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

  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

Saxon and Scythian

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 34567 45>
Author
SearchAndDestroy View Drop Down
Caliph
Caliph
Avatar

Joined: 15-Aug-2004
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2728
  Quote SearchAndDestroy Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: Saxon and Scythian
    Posted: 25-Apr-2008 at 22:52
This discussion is useless, nothing will be changed if I show several other sources because you believe all ancient historians and geographers didn't know Scythians and confused them with other peoples!!! Ouch
We can say the samething.
 
Sax" means nothing except "Knife" in the Persian and Scythian languages, the most famous Scythian weapon was "Saxar" in the Scythian language, "Sagsar" in the Persian and "Sagaris" in the Greek.
Not for the Germanic peoples, in which case the Saxons are apart of, and seem to be named after the Seax, Sax, Seaxe, etc... Which was used widely in Northern Europe and related to the Germanic people.
 
I'm not sure why you believe just because they had similar names that they would be the same people. Sound and spelling don't mean similarities. Like I said above, the Scythian name seems to come from "archer, shooter", wikipedia even has it and gives three sources for it.
Naming and etymology

The Scythians known to Herodotus (Hist. 4.6) called themselves Skolotoi. The Greek word Skythēs probably reflects an older rendering of the very same name, *Skuδa- (whereas Herodotus transcribes the unfamiliar [] sound with Λ; -toi represents the North-east Iranian plural ending -ta). The word originally means "shooter, archer", and it ultimately derived from the Proto-Indo-European root *skeud- "to shoot, throw" (compare English shoot, German Schtze). [3][16][17]

Scythians also were known for their archers, hence the name, and horsemanship. I don't recall Germanic people being known for either during this time.
 
What I do know is, that the Germanic Peoples did value their swords, and they have the Seax, which is also spelled Sax, that is accociated with Germanic people.
 
So, which is the likely conclusion? Saxon derived from Saka which comes from the IE word for archer, shooter, or Does Saxon come from the Germanic Sword, and on top of that, share the same langauge catagory, religion, and culture? I choose Germanic.
"A patriot must always be ready to defend his country against his government." E.Abbey
Back to Top
gcle2003 View Drop Down
King
King

Suspended

Joined: 06-Dec-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 7035
  Quote gcle2003 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 26-Apr-2008 at 10:23
Back to Top
Cyrus Shahmiri View Drop Down
Administrator
Administrator
Avatar
King of Kings

Joined: 07-Aug-2004
Location: Iran
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 6240
  Quote Cyrus Shahmiri Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 26-Apr-2008 at 13:34

You have no source and just prefer Saxons to be not Scythians, but the historical fact is something else which is confirmed by all ancient, medieval and even modern historians, as John Milton (1608-1674), one of the greatest English historians, poets, scholars and pamphleteer, in his absolute masterpiece "The History of Britain", says:

http://oll.libertyfund.org/index.php?option=com_staticxt&staticfile=show.php%3Ftitle=1210&layout=html

Saxons were a people thought by good writers to be descended of the Sac, a kind of Scythians in the north of Asia, thence called Sacasons, or sons of Sac, who, with a flood of other northern nations came into Europe, toward the declining of the Roman empire; and using piracy from Denmark all along these seas, possessed at length by intrusion all that coast of Germany, and the Netherlands, which took thence the name of Old Saxony, lying between the Rhine and Elve, and from thence north as far as Eidora, the river bounding Holsatia, though not so firmly or so largely, but that their multitude wandered yet uncertain of habitation.

Back to Top
gcle2003 View Drop Down
King
King

Suspended

Joined: 06-Dec-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 7035
  Quote gcle2003 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 26-Apr-2008 at 14:04
Not exactly the most authoritative historical source.
 
