Western Iranians vs. Eastern Iranians
Printed From: History Community ~ All Empires
Category: Regional History or Period History
Forum Name: Ancient Mesopotamia, Near East and Greater Iran
Forum Discription: Babylon, Egypt, Persia and other civilizations of the Near East from ancient times to 600s AD
URL: http://www.allempires.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=31063
Printed Date: 29-Apr-2024 at 04:40
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 9.56a - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: Western Iranians vs. Eastern Iranians
Posted By: Cyrus Shahmiri
Subject: Western Iranians vs. Eastern Iranians
Date Posted: 28-Jan-2012 at 09:50
|
I bleieve in the west and the east of the Caspian sea two different Iranian cultures were formed, the western one can be called Irano-Germanic and the eastern one as Indo-Iranian.
It is very possible that these two fought against each other in the Iranian plateau and the winner was the western one and afterwards the western culture could dominate the other.
The main god of Indo-Iranians was Deva: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deva_%28Hinduism - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deva_(Hinduism )
It is interesting that however ancient Persian kings usually respected the followers of other religions but they couldn't tolerate those who worshipped the Devas, for example Xerxes in one his inscription in Persepolis says: There was a country where Devas were still worshipped. Afterwards, by the favor of Ahuramazda, I destroyed that sanctuary of the Devas, and I made proclamation, "The Devas shall not be worshipped!"
Dev or Div in modern Persian means "demon", the important point is that this word never means "shining" in Persian, in fact it is not possible that a word with this meaning is used for demon, similar to Germanic, the Middle Persian word for "shining" was "Tewa", in Modern Persian that is "Tavan/Taban": http://www.wikiled.com/persian-english-t_00e2b_00e2n-Default.aspx - http://www.wikiled.com/persian-english-t_00e2b_00e2n-Default.aspx
As you read in this book: http://books.google.com/books?id=F3gfAAAAIAAJ&pg=PA77&lpg=PA77&source=bl&ots=NqYjv22ljw&sig=xXAW6EtXLlbHR3P55EJohOB6T4c&hl=en&ei=CMvlSc-QMJqFsAaDzaCdCw&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=5 - A history of Zoroastrianism: The Early Period By Mary Boyce, Frantz Grenet (page 77), the chief god of western Iranians was Tir/Tyr, as you read here: http://rbedrosian.com/ananik2b.htm - http://rbedrosian.com/ananik2b.htm it was certainly related to Armenian god Tiur, the founder of Parthian empire and some other Parthian and then Armenian kings were Tiridates which means "Given by God (Tir)".
About Germanic Tyr: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T%C3%BDr - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T%C3%BDr
------------- 
|
Replies:
Posted By: medenaywe
Date Posted: 28-Jan-2012 at 10:39
| If winner was Western Iranian culture how could be found Western Iranians traces all around Europe?There was Big people's migration from Hindu plateau somewhere between 350B.C. and 30B.C.Those people had created Empires further known as Roman,West and East,with residuals of structures they had populated:Ruling Elites!This part in history always have made me troubles and I believe this is one very possible story about this Exodus!New comers had created New Histories for natives also enslaved them,in which all natives have to be out comers and they natives!Next DNA comparative research have to prove it.If forgery will not continue further!Best lie is Good lie!1000 times had spoken lie became a truth. |
Posted By: Cyrus Shahmiri
Date Posted: 28-Jan-2012 at 12:18
|
The earliest civilizations were formed in a region in the west of Iran which is called Mesopotamia, this civilized region attracted people from all around the world, especially from Europe, one of these people where Iranians who came from the Eastern Europe and the Central Asia.
Before Iranians we know several non-Iranian peoples such as Elamites, Kassites, Mannaeans, Lullubis, Gutians, Urartians, ... lived in the Iranian plateau, of course some of them could be Indo-European, the earliest known Iranian people were Medes who probably migrated to the western Iran through the Caucaus in the first millennium BC.
After Medes, Scythians and Cimmerians also came from the same region and then Persians who first lived in the northwest of Media and finally in the south of Media in a region which is called Persia.
Anyway the path of migration was from the north to the south, not vice versa. -------------
|
Posted By: medenaywe
Date Posted: 28-Jan-2012 at 12:48
|
Those are just names Cyrus.I agree about all you have read cause i know i read it also.Where is Hindu from Indo-European in our languages?Few words in mine.But there are Hindu people all around me that have denied always our right to be natives.They had absorbed our language&past during existed two last great Roman Empires and rest that followed them.If there were big migration in last 2000 years they had come from this direction.I am sorry about thinking different about it even i am so far from there!Take it as one of possibilities about human history screenplays!I have seen lot of churches icons and lot of ancient mosaics&pictures analyzing features of faces comparing them!In Roman Art not so much but in Byzantine,features of saints&people had had more "Hindu" elements than European. |
Posted By: Ince
Date Posted: 28-Jan-2012 at 19:39
|
Like I mentioned in a previous thread the Automosal DNA of Iranians points to Central Asia before Iran. Kurds and Iranians both show a gentic pull towards Central Asia that is not present in other populations in west asia. Kurds and Iranians do not show any unusual genetic tie to Eastern Europe at all. But Indo-Iranians in all show a high genetic pull towards the Northern Caucasus, which points to the southern pontic stepps as the home of Indo-iranians before Central Asia. |
Posted By: Cyrus Shahmiri
Date Posted: 29-Jan-2012 at 02:37
|
For example about Haplogroup I (Y-DNA): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_I_%28Y-DNA - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_I_(Y-DNA )
Bosnia and Herzegovina: 65% I think, except Iran, all other ones are either Germanic or from the eastern Europe. -------------
|
Posted By: medenaywe
Date Posted: 29-Jan-2012 at 02:44
| Than we are relatives.Question is:Did this map always look this way or someone move figures on chess table? |
Posted By: Ince
Date Posted: 29-Jan-2012 at 08:28
You are looking at outdated study that only looked at Tehran the realistic number is less then 10%. Also most all the "I" Y-dna found in west asia is I2a and it's mostly found among Kurds of Anatolia. Most likely those tested in Tehran had anceint mixture from Anatolia. Here is the Y-dna of Iranians on FTDNA project, not a single "I" so far Iranian Y-dna results on FTDNA E1b1b1-M35 2 3.3% E1b1b1c1-M34 1 1.6% F*-M89 1 1.6% F3-P96 1 1.6% G-M201 5 8.2% G1*-M342 1 1.6% G1a-P20 1 1.6% G2a-P15 1 1.6% G2a4-L91 1 1.6% G2a3b1-P303 1 1.6% H-M69 1 1.6% J1-M267 6 9.8% J1c3d-L147 2 3.3% J2-M172 12 19.7% J2a4a-M322 1 1.6% J2a4b-S51 2 3.3% J2a4d-M319 1 1.6% J2a4h2-M158 5 8.2% Q*-M242 1 1.6% R1a1a1-M417 5 8.2% R1b1a2-M269 1 1.6% R1b1a2a-L23 1 1.6% R2*-M479 1 1.6% R2a-M124 4 6.6% T1-M320 3 4.9% From Eupedia http://www.eupedia.com/europe/european_y-dna_haplogroups.shtml I 3 R1a 16.5 R1b 6.5 G 10 J2 12 J1 10 E 4.5 T 3 L 4 Q 4 N 2.5 I1 the mostly found in Europe  I2a mostly found in south eastern europe.  Even tho Kurds have some I2a but based on Automosal DNA they have do not show any genetic tie to Eastern Europe and I2a is mostly very ancient and probaly was present before the age of the indo-europeans and other speakers. |
Posted By: Cyrus Shahmiri
Date Posted: 29-Jan-2012 at 11:08
|
Ince, please mention valid sources on real analysis, not probabilities and guesses, this is the source about Haplogroup I in Iran: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1046/j.1529-8817.2004.00092.x/pdf - http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1046/j.1529-8817.2004.00092.x/pdf
As I found about FTDNA project, it seems not even a single person in Iran has been analysed and it is just based on some people from UAE and other countries who claim to have direct ancestors from Iran. -------------
|
Posted By: Ince
Date Posted: 29-Jan-2012 at 16:03
|
I gave eupedia links. You can check their sources. Please go reasearch haplogroup I and you will see that most of I in west asia is I2a and is mostly found in anatolia.
