Notice: This is the official website of the All Empires History Community (Reg. 10 Feb 2002)

  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

Armenians, descendants of Sakson

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 131415
Author
Cyrus Shahmiri View Drop Down
Administrator
Administrator
Avatar
King of Kings

Joined: 07-Aug-2004
Location: Iran
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 6217
  Quote Cyrus Shahmiri Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: Armenians, descendants of Sakson
    Posted: 04-Jan-2008 at 15:34

It just shows how infulentional the Saxon/Scythian language was on modern German, English and even Swedish languages.

http://www.spiritus-temporis.com/sicambri/ The Sicambri (var. Sicambres, Sigambrer, Sugumbrer, Sugambri) were originally a Scythian or Cimmerian tribe who once inhabited the mouth of the river Danube. The Merovingian kings claimed their descent from the Sicambri, asserting that this tribe had changed their name to "Franks" in 11 BC under the leadership of a certain chieftain called "Franko".

It really doean't matter what all sources say about the Scythian origin of Sicambris, you can easily deny all of them!!

Back to Top
Temujin View Drop Down
King
King
Avatar
Sirdar Bahadur

Joined: 02-Aug-2004
Location: Eurasia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 5221
  Quote Temujin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 04-Jan-2008 at 19:21
Ok, now Saxons an Franks are already Scythian, what about Bavarians, Alemanni, Thuringians, Frisians, Lombards, Goths....


Edited by Temujin - 04-Jan-2008 at 19:21
Back to Top
beorna View Drop Down
General
General
Avatar

Joined: 03-Dec-2007
Location: Germany
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 925
  Quote beorna Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 04-Jan-2008 at 20:25
Originally posted by Cyrus Shahmiri

It just shows how infulentional the Saxon/Scythian language was on modern German, English and even Swedish languages.

Call it indoeuropean ans I'm with you.
 
Originally posted by Cyrus Shahmiri

The Sicambri (var. Sicambres, Sigambrer, Sugumbrer, Sugambri) were originally a Scythian or Cimmerian tribe who once inhabited the mouth of the river Danube.
 
Whatnow, Skythian or Cimmerian? You are always mixing Cimmerians, Skythians and Sarmatian. That's the same as if I would always say Celtic, Italic or Germanic. I don't know if your Sicambri have something to do with the Sugambri at the Rhine. But if there were a what ever eastern influence it had been fading away completely by the times of Cesar.
 
Originally posted by Cyrus Shahmiri

The Merovingian kings claimed their descent from the Sicambri, asserting that this tribe had changed their name to "Franks" in 11 BC under the leadership of a certain chieftain called "Franko".
Just one author called them brave Sugambri. If they called themselves is not known. But it is known that they believed that they are the descendants of a bistea Neptuni Minotaurus similis. I tell you next week what this story means. If the Sugambri are a part of the Franks is not known, the most scientists say not. It is also never mentioned that these Sugambri called themselves Franci neither after 11Bc nor later. There is also no name Franco at all. The name was given to many nations and not to one under a leadership of a Franco. Then we have to espect Alamanno or a Baiuwario or a Thuringio as well. And the Merovingi called them Merovingi and not Francingi, what, if you were right would be the name.

Originally posted by Cyrus Shahmiri

It really doean't matter what all sources say about the Scythian origin of Sicambris, you can easily deny all of them!!
I am open for all sources. But there are plausible ones and ones that are not.  Perhaps you think a bit about what I said and try to be open.

Back to Top
Cyrus Shahmiri View Drop Down
Administrator
Administrator
Avatar
King of Kings

Joined: 07-Aug-2004
Location: Iran
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 6217
  Quote Cyrus Shahmiri Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 04-Jan-2008 at 21:02

Temujin, this is something which almost all sources say, as you read here: http://www.mimas.ac.uk/~zzalsaw2/pictish.html The Pictish Chronicle cleary says that the Scythians and Goths had a common origin.

Who were people who lived in Ireland?  They were Scots, from Scotia (northeast of the Black Sea), no they were Irish, from Iron (northeast of the Black Sea), no they were Albani, from Albania (northeast of the Black Sea), no they were Picts ...

I know these are just some coincidence similar names for two completely different peoples!!!

