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

  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

Topic ClosedAre Kurds Descended From the Medes?

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1234>
Author
Messopotamian View Drop Down
Knight
Knight
Avatar

Joined: 22-Sep-2009
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 56
Direct Link To This Post Topic: Are Kurds Descended From the Medes?
    Posted: 09-Oct-2009 at 08:17
Originally posted by Cyrus Shahmiri

It sounds great that Kurds of Turkey understand Persian language, I think Messopotamian is one of them, I ask him: "Aya shoma az tarze negaresho khaneshe zabane Parsi agahie kafi darid?"
 
İskit, I think your username shows that you believe Scythians were not an Iranian people, whenas it is already a proven historical fact that they were certainly an Iranian-speaking people, their original land was where modern Turkic peoples live, so there could be some cultural interchanges between them and Turks who entered those regions several centuries later but it doesn't change the fact that Scythians were the ancestors of some Iranian people who still live in those regions, like Ossetians that you mentioned. I think it is more believable to say Turkey has been always the land of Turks, than Central Asia!
 
 
Ofcourse , NO ! Kurds dont understand Persian. I am Member of Kurmanji ( Kur : Son, Manji : Magi ) from Turkey,Turks think kurds understand persian,because they are Persian :D
 
Perhaps Kurmanjis are descendents of Medes,they's dialect diffrent with other dialects.
 
 
Back to Top
Azadi View Drop Down
Consul
Consul
Avatar
retired AE moderator

Joined: 17-Aug-2009
Location: Kurdistan, Iran
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 362
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09-Oct-2009 at 15:37
Originally posted by İskit

İn turkey most of Kurds understand persian. But you dont. İts ok. ( ım not kurd and dont know kurdish so cant say my own opinion)

Most Kurds in North understand persian ? 
I think you missed a class or something, all Kurds, in a certain degree, in East-Kurdistan understand Farsi. In North they speak mostly Kurdish, Kurmanji being the most spoken, and Turkish. I've been in Urmiye several times, were I had to go though North-Kurdistan first - and almost nobody, except those on the artificial boarders knew Farsi.

A.
Back to Top
Miller View Drop Down
Baron
Baron
Avatar

Joined: 25-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 487
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09-Oct-2009 at 22:40
Originally posted by İskit


İn Turkey in primary and high school books  show Scythians as a Turk.
 
Now that explains alot of what we see over the internet.
 
Turkish gevernment has picked a dangerous path trying to create identity and pride
Back to Top
Miller View Drop Down
Baron
Baron
Avatar

Joined: 25-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 487
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09-Oct-2009 at 22:46

Kurdish and Persian are like German and Dutch. They are independent languages, but the structure is very close. Many of the words have the same root but have evolved differently and the only one that could tell the similarity is a person who knows both languages

People speaking different dialect of the same language can rarely understand each other let alone two different languages.

Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09-Oct-2009 at 23:44
Originally posted by Miller

Originally posted by İskit


İn Turkey in primary and high school books  show Scythians as a Turk.
 
Now that explains alot of what we see over the internet.
 
Turkish gevernment has picked a dangerous path trying to create identity and pride


Saying them iranian is a very safe and holy  path. What a dangerous way we are in. Shocked

İ think our schools better than yours one. writing history how politics want it is a job of europan historians not us.



The review of the politically correct scientific half-truths and outright falsifications would not be complete without addressing the treatment of the unsuitable facts.

Time to time the life brings to light a fact that contradicts the official theory. In Russia, the facts can be disposed of by explaining them away, silencing them, ignoring them, or destroying them. One example of explaining away is the attribution of a fact to an import, like the nomadic animal art copied from the advanced Iranian/Greek/Mediterranean settled population. The silencing is best done by hiding it, like the Scythian artifacts hidden in the storage of Hermitage, to hide the splendor and skill of the population preceding the Slavic migrants. The inscriptions can be ignored, to retain the concept of the illiteracy of the nomadic population, invariably repeated in every publication. And the destruction continues on an industrial scale, some by design, some by shear negligence. Cities and kurgans are being ploughed over, records and bones destroyed, samples not analyzed, results not published, the hand written records and collections of the pre-Soviet time archeological societies lost and destroyed. Whatever are the means, the official theory remains unscathed. The former USSR and now the Russian Academy of Sciences has a long history of never acknowledging the evidence that contradicts the official stance. Historically, it was not an enviable preposition for a Russian scientist: either silence, or else.