Do a google search for "FTDNA project iranians forumbiodiversty" you can see the posts. I am on my phone so cannot get to much in to providing links at the momet. Pleasee search Google for the dodecad project to see Automosal DNA reasearch. |
Posted By: Ince
Date Posted: 29-Jan-2012 at 19:33
|
Dodecad project results, based on Automosal DNA there is a clear genetic tie towards central asia. Check out Iranians_D (Dodecad paricipants, from all around iran) Iranians_Behar (Iranians from south iran, mostly maybe from around khuzestan) Kurds_D (Dodecad paricipants indludes,Sorani,Kurmanji,Feyli Kurds) Kurds_Y (Kurmanji Kurds, originaly from Urmia) Dodecad V3 https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?authkey=COCa89AJ&key=0ArAJcY18g2GadDUyeEtjNnBmY09EbnowN3M3UWRyNnc&hl=en_US&authkey=COCa89AJ#gid=0 K12a https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0ArJDEoCgzRKedGdRbkxKMDdlZkJWc21tdkpldWxwVmc#gid=0 World9 https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0ArAJcY18g2GadGlpc3JQaVdQbS1QTWF3SzNjTVdfZEE#gid=0 |
Posted By: Ince
Date Posted: 29-Jan-2012 at 20:13
|
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Note* That the south asian among Kurds and Iranians is mostly ancient Central Asian component which is mislabeled as south asian, this because Dodecad and Mcdonald combine 2 compenents known as ASI(Ancestral South Asians) and ANI(Ancestral North Indians). ANI is mostly found in central asia and North India where as ASI is mostly found in south indians and found in some amounts in Afghanistan and Pakistan, but much lesser among Iranians and Kurds as Kurds and Iranians carry mostly ANI. ASI clusters  ANI   ANI is most similar to the West Asian component where as ASI is similar to South East Asia. http://img17.imageshack.us/img17/5534/genome3.png - |
Posted By: Cyrus Shahmiri
Date Posted: 30-Jan-2012 at 01:38
|
This is Y-Chromosome Haplogroup maps of West Asia: http://sites.google.com/site/thelineagesofasia/ - http://sites.google.com/site/thelineagesofasia/
As you see Iran is a very diverse country and it is not really possible to say something about the whole people of Iran, there were some migrations from different directions to Iran, for example "Map of Haplogroup E" shows a migration from the southwest Asia (probably Arabia), Haplogroup G seems to be very Iranian, "Map of Haplogroup I" certainly shows a migration from the Europe and Haplogroup R seems to be related to Indo-Iranians. -------------
|
Posted By: Ince
Date Posted: 30-Jan-2012 at 05:33
Based on Automosal DNA of Iranians and Kurds there is a genetic pull towards Central Asia. I believe the homeland of Iranians before Iran was around Turkmenistan( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andronovo_culture - Andronovo/BMAC) . Y-dna does not say much as they are very old and do not reveale the sublcade. For example most the Y-dna "I" in west asia is I2a and is a native marker. Kurds/Iranians have a large chunk of native DNA from the ancient pre-iranian people, I would say 30-40% of the ancestry is probably from the original iranains settlements with the rest been native. There seems to be close genetic bond between Kurds and Iranians, they always cluster near eachother on plots and have similar numbers. If you look at the Dodecad results for the whole of the Indo-Iranian people, like for example the Kalash they show a clear genetic pull towards the Caucasus. The Kalash are mostly West Asian with some South Asian/Gedrosia (Mostly ANI) with a little ASI due to geographical location. East Iranians like the Pathan have high amounts of South Asian ASI that is low among west iranians, this can be explained with them moving south from central asia and mixing with locals. I would say that the Ancient Iranians from Central Asia were largely a mix of West Asia and ANI/Gedrosia with some North European. It is likely the Proto Indo-Iranians were different and language replacement could of happened but it could be that they were similar to Northern Caucasians in genetics which expalians why they get pulled towards caucasians. Tajiks and Turkmens(Turkmenistan) seem to be similar to Iranians only main difference is they have high amounts of Asian DNA(Siberian,East Asian) due to the Turko-Mongol invasion. |
Posted By: Cyrus Shahmiri
Date Posted: 30-Jan-2012 at 07:22
|
If you look at those Haplogroup maps that I posted in my previous post then you will see that there is nothing which can show a relation between Iranians and Central Asians, the fact is that Iranians generally look like other people of the Middle East, like Arabs, but with some more European features. For example in another thread, I talked about light eyes: http://pages.globetrotter.net/peter_frost61z/Eye-color.jpg - http://pages.globetrotter.net/peter_frost61z/Eye-color.jpg
 As you see about 20-49 percent of people who live in the the Iranian plateau have light eyes, it can be just related to people who live in the eastern and northern Europe, not Central Asians. -------------
|
Posted By: medenaywe
Date Posted: 30-Jan-2012 at 07:39
Yes Cyrus but were they Egyptians or Persians once?Have you ever asked yourself about it?This question has nothing with your personal beliefs but has with truth! We share same syllables Cyrus.Arabs and Jews also.I suppose many other "nations" today also.Question is:What did really happen in ancient times with Europe &Africa 2000-2500 years ago?Without aliens of course. |
Posted By: Ince
Date Posted: 30-Jan-2012 at 07:46
|
Most of the Haplogroups found among Iranians is found in Central Asia R1a1a,R1b,J2,G. Automosal DNA is far more accurate then Haplogroups and it clearly shows a genetic pull towards Central Asia. Light eyes are also very common among other indo-iranian speakers like North Indians,the Kalash and is also common among North Caucasians as well. I would not take a map like that as indication of connection to Europe. Majority of Iranians look like Anatolians and Caucasians with some leaning towards Arabs and some in the south and east looking indic. Iranains are largely similar to Caucasians and Anatolians this is becasue the iranians who settled in Iran were already a Caucasian like population. For example on 23andme's population placement map. People like Assyrians and Arabs are in the Near East cluster. Armenians,Georgians and Turks are in south west european cluster and cluster in the south european group. Where as Kurds and Iranians appear in the same spot as I did, in between the 3 groups and a genetic pull towards Central Asia that is not present in other west asian people. The only other people who get pulled towards Central Asia are a few Turkish people this because of there high Asian score of above 5%-10% that pulls them East. |
Posted By: Ince
Date Posted: 30-Jan-2012 at 07:56
|
Also the current best theory regarding the origins of Indo-Europeans is the Pontic Stepps. Like I had mentioned I believe the southern pontic stepps as the home of Iranians before Central Asia>Iran. Also many do not want accept that the pro-to Indo-Europeans could of had a large chunk of west asian DNA and were not entirely European like and explains why there is West Asian component among Europeans. Even on the K12a run their is even Gedrosia component found around Europe. K12a , Gedrosia and Caucasian can be found in Europeans http://https://docs.https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0ArJDEoCgzRKedGdRbkxKMDdlZkJWc21tdkpldWxwVmc#gid=0%20 - https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0ArJDEoCgzRKedGdRbkxKMDdlZkJWc21tdkpldWxwVmc#gid=0 World9, Caucasian_Gedrosia is found around 10%-13% in western Europe. http://https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0ArAJcY18g2GadGlpc3JQaVdQbS1QTWF3SzNjTVdfZEE#gid=0 - https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0ArAJcY18g2GadGlpc3JQaVdQbS1QTWF3SzNjTVdfZEE#gid=0 |
Posted By: Cyrus Shahmiri
Date Posted: 30-Jan-2012 at 08:31
About 2500 years ago Persians conquered Egypt, we know a group of them resided there and there are some ancient Persian monuments in Egypt, so there could be some relations between these two people. -------------
|
Posted By: Cyrus Shahmiri
Date Posted: 30-Jan-2012 at 09:10
The number of migrations from Iran to the Central Asia was certasinly more than the reverse path, one of the main reasons is that Afghans and Tajiks already speak a modern Persian language.
Anyway Haplogroup R (R1a1a-M17, R1b-M343 & R2-M124) that you mentioned shows Eastern Iranians or Indo-Iranians that I talked about them in my first post in this thread, this is the map:
 As you see they can be seen just in some parts of eastern Iran, according to R1b their original land could be somewhere around Central Asia, especially modern Turkmenistan, and then north India an Pakistan but Haplogroup G that you mentioned seems to be very Persian and can be found just in the land of Tats (Caucasian Persians), Persia, Khorasan, northern Afghanistan and Tajikistan. In fact in the regions where Persian-speaking people live.