Back to Top
Cyrus Shahmiri View Drop Down
Administrator
Administrator
Avatar
King of Kings

Joined: 07-Aug-2004
Location: Iran
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 6217
  Quote Cyrus Shahmiri Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 05-Jan-2008 at 14:14

What do you know about Pactya (modern Paktya province in eastern Afghanistan and Pictral/Chitral district in the North-West Frontier Province of Pakistan)?

http://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kalash

Back to Top
Cyrus Shahmiri View Drop Down
Administrator
Administrator
Avatar
King of Kings

Joined: 07-Aug-2004
Location: Iran
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 6217
  Quote Cyrus Shahmiri Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 05-Jan-2008 at 16:03

Call it indoeuropean ans I'm with you.

Ok but except Greek, Latin, Sanskrit, Spanish, French and some other Indo-European languages.

Whatnow, Skythian or Cimmerian? You are always mixing Cimmerians, Skythians and Sarmatian. That's the same as if I would always say Celtic, Italic or Germanic.

Scythians, Sarmatians and Cimmerians were all Iranian tribes, like Persians, Parthians and Medians, that is the same as if you say Brahuis, Tamils, Malayalees and other Dravidian

If the Sugambri are a part of the Franks is not known, the most scientists say not.

It is just important for me what the sources (especially first hand ones) say not scientists or philosophers.

Back to Top
Styrbiorn View Drop Down
Caliph
Caliph


Joined: 04-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2810
  Quote Styrbiorn Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07-Jan-2008 at 08:59
Originally posted by Cyrus Shahmiri

It just shows how infulentional the Saxon/Scythian language was on modern German, English and even Swedish languages.

http://www.spiritus-temporis.com/sicambri/



1. Saxon and Scythian are not even the same language. Saxon is a lot more similar to the other Germanic languages than to Scythian. In fact, Saxon were mutually intelligible to Scandinavian and other Germanic languages. Scythian would have been gibberish to an ancient Saxon speaker.

2. No, it shows they are similar! My cousins look similar to me; that doesn't mean I have greatly influenced their appearance. To show influence you need a little more than that.


Edited by Styrbiorn - 07-Jan-2008 at 08:59
Back to Top
beorna View Drop Down
General
General
Avatar

Joined: 03-Dec-2007
Location: Germany
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 925
  Quote beorna Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 08-Jan-2008 at 13:32
Originally posted by Cyrus Shahmiri

Scythians, Sarmatians and Cimmerians were all Iranian tribes, like Persians, Parthians and Medians, that is the same as if you say Brahuis, Tamils, Malayalees and other Dravidian

I am not sure if we should call them iranian tribes. Of course they belong to the Indo-Aryan-stock but these tribes are different nations, so we shouldn't mix them. That is as if I would call the Portugese of Alamannian origin or Thuringian origin because there lived Suebi. Of course Thuringians and Alamanns are close to Suebians but they are different. So we need exact terms.


Originally posted by Cyrus Shahmiri

It is just important for me what the sources (especially first hand ones) say not scientists or philosophers.
 
well e.g. Gregor of Tours relates the Merovingians with the Sugambrians and he also tells us a story of the frankish origins in Pannonia but he isn't sure by himself. The Frdegar chronicle (7th century) says that the Sugambrians, wich are the Franks, came in the 4th century from Pannonia. This shows us that they did not have good informations. So Gregor didn't know much about the Frankish origins. He didn't know Baunonia and he was not informated about the Merovingian origins. fredegar is completely confused and mixes all together. On the other side there are older chronicles that mention Chamavi, Chattuarii, Brukteri and others among the Franks. Sugambri are not mentioned.
 
I did not want to explain the bistea Neptuni Minotaurus similis. But I think it is necassary to do it nevertheless. So if anybody wants to make it public it would be nice to tell everybody where you have the idea from. What does this bistea Neptuni means? It is a beast from the sea, half man, half beast or animal. Is there anything mentioned else in Germanic mythology? No, there isn't. So what does it mean? Let us go on. It is a bistea Minotaurus similis. How do we have to imagin that beast. Minotaurus was a beast half-man, half-bull. So we have to expect a beast from the Sea that looks like Minotaurus. Who is this person? Is there any person we can identify with it? We should expect the origins of the Merovingi among the Germanic Gods. So we have Wotan, Donar, Tiu, Ing or Fro, Loki and all these others. No one is connected with a bull. And this is the mistake. It is not said that this beast is a Minotaurus. It is similar to Minotaurus and not identical. So we have to expect a man-like body with a head of an animal. But what animal? Is there a god we can connect with the sea. Well, we have egir from the Edda and we have Njrd. But they are to late to say they can be identified with it and they are not related with an animal. But there is Ing or Fro mentioned as the son of Njrd. His related animal is a male pig. These male pig is related with the Merovingians as well. The Germanic nations along the coast are called Ingvaeones, people of Ing. Baunonia, the isle in the northern sea is a part of the ingvaeonic regions. That shows us what the story of the bistea Neptuni Minotaurus similis will tell us. The Merovingians are descendants of the god Ing/Fro. There is no Skythian origin and none of Pannonia.