The dissenters, who exist in all societies and in all times, had to either remain silent, or pay a heavy toll. Here again existed a circus air, when even the loyal followers could be labeled dissenters upon a turn in the official position. Like in the Imperial times, in the Soviet time some dissent always survived in a camouflaged form, masked as poetry, novels, anti anti-official assertions, and other innocently looking works. Usually the camouflage was supported by a loyal lip service in the beginning paragraphs. Not infrequently, both the august referent and the author worked in tandem disguising the true substance of the work.

The Iranian/Ossetian Scythian theory has all the traits of a politically correct theory. It is built on a thinnest foundation of an obscure language, and is not supported by the evidence and foresight connected with what is usually called a scientific theory. The cultural heritage, traceable for millennia among other peoples of the world, has not been shown to display links between the Ossetian, Pashtu, or other Iranian speaking peoples, and the details of the Scythian life described by the ancient writers. No traces, specific to the Scythian nomadism of the historical period, found their parallels in the historically documented Indo-European societies. It is well shown in the work of a prominent export on nomadism A. Khazanov(6).

The extensive Indo-European ethnology documents such cultural attributes as dress, food, drinks, conservation of produce, family relationships, housing, sanitary traditions, military traditions, societal organization, cosmological concepts, literary traditions, mythological and folk tale traditions, art, and a myriad of other traits. In many cases, the prominence of these traits far exceeds the significance of the other characteristics. For example, the Scythian mercenaries were a major, if not the only, force in the armies of a number of the states, during almost a millennia period. The Scythian warriors in the Scythian conical hats, Scythian boots, Scythian pants, on the Scythian horses and with Scythian composite bows are shown innumerable times in the historical records and became a staple image of the generic Scythian. The Ossetian ethnography of the historical period would have to come up with at least a remote echo of these mercenary military traditions wearing Ossetian conical hats, Ossetian boots, Ossetian pants, riding the Ossetian horses and with Ossetian composite bows. In the absence of such ethnological links, the Indo-European theory would remain a murky propaganda myth. The so-called universal acceptance can become a scientific concept only when the multidisciplinary evidence converges to the same conclusion.





.İ will give you an answer conversation writed by me.

S: Supporter of İndio Europan theory
M: Me

M: Why yuo indio- europize every people in the ancient world.
S: WE dont do. they speak indio europan language.
M: But your starting hypotesis anatolia or kurgan it starts them Bc. 5000 or 4000. Yuo got any linguistic source?
S: they speak indio europan language
M: At these hypotesis you made horse nomads, farmers, or hunter gatherers you make all of them İndio-euroapan; is it logic.
S:  they speak indio europan language
M: Your hypotesis says Europa, caucasia, north of black sea, anatolia, middle asia, altai region, syberia all of there populated by indio-europans from bc. 6000 to end of first age. there are huge differces at this regions, cultural, religional, economic, at every part of thier life. How yuo unite them İndio europanic.
S: they speak indio europan language
M: First writings found in the world, sumerian. But it isnt indio europan. How you examine this.
S: İt must be indio europan. More serius reseach will show it.
M: But most of research show its very similar to turkish.
S: No.  No Turks at anatolia, midlle asia , todays east and west turkestan, syberia no turks here to the huns. Ony iranians here. Ony iranians. İ-ra-ni-ans. ONLY İRANİANS. NO TURKS. Only hint europans, iranians. And Turks barbarian. They cant have civizilation like sümerians have. (This bold sentences said by most of indio-europan historians)
M: Turks and mongolians are horse nomad too. How yuo prison them to todays mongolia only. Why they dont go euroasian steppes?
S: Onlyyyyyy İraniiiiiiaannnn Noooo Turk or mongol. İranians speak indio europan. We indio europans at eveywhere. We create civizilation.
M: At 1000 Bc a viking from norseland,  a horse nomad from scytia, a people from india, how yuo unite them same. Yuo said laguage. When they came togather they dont understand each others language. Their culture, religion etc diffrent.
S: They are indio europan. Europans eveywhere.
M you call all white peoples indio-europan. Why?. İts totally ridiciolus and racial.
S: We are aryaaaannnnnn!!! We made civizilation.
M: but your theory isnt eurocentric. Right?
S: yes we hate eurocentrisim. but love indio europans. Turks are barbarian.