What does Geoffrey of Monmouth say? Rolling%20Eyes
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: 26-Apr-2008 at 15:43
Originally posted by Cyrus Shahmiri

You have no source and just prefer Saxons to be not Scythians, but the historical fact is something else which is confirmed by all ancient, medieval and even modern historians, as John Milton (1608-1674), one of the greatest English historians, poets, scholars and pamphleteer, in his absolute masterpiece "The History of Britain", says:


John Milton isn't modern, and not an historian. His History of Britain is not a scholarly work; it's that of a poet with a political agenda. I'm really surprised to someone studying history using him as a source. Do you ever question the credibility of a source? And what made you make the completely incorrect conclusion that everyone "confirmed" it? If anything it's the opposite.

There are no sources, and the reason is simple: they weren't the same people. But there is no reason to repeat everything once again. For new people: just read the thread.


Edited by Styrbiorn - 26-Apr-2008 at 15:48
Back to Top
SearchAndDestroy View Drop Down
Caliph
Caliph
Avatar

Joined: 15-Aug-2004
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2728
  Quote SearchAndDestroy Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 26-Apr-2008 at 16:18
You have no source and just prefer Saxons to be not Scythians
No sources? The opposite of what you say is every where, and quite frankly, has alot more proof then you can offer.
I already broke down the names, they don't make sense when using their meaning. Their culture, they don't match up. And the Saxon's Language, it's Germanic. So if your going to call the Saxons a Scythian people, you might as well call all the Germanic people Scythian too.
"A patriot must always be ready to defend his country against his government." E.Abbey
Back to Top
Cyrus Shahmiri View Drop Down
Administrator
Administrator
Avatar
King of Kings

Joined: 07-Aug-2004
Location: Iran
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 6240
  Quote Cyrus Shahmiri Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 26-Apr-2008 at 16:21
Originally posted by gcle2003

Not exactly the most authoritative historical source.
 
What does Geoffrey of Monmouth say? Rolling%20Eyes
 
Geoffrey of Monmouth also believed that Scythians lived in the north Germany and Denmark and mentions a Scythian migration to the Britain:

"History of the Kings of Britain" by Geoffrey of Monmouth, Book IV, Chapter XVII: "Scythians came from Scythia with a great fleet, and arrived in the north part of Britain, which is called Albania, and began to ravage that country."

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: 26-Apr-2008 at 16:48
Originally posted by Cyrus Shahmiri

Originally posted by gcle2003

Not exactly the most authoritative historical source.
 
What does Geoffrey of Monmouth say? Rolling%20Eyes
 
Geoffrey of Monmouth also believed that Scythians lived in the north Germany and Denmark and mentions a Scythian migration to the Britain:

"History of the Kings of Britain" by Geoffrey of Monmouth, Book IV, Chapter XVII: "Scythians came from Scythia with a great fleet, and arrived in the north part of Britain, which is called Albania, and began to ravage that country."


He was ironic. Geoffrey is as credible as  Alexandre Dumas.
Back to Top
Cyrus Shahmiri View Drop Down
Administrator
Administrator
Avatar
King of Kings

Joined: 07-Aug-2004
Location: Iran
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 6240
  Quote Cyrus Shahmiri Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 26-Apr-2008 at 18:12
Styrbiorn, Who is credible? Just someone who says "there is no relation between Saxons and Scythians"? In this case I think you can't find any credible historian!!
Back to Top
Cyrus Shahmiri View Drop Down
Administrator
Administrator
Avatar
King of Kings

Joined: 07-Aug-2004
Location: Iran
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 6240
  Quote Cyrus Shahmiri Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 26-Apr-2008 at 18:19
Originally posted by SearchAndDestroy

You have no source and just prefer Saxons to be not Scythians
No sources? The opposite of what you say is every where, and quite frankly, has alot more proof then you can offer.
I already broke down the names, they don't make sense when using their meaning. Their culture, they don't match up. And the Saxon's Language, it's Germanic. So if your going to call the Saxons a Scythian people, you might as well call all the Germanic people Scythian too.
There is no difference between Saxon and Scythian cultures and there is certainly a strong Scythian/Saxon influence on Germanic cultures. As I said in the another thread, Saxon language is the most similar language to Persian among all Indo-European languages.
Back to Top
gcle2003 View Drop Down
King
King