Edited by beorna - 08-Jan-2008 at 13:54
Back to Top
Temujin View Drop Down
King
King
Avatar
Sirdar Bahadur

Joined: 02-Aug-2004
Location: Eurasia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 5221
  Quote Temujin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 08-Jan-2008 at 20:56
Originally posted by beorna

Alamanns are close to Suebians but they are different.


so why did they call themselves like that if they are different?
Back to Top
beorna View Drop Down
General
General
Avatar

Joined: 03-Dec-2007
Location: Germany
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 925
  Quote beorna Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09-Jan-2008 at 08:17
We had come too off topic I think. First the Franks, now the Alamanni. But because I opened these doors by myself , let me explain.
Alamanni can be Suebi and Suebi can be Alamanni, but Alamanni needn't to be Suebi and Suebi needn't to be Alamanni. Since the end of the 3rd century mostly Suebic groups migrated to the Southwest. For 260 there are the Juthungi recorded which are Semnones. archaeological site show us that from all over the eastern Elbe-territories there migrated people south and also from Bohemia. These people were named Alamanni. Until the 70th they thought the Alamanni came as a tribe to the south, today we think of an Alamannic ethnogenesis that happen after they came to the south. For example the Juthungi were included into the Alamanni not before the middle of the 4th century. Till about 413 we here about the Alamanni a lot, but then for about 30 years we have no notice. after that time they are recorded again. Till the end of the 5th century the terms Suebi and Alamanni are different. But during the 5th century there came greater groups of Suebi from the Elbe territories, from Bohemaia and Moravia and from Slovakia to the Alamannia, especially in the late 5th century under Hunimund. So this is often called a new stage of Alamannic ethnogenesis. So from the beginning of the 6th century both terms, Alamanni and Suebi, can be used for the people in the Alamannia.
Back to Top
Tyranos View Drop Down
Shogun
Shogun
Avatar

Joined: 01-Oct-2007
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 246
  Quote Tyranos Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 10-Jan-2008 at 15:36
Originally posted by Cyrus Shahmiri

Temujin, this is something which almost all sources say, as you read here: http://www.mimas.ac.uk/~zzalsaw2/pictish.html The Pictish Chronicle cleary says that the Scythians and Goths had a common origin.

Who were people who lived in Ireland?  They were Scots, from Scotia (northeast of the Black Sea), no they were Irish, from Iron (northeast of the Black Sea), no they were Albani, from Albania (northeast of the Black Sea), no they were Picts ...

I know these are just some coincidence similar names for two completely different peoples!!!



Most of your information is coming from flimsy Etymology(using Indo-European) and Middle Ages-17th century folkore and mythology which have no basis in historical fact.

Some British and Frankish writers tried linking themselves to Scyths, because they thought they came from Asia Minor/Troy. Its not hard to see that they were trying to claim relations to Troy and the Roman crown, following Virgil's lead.

This line of thinking led to the formation of "Anglo-Israelism'.


Edited by Tyranos - 10-Jan-2008 at 15:38
Back to Top
Artabanos View Drop Down
Immortal Guard
Immortal Guard
Avatar

Joined: 24-Feb-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 0
  Quote Artabanos Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11-Jan-2008 at 10:28

Talking about the Suebi, I always found it interesting that Ariovist has the typical Ario- first part, used in many Iranic names (like the Arta-). This becomes interesting because there are also other Germanic king names like the Gothic Ariarisch with another typical Iranic front part Aria-. But I would say its a PIE remain rather than the Suebi being directly connected to the Indo-Aryan groups of that period.



Edited by Artabanos - 11-Jan-2008 at 10:32
Back to Top
Yekta View Drop Down
Samurai
Samurai
Avatar

Joined: 22-Jun-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 119
  Quote Yekta Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22-Jan-2008 at 20:06
Originally posted by Styrbiorn

Originally posted by Yekta

Where is your source for svera meaning mother-in-law in old norse? (in any dialect)
 
Zoega's Old Icelandic dictionary. It's svera in my own dialect as well, though I can't "prove" that since my dialect doesn't have a dictionary. 
 