 -------------
|
Posted By: Ince
Date Posted: 30-Jan-2012 at 10:55
|
Thing is Cyrus those maps you posted are based on one study and do not represent maybe the true presence of R1a1a in Iran as it is found R1a1a comes in different subclades and those maps are very misleading because the R1a1a found in Central Asia and Iran is different to the one found in Europe. Most of all the R1a1a in Iran and Central Asia is R1a1a1h(Z93) where as the one found in Eastern Europe is R1a1a1g (Z283). It is two different subclades that have age difference of thousands of years and before the Indo-European languages. East Iranians also experienced mixture from South Asia due to moving south and mixing with natives. Like I had mentioned I believe the Turkmenistan was the home of Iranians before their expantion south and west. Central Asia thousands of years ago was different to today, it has experienced heavy mixture from Turks and Mongols. Haplogroup G is the same, my own Haplogroup is G2a(L31) is mostly found in Anatolia,Caucasus and North Iran. Where as other subclades of G such as G2a3,G1,G2..ect is also found around Iran. G among Tajiks could of been carried by Persian speakers from Iran to the region which increased the frequancey, but G is very common in the Caucasus as it is believed to originated there. My family origins are North Iran, which is why even Mcdonald placed me in North Iran. My family are Alevis(formely known as Kizilbash) who migrated from Urmia>Khorasan>Turkey. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_G_%28Y-DNA%29 |
Posted By: Ince
Date Posted: 30-Jan-2012 at 11:53
Turkmenistan, Karakum dessert
http://huxley.net/soma/ Here is a video on the discovery, it looks like it was the home Iranians before Iran. Interesting video, it goes with what Genetics says. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hugCJ9tuq-g |
Posted By: Cyrus Shahmiri
Date Posted: 30-Jan-2012 at 15:20
|
As I mentioned in other threads, the original land of Iranians (Airyana Vaeja) was somewhere in the remote north where as we read in Avesta "There are ten winter months there, two summer months; and those are cold for the waters, cold for the earth, cold for the trees." I think it can't be denied that Iranians entered to the Iranian plateau from both the east and the west of Caspian sea, the culture of the eastern Iranians was similar to the Indian culture and the western one could be related to the European culture, especially the Germanic culture.
The important point is that both the Caucasus and the Central Asia were the passages of ancient Iranian people, not their original lands, of course we know some Iranian-speaking people have lived in these regions from the ancient times but it can't be said that one of them was the original one.
For thousands years, people of the eastern Europe were Iranian-speaking people, such as Scythians, Sarmatians, Alans, Iazyges, Ossetians, ... in fact Iranians have a longer history in the Eastern Europe than Iran and the Central Asia, so if you find some similarites between the peoples of Iran and Central Asia and differences between them and the people of the Eastern Europe, then you can be sure that those are a non-Iranian people, probably a Turkic people. -------------
|
Posted By: Ince
Date Posted: 31-Jan-2012 at 20:07
|
But the thing is people who inhabit Eastern Europe are Slavs, and Iranians do not show any genetic ties to them but Slavs are not descendants of the Scythians. So far every ever Kurd and Iranian have had a cline towards Central Asia. You might think it is because of the Turks but Turkish people themselves do not have the same cline, they cline more towards Siberia then Central Asia. Their is no doubt that the Iranians who entered Iran came from Central Asia, this is what Automosal DNA says. Iranains do not show any tie to Eastern Europe, I do not know why this is but western europeans such as Germans and Irish seem to have some Gedrosia component among them that is low among eastern europeans here for example, heres the latest K12b results for the components. https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0ArJDEoCgzRKedEY4Y3lTUVBaaFp0bC1zZlBDcTZEYlE#gid=0 Iranian_D Gedrosia 28.8 Caucasus 40.3 Kurds_D Gedrosia 28.7 Caucasus 40.4 North Ossatiens_Y Gedrosia 16.5 Caucasus 56.7 British_D Gedrosia 11.3 Caucasus 1.3 Dutch_D Gedrosia 9.9 Caucasus 4.8 German_D Gedrosia 7.3 Caucasus 9.8 Russian_D Gedrosia 1.8 Caucasus 11.7 Polish_D Gedrosia 0.5 Caucasus 12.1 Ossetians have suffered what might be called genetic mixing, they have heavely mixed with cauacaisns. On Y-dna they have around 1-5% of R1a1a. Some believe that the Alans males were all killed by the invading Turks and that the males among Ossetians are the caucasian mixture. As you know Kurdistan was settled by Scythians, like I had mentioned Kurds also have the same genetic pull towards Central Asia and do not differ much from Iranians, only a few Kurds show a genetic pull towards North Caucasians. It could be that The Iranain speakings people moved towards the west and mixed with the germans and that the Slavs invasion drove many of them away or they were killed. |
Posted By: Ince
Date Posted: 31-Jan-2012 at 20:13
|
.... |
Posted By: Cyrus Shahmiri
Date Posted: 01-Feb-2012 at 05:11
People who inhabit Turkey are Turks, do you think they are the same as original Turks? Most of those Slavs are in fact Slavized Iranians.
Who is an Iranian? For a long time, a large number of non-Iranian people, such as Elamites, Mannaeans, Urartians, Lullubis, ... lived in the Iranian plateau then there could be a migration of Iranian-speaking people from Eastern Europe and Central Asia, but then Greeks occupied Iran, and then Arabs, Turks, Monglos and etc. There were several other migrations from other regions, for example some hundred thousands Georgians from Georgia migrated to the north and central Iran, most of them mixed with other people and already consider themselves Persian or Mazandarani, but there is still a large Georgian city in the Isfahan province and people of this city and several villages around this city speak Georgian.
You yourself show that Iranians are more related to the people of Caucasus but then you say they are related to Central Asians, Gedrosia was in the southeast of Iran, not the Central Asia. -------------
|
Posted By: medenaywe
Date Posted: 01-Feb-2012 at 05:30
|
If you can stand above "national" inside you,truth stands in front of you:Syllables were ancient people's Egyptian,Cyrus!Someone have created billions of fractals from people we were in the beginning!Reason:To have been proved their ruling position on territories they lived.Achaemenides spoke the same language!That means that Hindu&Egyptian people have shared Persian territories as it is today!Sorry that this will hurt Your "national" feelings but that's not the point of my view here!We are searching our roots as you can see.We share same syllables! |
Posted By: Ince
Date Posted: 01-Feb-2012 at 06:53
You can believe in what you want it is now a proven that Iranian have a genetic tie to Central Asia. Gedrosia is called Gedrosia because it peaks in that region, but does not mean it originated there. I do not believe Slavs Slaviced Scythians, they do not even carry the same linage as the Ossetians who actually speak a offshoot of Scythian. Turks of Anatolia have 3-8% East Asian and do not show a genetic tie to Central Asia but to Siberia. Out of all the west asian people, Kurds and Iranians are the only ones who have genetic pull towards Central Asia, why don't Armenians,Assyrians,Georgians all show this pull? You just cannot explian this by saying that Iranians today are just all natives and not Iranic. Dodecad and even a major company like 23andme all show this. Maybe you do not want accept that the Indo-Iranain origins was Central Asia around BMAC. |
Posted By: Cyrus Shahmiri
Date Posted: 02-Feb-2012 at 15:08
|
As I said in my first post, the origin of Indo-Iranians was probably from the east of the Caspian sea, namely Central Asia, but western Iranians, like Persians and Medes, came through the Caucasus.