Suspended

Joined: 06-Dec-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 7035
  Quote gcle2003 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 26-Apr-2008 at 18:40
Originally posted by Cyrus Shahmiri

Styrbiorn, Who is credible? Just someone who says "there is no relation between Saxons and Scythians"? In this case I think you can't find any credible historian!!
Of course there is a relation. At worst they're both human.
 
The only question of interest would be whether there is any reason to think Saxons are any closer related to Scythians than say the Gauls or the Latins or the Poles are.
 
And, yes, it is difficult to find sources that point out what is obvious.
Back to Top
Cyrus Shahmiri View Drop Down
Administrator
Administrator
Avatar
King of Kings

Joined: 07-Aug-2004
Location: Iran
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 6240
  Quote Cyrus Shahmiri Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 26-Apr-2008 at 19:03
The only question of interest would be whether there is any reason to think Saxons are any closer related to Scythians than say the Gauls or the Latins or the Poles are.

One of the major reasons is the Language, what do you call two peoples with the same language?
Back to Top
SearchAndDestroy View Drop Down
Caliph
Caliph
Avatar

Joined: 15-Aug-2004
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2728
  Quote SearchAndDestroy Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 26-Apr-2008 at 19:06

As I said in the another thread, Saxon language is the most similar language to Persian among all Indo-European languages.
What are these Examples? The closest language to the Saxons is Old Frisian.

And how is it that their cultures have no difference? Their Religion was different, Saxons weren't exactly known for either Archery or Horsemanship. Their Language was Low Germanic.

Beorna already commented on your Vettersfeld example, which doesn't seem like it was wide spread if it's in one place, and how recent developments say otherwise. And the Vettersfish, one of the examples from these sites show how art is just passed through societies and cultures as it's a mix of Celtic and Scythian Art found in traditional Germanic area. The Germanic tribes were pretty much between those two peoples.
 
If we are going to use art, we mind as well call Celts Germanic, and Germanic Tribes all Celtic, as they passed cultural influences on between each other.
"A patriot must always be ready to defend his country against his government." E.Abbey
Back to Top
gcle2003 View Drop Down
King
King

Suspended

Joined: 06-Dec-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 7035
  Quote gcle2003 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 26-Apr-2008 at 21:12
Originally posted by Cyrus Shahmiri

The only question of interest would be whether there is any reason to think Saxons are any closer related to Scythians than say the Gauls or the Latins or the Poles are.

One of the major reasons is the Language, what do you call two peoples with the same language?
 
Two peoples with the same language.
 
Jamaicans and Englishmen speak the same language.
 
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: 26-Apr-2008 at 23:32
Originally posted by beorna

Perhaps you think it is useless. Before you do not explain how these Scythian Horse-warriors became seamen and pirates, before you do not show where your Scythians or Sakas lived between 500 BC and 350 AD, before you cannot explain why the known saxon groups are all among northsee and elbgermanic groups, before you do not show that Saxon is closer to Iranian than to every other Germanic dialect or language, I am not the one who is not able to learn. ........So whatever Saxon means or Saka means if both names have a common term, it isn't necessary to believe that both people share a common ethnic base. All data we have says that there is no Scythian origin at all, never ever.  