I see, I'm sure you are referring to the word svra.
The fire that never dies burns in our hearts.
Back to Top
Styrbiorn View Drop Down
Caliph
Caliph


Joined: 04-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2810
  Quote Styrbiorn Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22-Jan-2008 at 20:37
Originally posted by Yekta

Originally posted by Styrbiorn

Originally posted by Yekta

Where is your source for svera meaning mother-in-law in old norse? (in any dialect)
 
Zoega's Old Icelandic dictionary. It's svera in my own dialect as well, though I can't "prove" that since my dialect doesn't have a dictionary. 
 
I see, I'm sure you are referring to the word svra.
Yep. is annoying to write with a Swedish keyboard. 
Back to Top
Slayertplsko View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar

Joined: 13-May-2008
Location: Slovakia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1061
  Quote Slayertplsko Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19-May-2008 at 23:31
Originally posted by Cyrus Shahmiri

Sacan means sack (German Sack, Swedish s�ck). Which dictionary are you using?

Oxford and Webster, that is Sacc not Sacan, Sacan/Sac means "Scrap, Quarrel, Fight".



Send me a link please:)
Or if you have a book, send me an amazon link...please:)
Back to Top
Slayertplsko View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar

Joined: 13-May-2008
Location: Slovakia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1061
  Quote Slayertplsko Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19-May-2008 at 23:50
Originally posted by Temujin

Originally posted by Cyrus Shahmiri


I think this is also the only word in German where "e" is pronounced as "o", yes?!



no, it is a regular E.


You're wrong, Temujin.LOL

Cyrus spricht Deutsch viel besser als DU!!! Warum denkst du, dass du mit ihm streiten kannst??Confused




Edited by Slayertplsko - 19-May-2008 at 23:51
Back to Top
opuslola View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar
Avatar
suspended

Joined: 23-Sep-2009
Location: Long Beach, MS,
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4621
  Quote opuslola Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 28-Feb-2014 at 16:54
Originally posted by Reginmund

Yes, there are similarities between all human languages because they are all related, but this doesn't indicate any recent influences or connections. If you look into it you'll find several peoples across the world throughout history who share the same name, but to conclude on that basis that all these peoples are connected beyond being human however is such a historical fallacy you'd be a laughing stock at any university. A general and well-known rule among educated historians is to avoid all theories based on etymology; these are not accepted by the modern historical science and for good reason. This is a prime example of just such a theory.


Yes, gone but not forgotten Reginmund, it is true what you say above about "educated historians." Yes, they are mostly something like "the immovable object" in Physics!

The usage of etymological comparisons creates a lot of conundrums in their stylized chronology which gives up years and months of any type of change to its written in stone accepted timeline with frightful vengeance. Thus, if they agree in any way that etymology can be a useful tool in historical research, these "defenders of the faith", thus have to face these other related problems which are created and related.

Thus; They face some enigmas, some mysteries, some "catches", some "stumbling blocks", and they also fear that it might well become a "trap", and it is always considered as a "dilemma!"

So, in my humble opinion, I posit that they have used in defense of their stance to just dismiss all such usage of etymology with the royal "dismissive wave of the hand/staff of power!"

Thus all such is not worth reading, etc.!

Just how do any of you take the above opinion?

Ron   
http://www.quotationspage.com/subjects/history/
Back to Top
beorna View Drop Down
General
General
Avatar

Joined: 03-Dec-2007
Location: Germany
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 925
  Quote beorna Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 28-Feb-2014 at 17:03
Originally posted by Artabanos

Talking about the Suebi, I always found it interesting that Ariovist has the typical Ario- first part, used in many Iranic names (like the Arta-). This becomes interesting because there are also other Germanic king names like the Gothic Ariarisch with another typical Iranic front part Aria-. But I would say it�s a PIE remain rather than the Suebi being directly connected to the Indo-Aryan groups of that period.


Is the germanic Ario- (if the Ario- in Ariovist is germanic, based on an indo-iran. arya? What does Ariarich mean? Isn't it more likely to suppose a germ. harja?
Back to Top
opuslola View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar
Avatar
suspended

Joined: 23-Sep-2009
Location: Long Beach, MS,
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4621
  Quote opuslola Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 28-Feb-2014 at 17:45
Yes Bear, those pesky silent letters! They can drive one to drink! LOL
But here you have "silent "a's", silent "h's", and others!

Perhaps you may well have to resort to the usage of etymology?
http://www.quotationspage.com/subjects/history/
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 131415

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Bulletin Board Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 9.56a [Free Express Edition]
Copyright ©2001-2009 Web Wiz

This page was generated in 0.142 seconds.