It is really possible that moden Iranians have genetic pull towards Central Asia because:
1. The majority of the people of Central Asia are Turkic people
3. There were several migrations of Turkic people from Central Asia to Iran 2. About one third of Iranians are already Turkic-speaking people
As I said Iranian speaking people have a longer continuous history in the Eastern Europe than Iran and Central Asia, so it is not possible to talk about Iranians and ignore them, some Eastern European peoples, such Serbs, Croats, Bulgars and etc still consider themselves Iranian. -------------
|
Posted By: Ince
Date Posted: 02-Feb-2012 at 17:38
I do not believe the Turkic impact can explain why Kurds have nearly the same genetic makeup as Iranians because it does not explain why Kurds have the same pull and there has not been much brothely love between Kurds and Persians for a long time to explain the similarities. I too believe that the eastern part of the caspien sea(Turkmenistan) was the homeland of Iranains before Iran, even the Parthian homeland was near that region. Automosal DNA of Turkmenistan is very similar to Iran, only difference been is Turkmenistan has higher levels of East asian around 15% where as it's 1-3% among Iranians and Kurds. Turkmenistan was a Iranian dominated region before the Turkic arrival from Siberia. Even Tajikistan is similar to Iran, but Tajiks have higher East Asian, due to Turkic and Mongol invasion. It could be that Medes and Persians took the Northern root from Central Asia and came to Iran, but like I mentioned there does not seem to be a genetic link between Eastern Europeans and Iranians. It could be that in the ancient times, the region of Siberia and some parts of Eastern Europe were Iranian dominated, but maybe only by elites, many people were reffered to as Scythians and likely were not Iranian speaking. Because Scythians were also present in west asia and were close to the Medes and yet no genetic link to Slavs at all can be found in North Iran or among Kurds. Proto-Indo Iranians are rather a different story, was there a language replacement in Central Asia by the Proto Indo-Iranians or were they already a caucasian like people? I also recommend you follow the Dodecad project as it gets updated time to time when they get new samples from studies that improve the results more as each new update it is more accurate then the other but they always follow the same trend and minor changes most of the time. |
Posted By: Nick1986
Date Posted: 02-Feb-2012 at 19:18
|
Could the fair haired and light-skinned Iranians have been descendents of Alexander's Greek soldiers?
------------- Me Grimlock not nice Dino! Me bash brains! |
Posted By: Ince
Date Posted: 02-Feb-2012 at 19:38
No I doubt that. Because many claimed the same thing about the Kalash where some of them have lite eyes and hair, but on genetics they show no ties to Greeks or Eastern Europeans. |
Posted By: Cyrus Shahmiri
Date Posted: 03-Feb-2012 at 03:14
It seems it was the vice versa, the majority of Persians were fair haired and Greeks were among the first people who changed it.
As Kanas_Krumesis posted some pics titled "Persian soldiers from Achaemenid times through the eyes of the ancient Greeks", we usually see Persians were fair haired but Greek themselves had black hair.
Greek hero Achilles, Priam and Hector (bottom left):
 Persian king Darius (seated on throne) and Xerxes:
 -------------
|
Posted By: medenaywe
Date Posted: 03-Feb-2012 at 03:16
|
If you use black&white TV picture looks black&white Cyrus!
|
Posted By: Ince
Date Posted: 03-Feb-2012 at 06:50
The Kalash are the closest people to what the Ancient Indo-Iranians were, this is because they have been more isolated then any other group and do not seem to have had any influence from Mongols or Turks and they have lower South Asian compared to the Pathan and other Afghans and Pakistanis. The Kalash are dominantly Euroasian in genetic makeup with some South Asian probably they got when they moved south where as the Ancient Iranians likely had no south asian, as it is low among Kurds and iranians(some have high, probably influence from the south) |
Posted By: medenaywe
Date Posted: 03-Feb-2012 at 07:09
|
It's more complicated Ince as it looks!Why did Kalashes stay in India then?(Pakistan now!)Why did the not come back with Alexander?Why did Hunza people also?I believe Alexander had helped them they turned back home!Now if I am right who had pushed this Big migration of people out of Hindu valley&Eastern Iran? Let You help me about this cause you are living there. |
Posted By: Ince
Date Posted: 03-Feb-2012 at 07:30
I do not know what you mean. My point was the Kalash are genetically Euroasian with no ties to Greeks or Eastern Europeans. Kalash like other Indo-Iranian people have their origins in Central Asia. When I said they moved south, they like the Indo-Aryans moved South towards India and Pakistan. But they probably are the closest to the ancient indo-iranians then anyother group because they seem to have less outside infleunce then anyother Indo-Iranian group. I do not believe the Kalash are the descendants of Alexanders soldiers like some claim. |
Posted By: medenaywe
Date Posted: 03-Feb-2012 at 07:45
|
That's the point!How did they finish inside Alexander's army of mercenaries?As it looks now they did it cause they need return ticket for home!Who did push them in Euro-African areas?Ince i believe,here had started migration that was not written in history books.Cause those that did it had changed history as it is today.Of course it is my hypothesis here. |
Posted By: Cyrus Shahmiri
Date Posted: 03-Feb-2012 at 11:46
|
Fair hair doesn't relate to Iranians, Greeks, Central Asians or peoples of the Caucasus, but mostly to north European peoples, like Germanic people.
As I have said in other threads, original Iranians probably lived somehwere in the northeastern Europe, near the Germanic lands, from this original land they migrated to the regions in the east and the west of the Caspian sea and then Iran and other lands.
The reason of this migration has been mentioned in the ancient Iranian and Germanic sources, the important point is that Indian, Greek, Celtic and other Indo-European sources never talk about it, that is Fimbulvetr, three successive winters in the Germanic sources and ten winter months in the Iranian sources, which has been proved to be the extreme weather events which resulted in a notable drop in temperature across northern Europe. -------------
|
Posted By: balochii
Date Posted: 18-Dec-2012 at 19:13
kalash yes, but I think isolated Tajik (pamiri) are even closer then Kalash to original indo iranians, some of them have totally european features, they can easily fit in places like Germany. Kalash I believe have roughly 22-25% north east European genetic component in them, while some tajik pamiri groups have 27-30% north east euro component, all these people in south central asia are clear descendants of indo Iranians, who were heavy mix of european and west asian |
Posted By: Venkytalks
Date Posted: 15-Jan-2013 at 15:44
|
Interesting discussion here. I myself find the initial post quite interesting because it resonates with a theory I used to like (a couple of decades ago actually). This is my personal belief only. I used to believe that the original European people evolved from migrations as old as 30,000 plus years ago. And that Indo european languages spread out from Turkey 8000 years ago and was spoken by the European people, some of whom settled in the Khazakhstan and Russian steppes before 3000 BC. They had light hair and eyes (blond and blue eyed ). By 1800 BC the Sintashta and Arakaim cultures of Western Steppes were advanced in copper metallurgy, had adopted horse rearing from the Mongols and invented both horse chariots and bow fighting techniques. With these advantages they invaded and settled in Mesopotamia and formed the Mitanni and Kassites rulers (and I used to believe even Hykso rule of Egypt and into the Indus valley Civilization of Pakistan) and ruled for 500 years before they declined and were replaced. That they were a minority in these areas and were a ruling class only. After decline they migrated east to Iran and Punjab where their bretheren lived. And made small settlements. From where they were again disposessed by the Medes from Central Asia - an invasion by another group of different Indo European people (continously pushed out of the steppes by the Mongols). So they went and joined the last of the early proto Indo European people who were in Pakistan. So the original Mitanni/early Indo Iranians spoke in proto indo European, worshipped Indra and Devas and migrated east. They were light skinned but unlikely to be blond or blue eyed because of local mixing (in mesopotamia and IVC) and came from a well developed ruler class of 500 years standing (and not pastoral agriculturists from the Steppes). Their priest class were advanced in their hymns and methods of worship. But they had preserved many of their early steppe ways which became more pronounced as they joined their bretheren and regressed to a more pastoral life. As they migrated east, they reached Punjab where they settled with the earlier Rig Vedic people. Further Indo Iranian migrations from more pastoral communities from Central Asia also probably ocurred between 1200 BC to 800 BC into Punjab, some of whom had similar beliefs but others had different beliefs. And that the Rig Veda Samhita was collected from the compilation of not one but multiple Indo Iranian migrants and derived mostly from the more ancient hymns from periods much before compilation, accounting for the more archaic language. These I used to believe was (the romantic !) history of the Rig Vedic people. In other words, the Aryan migration theory into India with the added bit that the ruling classes of well developed Mitanni Kassite rulers were also among those migrating - explaining the more advanced features seen in the Rig Vedic people than what you would expect from mere steppe tribals. It would also explain their desire to preserve their heritage - like the Parsis who came later. Although most scholarship of Kassites and Hyksos are against them being even Indo Iranian nowadays (when I was reading earlier, they were considered Indo Iranian), I would still like to imagine that the Rig Veda is mostly the Mitanni hymns mixed with the hymns of those who migrated to Pakistan in the 1800 BC period. Regardless of whether the above is true or not, I have no doubt about some things. 1. Rig Vedic people are derived from migration of people from the Sintashta/Petrovka/Arkaim cultures - either directly to Punjab in 1800 BC or via Mesopotamia and Iran as described above. 2. History has shown repeatedly that the steppe people of earlier Indo European origin or later mongol origin have dominated the development of Asia from 1800 BC to the modern age. Why exclude the Rig Vedic people from this long list? 3. That they innovated and assimilated but were always energetic - a prerequisite for the people described in the Rig Veda. Regarding the Zorashtrian Persians - they themselves later were displaced from Iran and migrated to India and formed the Parsis - who despite their small numbers and minority religion, dominate the cultural and business life of India to this day - preserved their religion and way of life and preserved the Avesta for the British to decipher. Why not the same with the Rig Veda and Mittanni? ------------- Venky |
Posted By: EN-SZE
Date Posted: 15-Jan-2013 at 17:59
I understand that it is most prestigious to call now Germen of h/g carriers - I. But before to become Germen, these Scandinavians needed to come under influence of AS-gardian TURKIR-MENs with h/g-R1a1 and R1b! I once again want to focus attention of fans of history to that fact that barbarians paleoeuropean, as well as barbarians Afro-Semites, were carriers RELATED haplogroup I and J.Ancient Europeans and ancient hamito-Semite have also the related glossary. I pray to consider and that circumstance what exactly carriers h/g I in Europe suffer lack of enzymes for digestion of cow, sheep and goat milk MORE OFTEN! And h/g carriers I were noticed in a cannibalism in the second century until BC and in the second century before BC! Any woman European would prefer to give birth to the child from gallant Turkic nomads not to have problems in case of lack of chest milk! Such is the primordial reason of shatteringly fast penetration of Turkic man's h/g-s in the territory of Europe.