Would you be so kind to answer?
Saxon isn't closer to Iranian than to any other language. The closest languages to saxon are other Germanic languages. so all Germanic nations in Scandinavia and Middle Europe would have had Scythian origin if you were right. And pardon, Cyrus. You can't prefer those sources! Than I can write a russian history on the base of "war and peace". The Romans called other nations Barbarians. Do you search for Barbaria? I told you although we call the inhabitants of Asia Asians there is a difference betweeb Israelis, Indians and Japanese, or are you one nation, because we call you Asians? Saxon culture is Scythiian? Well, please let us speak about archeological places in North Germany and Danmark. Perhaps you can show me your Scythian culture. I am looking forward to hear of it.
Back to Top
King John View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar

Joined: 01-Dec-2006
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1366
  Quote King John Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27-Apr-2008 at 05:18
Just to illustrate the linguistic point here are two language family trees. Both are of the Indo-European language family the first is the Centum langauges:

the second is the Satem languages:

Notice that Old Saxon and the Germanic Languages appear in the Centum Language Tree, whereas Persian appears in the Satem Language tree.

edit:
Here is the Satem Language Branch:


here is the Centum Branch of the IE Language tree



Edited by King John - 27-Apr-2008 at 12:26
Back to Top
SearchAndDestroy View Drop Down
Caliph
Caliph
Avatar

Joined: 15-Aug-2004
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2728
  Quote SearchAndDestroy Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27-Apr-2008 at 05:23
Those are great red X's John! Cheeky
 
They aren't showing up, did you copy the link properly?
 
"A patriot must always be ready to defend his country against his government." E.Abbey
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: 27-Apr-2008 at 11:35
Originally posted by Cyrus Shahmiri

There is no difference between Saxon and Scythian cultures and there is certainly a strong Scythian/Saxon influence on Germanic cultures. As I said in the another thread, Saxon language is the most similar language to Persian among all Indo-European languages.

There are enourmous differences. Different burial rites. Different buildings. Different language. Different culture. Different everything.

And for language similarity: you're simply wrong. I suggest you get in contact with a professional linguist, maybe he will convince you, seeing that you don't listen to or trust any single evidence put against you.


These are the pics King John linked to, from http://www.danshort.com/ie/

Cyrus, this is basicly what all linguists agree about. Why do you think they are all wrong and you know better?





Edited by Styrbiorn - 27-Apr-2008 at 11:53
Back to Top
Cyrus Shahmiri View Drop Down
Administrator
Administrator
Avatar
King of Kings

Joined: 07-Aug-2004
Location: Iran
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 6240
  Quote Cyrus Shahmiri Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27-Apr-2008 at 13:47

King John, what do you know about Centum and Satem language?

For example it is said "k" sound of Centum languages became sibilants such as "s" and "sh" sounds in the some words of the Satem languages, would you please give some examples in Saxon, as a Centum language?!! I think the main problem is that there is no "sh" sound in the Centum languages!!

Lets discuss about this word:

Saxon: Sheort
meaning Short

Latin/Greek: Curto
Swedish: Kort
Spanish: Corto
German: Kurz
Italian: Corto
Danish/Dutch: Kort
French: Court

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: 27-Apr-2008 at 15:11
Originally posted by Cyrus Shahmiri

King John, what do you know about Centum and Satem language?

For example it is said "k" sound of Centum languages became sibilants such as "s" and "sh" sounds in the some words of the Satem languages, would you please give some examples in Saxon, as a Centum language?!! I think the main problem is that there is no "sh" sound in the Centum languages!!

Lets discuss about this word:

Saxon: Sheort
meaning Short

Latin/Greek: Curto
Swedish: Kort
Spanish: Corto
German: Kurz
Italian: Corto
Danish/Dutch: Kort
French: Court


No 'sh'-sound? There are 5 different sh sounds in Swedish, and at least one in English. In  German there is two, etc. Furthermore, that the IE stem -sker evolved into short in English, but kort in other Germanic languages doesn't mean it's the rule. For example, Swedish skra (pronounced shaera), German scheren,is derived from the same word, but here it has transformed according to 'sh'. There is no rule stating that all/no words have made this transform.

Please tell me where you read there are no 'sh'-sound!


Edited by Styrbiorn - 27-Apr-2008 at 15:20
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 34567 45>

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 0.094 seconds.