------------- In search of Truth we are limited to knowledge tools and consequently our idea of Truth includes also a certain mistake. |
Posted By: EN-SZE
Date Posted: 15-Jan-2013 at 18:05
|
There was no paleoeuropean h/g I on the Arkaim. There was ONLY Turkic R1a1 and R1b with subclades! Moreover, sumer to Arkaim came ANNUALLY(!) without arranging long-term dwellings. Sumerian submitted huge spaces from the Mesopotamic cities to Ural in searches and copper production. Exactly so is and in culture of Vinka=vincha in Europe. And there Sumerian found copper and founded the settlements.
------------- In search of Truth we are limited to knowledge tools and consequently our idea of Truth includes also a certain mistake. |
Posted By: Cyrus Shahmiri
Date Posted: 16-Jan-2013 at 11:01
Mitanni culture was a good mention, of course they were a Hurrian people but they were certainly under influence of a strong Indo-Iranian culture, it can compared to the spread of Mithraism throughout the Roman Empire.
As I said in my second post in this thread, peoples who lived in the Iranian plateau before the first millennium BC were NOT Iranian, but some of them could be Indo-European, the interesting thing about the Mitanni culture is that it was more influenced by Indian culture than Iranian culture. -------------
|
Posted By: EN-SZE
Date Posted: 16-Jan-2013 at 16:12
E1b1b1-M35 2 3.3% E1b1b1c1-M34 1 1.6% F*-M89 1 1.6% F3-P96 1 1.6% G-M201 5 8.2% G1*-M342 1 1.6% G1a-P20 1 1.6% G2a-P15 1 1.6% G2a4-L91 1 1.6% G2a3b1-P303 1 1.6% H-M69 1 1.6% J1-M267 6 9.8% J1c3d-L147 2 3.3% J2-M172 12 19.7% J2a4a-M322 1 1.6% J2a4b-S51 2 3.3% J2a4d-M319 1 1.6% J2a4h2-M158 5 8.2% Q*-M242 1 1.6% R1a1a1-M417 5 8.2% R1b1a2-M269 1 1.6% R1b1a2a-L23 1 1.6% R2*-M479 1 1.6% R2a-M124 4 6.6% T1-M320 3 4.9% ------------- In search of Truth we are limited to knowledge tools and consequently our idea of Truth includes also a certain mistake. |
Posted By: EN-SZE
Date Posted: 16-Jan-2013 at 17:14
|
I, apparently, start to understand: The western Iranians are presented at you on the table as far as I understood your subject. Perfectly! Answer me, please, only with deep arguments whom you understand as "east Iranians"?
Whether 2,5 million Turkmen enter into number of "east Iranians"? Whether Hazeragu's 1,5 million which were crushed by Kazakhs in the 18th century and in the 18th century migrating on the territory of Iran enter into number of "east Iranians"? Whether enter into number "east Iranians" pushtuns, Uzbeks, living in east Iran? Whether inhabitants of the province the Farce enter into number of "east Iranians"? Whether inhabitants of southeast Iran enter into number of "east Iranians"? If all these ethnoses aren't included by you in number of "east Iranians", in what lonely small village you carried out the DNA project where received 34 % of h/g I???
------------- In search of Truth we are limited to knowledge tools and consequently our idea of Truth includes also a certain mistake. |
Posted By: Venkytalks
Date Posted: 17-Jan-2013 at 02:16
Although Hurrian, the ruling elite were Indo Aryan. The Roman Mithraism is supposed to be derived from the Indo Aryan Mitra as well as the Persian Mithra but happened much later in history around 2nd century BC http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mitra ------------- Venky |
Posted By: Cyrus Shahmiri
Date Posted: 17-Jan-2013 at 04:11
As I said in the first post, by "east Iranians" I mean ancient Indo-Iranian people who lived in the east of the Caspian sea, namely Central Asia, of course in the last 3,000 years many things have been changed in this region and the eastern Iran.
About Haplogroup I, according to this wiki article: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_I_%28Y-DNA%29 - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_I_(Y-DNA) , 34% is just about Tehran, capital of Iran, but in Isfahan in the Central Iran, it is just 10%. -------------
|
Posted By: EN-SZE
Date Posted: 17-Jan-2013 at 05:30
But, madam, I know beyond doubt that more than a half of inhabitants of Tehran are ethnic Turkic peoples. However, and all governors in the ancient time, except Sasanids, too were Turkic peoples. I consider that article in Wikipedia is a usual POLITICAL LIE. In Tehran there can not be 34 % of inhabitants with h/g I in any way. According to historical chronicles absolutely precisely it is known that the Swedish tribe RUSь sold slaves and finno-ugrishs to Mesopotamia and in Transcaucasia. It was continuous within 4 centuries process of delivery of slaves carriers to h/g I. These slaves couldn't disappear in a flash)))) ------------- In search of Truth we are limited to knowledge tools and consequently our idea of Truth includes also a certain mistake. |
Posted By: Cyrus Shahmiri
Date Posted: 17-Jan-2013 at 07:27
(madam?!!) Please keep away from exaggeration, I myself live in Tehran, of course there are a large number of Azeri people here but everyone knows that, like the people of Turkey, they are not ethnically Turkic people, anyway it can't be denied that some groups of Turkic peoples have migrated to Iran especially in the last thousand years, and before them Arabs, for this reason we should say the modern people of Iran are a mixture of Turkic, Semitic, Indo-European and aboriginal people.
I had talked about http://www.allempires.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=28053 - Vikings and the Rus in the south of Caspian sea in the 10th and 11th century, but it was just for trade or plunder, they didn't occupy any land, and I really doubt that some slaves who were sold during this period could have a large impact on the racial diversity of Iran!! -------------
|
Posted By: EN-SZE
Date Posted: 17-Jan-2013 at 08:00
I apologize you: I thought that you are the woman. According to your answer: The considerable part of everything SETLEMENT the population of Mesopotamia is descendants SUMERIAN WOMEN, with sumerian = Turkic language! After migration of a considerable part Sumerian in the territory of Europe, Black Sea Coast, North Kaspy, the Volga region, the Carpathians, on the territory of Siberia and the Far East, in Mesopotamia there was part of sumer, women, children, old men, priests of temples, priests castes etc. Modern Turks are akkadization Sumerian which women kept sumerian language. Certainly, akkadian language influenced Turkish language, but insignificant. Just the same AZERBAIJANI language! It is Sumerian language of Mothers of sumer, in ancient time won by Semite akkadians. Therefore at Azerbaijanians a significant amount of h/g J at men is combined with Turk=sumerian language of their mothers.) )) When I wrote about Turkic peoples of Tehran I meant not only Azerbaijanians! I meant Torkomans and Kashkais! It still thus that I didn't consider the Iranian Turkic peoples, living much thousands years on coast of the Tiger! ------------- In search of Truth we are limited to knowledge tools and consequently our idea of Truth includes also a certain mistake. |
Posted By: EN-SZE
Date Posted: 17-Jan-2013 at 08:33
|
All Turkic peoples to the Flood named themselves AS. 7000-6000 years ago Sumerian in Mesopotamia received the First Scriptus and the guide to action, about which Allah Supreme remembered us in Sacred Koran! Those Sumerian which executed the Message of the Allah began to be called ТURG=ТURК = "Establishing". What established Turk=Turg? Established the Right and the Power vertical. Precisely according to representations Sumerian about a space order in Solar system and in the Universe! Priests - SHANGU and their APOSTOLs (=12) executed the Order Supreme on Establishment of ITS Order! This part of ancient Turkic peoples began to name itself TURK!One part of them went to East and founded Chenees Impair.Second part went to Scandinavia.Other part went to Europe and Great Britane, one part went to Egipt and Afrika, at last one part went to the territory of modern Afganistan near Kandagar city.Unlike other Turkic peoples, continuing to call the AS. Get accustomed more attentively: ASIA=AZIA =AS+iA= "Possession of AS"!!! in the Tatar language.
------------- In search of Truth we are limited to knowledge tools and consequently our idea of Truth includes also a certain mistake. |
Posted By: EN-SZE
Date Posted: 17-Jan-2013 at 10:19
|
Vikings of a tribe of RUS had no state on the Caspian Sea or on the Black Sea. Robbers of RUS undertook 2 campaigns to the Caspian Sea but before getting to the Caspian Sea these Vikings ASKED to allow to float them across Volga from Noiegard-Ladoga. From someone they asked? Vikings asked permission the tsar of the Volga Bulgarians. During the first campaign to the Caspian Sea Vikings had 5000-7000 soldiers on 150-200 river crafts. After plunder of the coastal people these Vikings were possible manage through protecting armies Volga Blgar, and their most part left on the northwest, on their territory. In the second extortionate campaign Vikings of RUS brought together about 50 000 robbers by uncountable boats. Bulgarians Volga again passed this time Vikings down across Volga, however this time collected significant forces to DESTROY, at last, these barbarians. After a robbery of the near-Caspian peoples these 50 000 robbers during return were attacked by Blgarian and were destroyed by Blgarian.
------------- In search of Truth we are limited to knowledge tools and consequently our idea of Truth includes also a certain mistake. |
Posted By: EN-SZE
Date Posted: 17-Jan-2013 at 10:58
Imagine a situation when 50 000 barbarians Vikings, carriers h/g I, force in EACH city and the village of all women of genital age: All virgins, married women and absolutely little girls! Presented? Hypothetically it is 50 000 children in EACH large city of Mesopotamia, by the way! Here from where inhabitants of Iran have this paleoeuropean h/g I!!!
------------- In search of Truth we are limited to knowledge tools and consequently our idea of Truth includes also a certain mistake. |
Posted By: TheAlaniDragonRising
Date Posted: 17-Jan-2013 at 11:47
|
Posted By: EN-SZE
Date Posted: 17-Jan-2013 at 11:58
I forgot nothing and perfectly I remember about an unexpected extortionate campaign of Vikings under Svyatoslav's leadership. But you forgot that active armed forces pursued an army of Vikings and crushed them absolutely, and Svyatoslav was compelled to hide for Danube Blgariya's territories. By the way, this shameful flight didn't rescue of him. It found and Turkic solders decapitated him. ------------- In search of Truth we are limited to knowledge tools and consequently our idea of Truth includes also a certain mistake. |
Posted By: TheAlaniDragonRising
Date Posted: 17-Jan-2013 at 12:25
|
Posted By: EN-SZE
Date Posted: 17-Jan-2013 at 13:42
|
You or badly know sources, or you move political goals. Don't mislead readers the drawn card, by the way, which absolutely SENSELESS and is an ordinary forgery. Svyatoslav appointed the ruling prince from among the confidants in a small town in the south of the peninsula of Taman, but this governor was right there killed by citizens, at approach of active armed forces of Turkic peoples. If you understood the Tatar language, for certain, you would understand that the name TMUTARCAN it not the Scandinavian word and not a Slavic word. This word means "the Leader 10 000".This principality of Turkian existed LONG BEFORE extortionate attack of the Swedish army, and existed long after that.))) Notice: TAM+an=TAMAN peninsula and T(a)MUTARCAN=T(a)Mu Tarcan.And now read on Turkic dictionerys what mean this two words)))
------------- In search of Truth we are limited to knowledge tools and consequently our idea of Truth includes also a certain mistake. |
Posted By: TheAlaniDragonRising
Date Posted: 17-Jan-2013 at 14:56
|
Posted By: EN-SZE
Date Posted: 17-Jan-2013 at 16:33
You use the forged sources and consequently fall into a trap lie which was prepared for you by political falsifiers. The chronicle "A word about a regiment (prince) of Igor", dated the 11th century AD is written in language which consists for 60 % of the Tatar glossary. Prince Igor - the Kiev's prince. Events which are considered by you in the previous messages belong to the 10th century. In 100-120 years after "Svyatoslav's" (???)campaign inhabitants of Kiev still spoke in the native language, on Turkic. Don't exaggerate a role of the Swedish prince and a role of their EPHEMERAL state - Rus, which NEVER HAS BEEN. Read serious sources, for example, Volga Blgariya's chronicle which is called "Dzhagfar Tarikhe".There is writen REAL=TATAR names of "Russian" princes and and their Tatar title КАGAN are written. All faike "history" of EPHEMERAL Rus was written by monks in the Catherine II's secret printing house in the 18th century.
------------- In search of Truth we are limited to knowledge tools and consequently our idea of Truth includes also a certain mistake. |
Posted By: TheAlaniDragonRising
Date Posted: 17-Jan-2013 at 18:42
|
Posted By: EN-SZE
Date Posted: 17-Jan-2013 at 19:09
It is very fanny, that you trying to teach me the history of my people using faike sources)))) And more fanny here you don't write on theme "West Iranien vs Eastern Iranien" Are you afraid of reserch on history of your own country? Western Iranians vs. Eastern Iranien ?------------- In search of Truth we are limited to knowledge tools and consequently our idea of Truth includes also a certain mistake. |
Posted By: TheAlaniDragonRising
Date Posted: 17-Jan-2013 at 19:42
|
Posted By: EN-SZE
Date Posted: 18-Jan-2013 at 04:20
|
I could discuss with you on a subject: Someone from us is on friendly terms with LOGIC, and at someone a set of ready stamps from the historical school which has survived from mind. But this question is beyond this subject.
------------- In search of Truth we are limited to knowledge tools and consequently our idea of Truth includes also a certain mistake. |
Posted By: TheAlaniDragonRising
Date Posted: 18-Jan-2013 at 07:33
|
Posted By: EN-SZE
Date Posted: 18-Jan-2013 at 08:28
You curtailed on a footpath which IN ADVANCE prepared for me and which conducts in a trap. How you can speak about what KNIGHTS thus? ------------- In search of Truth we are limited to knowledge tools and consequently our idea of Truth includes also a certain mistake. |
Posted By: TheAlaniDragonRising
Date Posted: 18-Jan-2013 at 11:00
|
Posted By: EN-SZE
Date Posted: 18-Jan-2013 at 11:35
You preferred verbose phrase-mongering instead of discussion of a concrete subject - "The Western Iranians VS East Iranians". It is sure that fans of history already estimated your demagogical abilities to eluding from a discussed subject. ------------- In search of Truth we are limited to knowledge tools and consequently our idea of Truth includes also a certain mistake. |
Posted By: TheAlaniDragonRising
Date Posted: 18-Jan-2013 at 11:46
|
Posted By: EN-SZE
Date Posted: 18-Jan-2013 at 12:12
|
I didn't investigate all your epigrafic "works", but if all the rest at you same trolling as in this subject, I am surprised to long-suffering of mederators. Give them, the Supreme Allah, a lot of health)))
------------- In search of Truth we are limited to knowledge tools and consequently our idea of Truth includes also a certain mistake. |
Posted By: Centrix Vigilis
Date Posted: 18-Jan-2013 at 12:21
|
***/***** Whether I am or any other mod or staff member is long suffering is irrelevant. Both of you slow down and breathe. It is apparent that neither of you can concur with the others comments or analysis or presentation.That's fine. No harm done. It's expected. Your best bet now is to move on then. As for who decides when someone is trolling or inviolation of the Coc? That's a staff decision not a membership one. As noted many times and also recently exampled and restated, if a member has a problem with another it goes PM to the staff. It will not continue in open forum. If it does It will be dealt with in the same fashion it recently was. Now having made myself perfectly clear. Don't test that. Breathe and move on. And have a nice day. CV
------------- "Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence" S. T. Friedman Pilger's law: 'If it's been officially denied, then it's probably true' |
Posted By: TheAlaniDragonRising
Date Posted: 18-Jan-2013 at 13:18
| Many apologies to CV and the other mods, and Admins. On reflection I hold my hands up, EN-SZE, as my schooling shows me up so often, that nothing I say on here can be given much credence. |
Posted By: EN-SZE
Date Posted: 18-Jan-2013 at 13:44
|
I, as well as my relatives - МenGols, never lift hands as a sign of delivery in captivity. And on knees before anybody I will not rise, for my ancestors never before anybody didn't bend BOTH knees: Always bent ONE knee, even during oath bringing before the Emperor ChinGiz Kagan. I prefer not to break the laws of a discussment adopted on this site, and by all means I will look for unbiased opponents, at least, capable to have advantage for Truth search.
------------- In search of Truth we are limited to knowledge tools and consequently our idea of Truth includes also a certain mistake. |
Posted By: EN-SZE
Date Posted: 18-Jan-2013 at 14:07
Now is time : it is necessary very attentively to consider actually Iranian language and topony ERRAN which lies in a word IRAN root. Ancient Persian language now is defined as dead language, and the stare on its ancient records right there reveals its African hamito-Semitic roots. When linguists start to consider medieval Persian language, researchers come to the absolute BEWILDERMENT from unimaginable porridge from Sumerian(Tatar), Semitic, and dravidians glossary in languages of VARIOUS ethnic groups which unreasonably carried to the owner of Persian language.  ------------- In search of Truth we are limited to knowledge tools and consequently our idea of Truth includes also a certain mistake. |
Posted By: Ollios
Date Posted: 18-Jan-2013 at 14:10
Is this map true? 
------------- Ellerin Kabe'si var, Benim Kabem İnsandır |
Posted By: EN-SZE
Date Posted: 18-Jan-2013 at 14:37
|
Is this map true?
============= No, it isn't. There on the card "Iranien Homeland" is written and the brown spot is drawn, "Turkian Homeland" should be written...or "Huarasm (=our Entre Rios) Homeland" or "Madai Homeland". Why did nomadic Turks named themselfs MADAi after migration in to the South Kaspyan land??? What means a word of MADAi on Tatar = Sumerian language? What means word МADAi on Mengol = Sumerian language? Word MADAI in the MenGol's poem in 1324 year: "Bilig nigen dalai buyu Kёgar tengdache gariy Bilgyn josuni Biligty kymyn madaiiyu" "Bases of knowledge of your are sizes of oikumena To the Sky equal would be, if Knew writing In a science all barriers would overturn." On the Tatar-Sumerian language : Word MATAICHEK=MATAI+CHEK= means revolution through the head, an acrobatic jump with a complete REVOLUTION through the head. CHEK - affics So, why do nomadic Sumerian called itself МADAi = "turned over through the head"? Yes because these Tatars = Sumerian returned on the RECENT Homeland, from where undertook an outcome 3000-3200 years ago. Returned on the Homeland which they called ERRAN = ER+AN= the Country of Turkic Men". P.S: the sound A in the Tatar language always sounds as in the English word MAP.
------------- In search of Truth we are limited to knowledge tools and consequently our idea of Truth includes also a certain mistake. |
Posted By: EN-SZE
Date Posted: 18-Jan-2013 at 15:32
Shooters towards Persia on the card should start with the real homeland of Persians, related Kushitans. That is shooters should start with Africa to Elam. These shooters are necessary for continuing and through Persia to the southern India and to the island Sri Lanka. ------------- In search of Truth we are limited to knowledge tools and consequently our idea of Truth includes also a certain mistake. |
Posted By: Cyrus Shahmiri
Date Posted: 18-Jan-2013 at 15:39
That region could be the original land of Eastern Iranian people but Persians and Medians were Western Iranian peoples, as I said in http://www.allempires.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=31967 - this thread , there is no mention of Persians and Medians in Avesta, the oldest known Iranian source, but we read several times about Sogdians, Bactrians, Khwarezmians and other Iranian peoples who lived in the Central Asia and the east of Iran. -------------
|
Posted By: EN-SZE
Date Posted: 19-Jan-2013 at 03:34
|
Well, and now it is time to knock out already a chair from under the self-confident liars who have stolen that to them never belonged: I will give to you some pages from work of the great French linguist of J.Oppert which devoted over 20(!) years to interpretation of the Medean language fixed on the Bekhistun rock. By the way, J.Oppert categorically declared in the work about мedean and medean language: Medean were Tatars and spoke in the Tatar language.
http://archive.org/stream/LePeupleEtLaLangueDesMdes1879/Oppert1879LePeupleEtLaLangueDesMdes_djvu.txt ------------- In search of Truth we are limited to knowledge tools and consequently our idea of Truth includes also a certain mistake. |
Posted By: EN-SZE
Date Posted: 19-Jan-2013 at 04:37
|
I ask you, dear managers to make so that it was possible to attach the WORD files,PDF files and images to our messages. I can't attach neither texts, nor images.May be i made any mistake?
------------- In search of Truth we are limited to knowledge tools and consequently our idea of Truth includes also a certain mistake. |
Posted By: TheAlaniDragonRising
Date Posted: 19-Jan-2013 at 07:32
------------- What a handsome figure of a dragon. No wonder I fall madly in love with the Alani Dragon now, the avatar, it's a gorgeous dragon picture. |
Posted By: EN-SZE
Date Posted: 19-Jan-2013 at 08:09
|
I ask readers to accept indulgently the previous post from the remark edited.... He 's not reporting anything 'false' as far as I can discern.... but he may have been using academic references associated with Agustí Alemany, Sources on the Alans: A Critical Compilation. I realize there is a language difficulty perhaps in not using primaries.... and in acceptance or rejection of interpretations or sources. That's ok. But rude and unsubstantiated terms, like that edited, are not productive to civil discourse. So....keep the personality differences out of your responses. I have already commented on this. Next time I see; it action will be taken. Your now warned. CV/Moderator From the beginning of our Era and till 60th years of the 20th eyelid АLANs there were Caucasian Turkic peoples whom Karachay and Balkar are called. These are those KYVCHAKIAN which accepted Christianity the First after first Christians from among Jews. Not all from them steel christian:Part of ALANs continued traditions Sumerian Tengrianity with an equipotential cross in the form of Tengri symbol, the third part the late accepted Islam. Turkic peoples of the Caucasus, KARACHAi and BALKARs still address to tribespeople - "ALAN". AS is the self-name of part of Balkars returned in Caucus, it remained at the most ancient Turkic peoples during times to the Flood. During the Flood Turkic peoples escaped in the Caucasus. All other Turkic peoples on Earth - descendants of KARACHi and BALKAR. What proofs at me? The ancient Georgian chronicle argues that Turkic peoples = HON(HUN,GUN,KON) were the FIRST inhabitants of the Caucasus. Moreover, Karachi and Balkars have no any haplogroups N, Q, O or C. At them isn't present a uniform copy east haplogroups. False mister tries to insist on the ABSURD assumption, locating on the FORGED sources, on Abayev book which Abayev wrote by request of communist party and the Central Committee СPSU.This the book - lie from the beginning and up to the end. Ossetians who try to steal the Turkic name ALAN, were moved to the Caucasus very late, on historical measures during a board era by Sassanids. OSSETIANs is absolutely SETTLED ethnos, and Sassanids moved them to the Caucasus for restoration of the Great Caucasian Wall. Yes, yes. And in the Caucasus there are remains of the Great Wall - from the Black Sea to Caspian. This wall was destroyed periodically by Turkic peoples = ALANs.
------------- In search of Truth we are limited to knowledge tools and consequently our idea of Truth includes also a certain mistake. |
Posted By: EN-SZE
Date Posted: 19-Jan-2013 at 08:55
Ossetian "historians", followers of falsifier Abayev around the world are exposed to derision for the falsifications and clumsy attempts "to hide the stolen elephant". ------------- In search of Truth we are limited to knowledge tools and consequently our idea of Truth includes also a certain mistake. |
Posted By: benzin
Date Posted: 19-Jan-2013 at 10:46
|
as az and yas are the names of ancient ossetians. the question who are the alans then. I dont see turkic names connecting to them either.
|
Posted By: EN-SZE
Date Posted: 19-Jan-2013 at 11:43
Wrong. AS - it's a selfname of all Turkic peoples before the Flood. And then, Turks became TURK only after the First Message from Supreme Allah - First Scriptum, about which is written in Sacred Koran. The name of osetians is and were DIGIRON.
------------- In search of Truth we are limited to knowledge tools and consequently our idea of Truth includes also a certain mistake. |
Posted By: benzin
Date Posted: 19-Jan-2013 at 11:46
|
the yas people left language traces in hungary, and its clearly ossetian.
|
Posted By: EN-SZE
Date Posted: 19-Jan-2013 at 11:57
Turks= ALANs one of the first on Earth accepted Christianity. Together with Huns who are called by PACHINAK. Christian Turkic peoples also should have Christian names. By the way, to Turkic ALAN, very first after a part of Jews, the Christianity was taken up by the Turkic Huns then calling by AR-MiN - iRMAN. Their oath to destroy the Roman Empire for Jesus murder is written in the Tatar language on walls of the Christian church most ancient in the Crimea.!This record is dating the 2-nd century!!! These Turkic peoples, PACHINAKs and ALANs destroyed the slaveholding Roman Empire! ------------- In search of Truth we are limited to knowledge tools and consequently our idea of Truth includes also a certain mistake. |
Posted By: EN-SZE
Date Posted: 19-Jan-2013 at 12:05
you read the reliable primary source? Someone to you made comments on SEPARATE words, taking out of context? Give me, please, all primary source, I will analyse it, and then I will comment on it for you. I am already familiar with some attempts of Ossetian "cientists" to interpret Turkic names. These attempts were similar to attempts "to pull a parrot on the globe".
------------- In search of Truth we are limited to knowledge tools and consequently our idea of Truth includes also a certain mistake. |
Posted By: EN-SZE
Date Posted: 19-Jan-2013 at 12:21
|
====================== You GUESS and ASSUME let to answer my opponent at first. Instead of "ill turn" you could give simply the reference to that source which is known to you. And as you could add and opinion of the real linguists on reliability of your source. Yours faithfully.
------------- In search of Truth we are limited to knowledge tools and consequently our idea of Truth includes also a certain mistake. |
Posted By: EN-SZE
Date Posted: 19-Jan-2013 at 12:28
Give me this sources and those names...and I'll say you were you did mistake.
------------- In search of Truth we are limited to knowledge tools and consequently our idea of Truth includes also a certain mistake. |
Posted By: Cyrus Shahmiri
Date Posted: 19-Jan-2013 at 12:34
EN-SZE, Tatars were/are a great people but it can't make them greater if you try to relate some unrelated people to them, I don't know what you read in that French book from 1879 which shows Medians could be Tatars!! Someone can even prove Romans were Japanese but for many obvious reasons we know they were not. -------------
|
Posted By: Centrix Vigilis
Date Posted: 19-Jan-2013 at 12:35
Whether I guess or assume is irrevelent to the use of your rude terminology, in violation of the CoC, which I edited. Which I not only have the authority to do... but will do. You have been warned. Don't do it again. Don't challenge my authority to moderate this forum. You do? you will be on the bench. period. If you wish you may PM another staff or the admin owner for a review. That is your only remaining option. If you comment on it again, in this thread, I will suspend you for trolling and disrespect to staff for failing to follow staff direction. CV------------- "Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence" S. T. Friedman Pilger's law: 'If it's been officially denied, then it's probably true' |
Posted By: EN-SZE
Date Posted: 19-Jan-2013 at 12:39
I calmly wait your sources. ------------- In search of Truth we are limited to knowledge tools and consequently our idea of Truth includes also a certain mistake. |
Posted By: TheAlaniDragonRising
Date Posted: 19-Jan-2013 at 12:50
------------- What a handsome figure of a dragon. No wonder I fall madly in love with the Alani Dragon now, the avatar, it's a gorgeous dragon picture. |
Posted By: benzin
Date Posted: 19-Jan-2013 at 12:52
|
Part of the wordlist I found:
yas - 'magyar' ossetian (digor) Acca – ‘kacsa’; oszét acc/accae ‘vadkacsa’ Ban – ‘nap’; oszét bon Basa – ‘rántással készült leves’; oszét bas/basae Bax – ‘ló’; oszét baex Carif – ‘vaj’; oszét sarv/carv Cugan – ”lábas, fazék’; digor cigon Dan – ‘víz-1; oszét don Da – ‘tied’, oszét dae Docega – ‘tehén’; oszét dusgae/docgae ‘fejőstehén’ Fit – ‘hús’; oszét fyd/fid Fus – ‘juh’; oszét fys/fus Gal – ‘bika’, oszét gal Gist – ‘túró’; oszét, digor aengezun ‘forr, erjed’, aengist ‘erjesztő’ Hecav – ‘gazda’; oszét xisaw/xecaw Huvar – ‘köles’; oszét Xor/xwar Huvas – ‘széna’; oszét xos/xwasae Jaika – ‘tojás’; oszét ajk/ajka12 Kapken – ‘hal’, oszét kaef Karak – ‘tyúk’, oszét kark Karbac – ‘árpa’; oszét, iron kcervaez (árpafajta) Kasa – ‘kása’; oszét kash/kasae Kurajna – ‘malom’; oszét kwyroj/kurojnae K’ever – ‘kenyér’; oszét k’aebaer Manavona – ‘búza’; oszét maenaew/maenaewae Na – ‘mienk’; oszét nae Odok – ‘kanál’; oszét widyg/jedug Oras – ‘kovász’, oszét, digor waeras Osa – ‘nő’; oszét us/osae Qaz – ‘liba, lúd’; oszét qazh/qaz Sabar – ‘zab’ Saka – ‘kecske’; oszét shaegwyt Sana – ‘bor’, oszét saen/saenae Tabac – ‘tányér’, oszét taebaeg Vas – ‘borjú’; oszét, digor waess The wordlist made by a local to a government judge who went to judge to pilisjaszfalu, a yas village in Hungary in 1422. |
Posted By: benzin
Date Posted: 19-Jan-2013 at 12:55
The wordlist is made in latin and yas.
|
Posted By: EN-SZE
Date Posted: 19-Jan-2013 at 12:59
|
As an example I will give the name ZAUER which Ossetian "scientists" translated and translate as "a brilliant hand".)))) In the Tatar language, in the Turkic languages word ZAUER it is SAUER=SAU+ER = "The healthy man". SAU = "healthy" ER = "man", in this case male child!
You should understand my EXTREME scepticism concerning such silly interpretations of ancient names of Alans. ------------- In search of Truth we are limited to knowledge tools and consequently our idea of Truth includes also a certain mistake. |
Posted By: EN-SZE
Date Posted: 19-Jan-2013 at 13:06
Perfectly!!! At last I see, how they deceive!!!
------------- In search of Truth we are limited to knowledge tools and consequently our idea of Truth includes also a certain mistake. |
Posted By: EN-SZE
Date Posted: 19-Jan-2013 at 13:20
|
Please, write near everyone word the English translaition...and i make you SHOW
------------- In search of Truth we are limited to knowledge tools and consequently our idea of Truth includes also a certain mistake. |
Posted By: benzin
Date Posted: 19-Jan-2013 at 13:27
|
Some yas legends from hungary, as I see there is an interest for it.
This is the horn of Lél. He is a legendary, also a real yasic captain, the only one able to blow the horn. Its a true masterpiece, probably from the 9th century. Its said to be symbol of all yasic people around the world. Its said to be damaged when Lél leading the magyar army in germany lost a battle, got captured, and when he was taken in front of the royalty he smashed the head of Konrad prince of Lotharingia, relative of Otto the I.st holy roman emperor.  
The horn of Lél (also Lehel) is in Jászberény, Hungary. wich is said to be the Yasic capital. |