Edited by İskit - 09-Oct-2009 at 23:54
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09-Oct-2009 at 23:50
Originally posted by Azadi

Originally posted by İskit

İn turkey most of Kurds understand persian. But you dont. İts ok. ( ım not kurd and dont know kurdish so cant say my own opinion)

Most Kurds in North understand persian ? 
I think you missed a class or something, all Kurds, in a certain degree, in East-Kurdistan understand Farsi. In North they speak mostly Kurdish, Kurmanji being the most spoken, and Turkish. I've been in Urmiye several times, were I had to go though North-Kurdistan first - and almost nobody, except those on the artificial boarders knew Farsi.

A.


İts ok. perhaps my freinds learn persian and know kurdish, so they understand each other. As ı said before ı dont know al the entire population.
Back to Top
Miller View Drop Down
Baron
Baron
Avatar

Joined: 25-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 487
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 10-Oct-2009 at 01:30

Sorry, I don’t have the time to read through all the cut and paste, but I think in general you tend to dismiss language as a mean to determine the identity of historical groups. Don’t forget that could cut both ways. The whole pan-turkic idea is based on language. Clearly today’s central Asian Turks and Anatolian Turks are not of the same ethnic group and you don’t need a DNA test to prove that. If you take language out on what basis can all these people be grouped as Turks. Does this mean that you also believe either Anatolians are not Turk or central Asians are not Turk

Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 10-Oct-2009 at 06:21
Originally posted by Miller

Sorry, I don’t have the time to read through all the cut and paste, but I think in general you tend to dismiss language as a mean to determine the identity of historical groups. Don’t forget that could cut both ways. The whole pan-turkic idea is based on language. Clearly today’s central Asian Turks and Anatolian Turks are not of the same ethnic group and you don’t need a DNA test to prove that. If you take language out on what basis can all these people be grouped as Turks. Does this mean that you also believe either Anatolians are not Turk or central Asians are not Turk



History needs reading. And to be  be open minded. not have prejudgement.

İ will write them more open to understand what are try to say.


1) İe theory is not a fact. some people can beleive it. Other ones not. you cant dont belive people pan bla bla , or racist, or stupid etc. You have no right to do it.

2) liguistic cant not use alone to define a people. İt must be supported by other sources. İf its not. Linguistic is nothing.

3) İe theory use ligustic ony. Why because it havent got supportive sources to theory. Ad most of sources , (writings arcelogical materials , etc) destroyed by ie supporters becausese they see the theroy wrong.

4) Turk history not ony build on lingust only. İf you makes some writings taht ı give other post yuo will see. But yuor aim is not to support linguistic. your aim is slander to turks.

5) how yuo know anatolian turks and asian turks havent got same etcity. İ can show nomeraus of source (not linguistic only) from divan-uligat it Tur to modern writings, to show yuor opinion is totally wrong, ridiciolus and racist. Thats yuo. İf  somebody show yuo ideas are wrong you always start to lie and to slande. YUo are one of this liers and to slandes. nothing no more.

6) i see all dna research for history (not only about Turks all of them) totally racist.


Edited by İskit - 10-Oct-2009 at 06:26
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
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 10-Oct-2009 at 07:29
Iskit, it isn't important what other peoples say, Indians are Indian people and Europeans are European, you can't deny the existence of Iranian peoples because Iranian is also an Indo-European language, you know yourself that Turks didn't live in Turkey in the ancient times, it can be said about Iranians and Iran in an older time, we know in the ancient times some non-Iranian peoples, such as Elamites, Urartians, Lullubi, Mannaeans, ... lived in modern Iran, so Iranian-speaking peoples migrated from somewhere to this country.
 
You can't come here and say yesterday some Turkish scientists discovered that Scythians were a Turkic people, thousands Iranian sources from thousands years ago talk about Scythians as an Iranian people, Rostam, Iran's national hero, was a pure Scythian, not a Persian, in fact Ferdosi in Shahnameh talks about Scythia as the original land of Iranians, one of the highest titles in the Sassanid Persian empire was "Scythian King" (Sakan-Shah), ... the Iranian origin of Scythians is not a chemical element which can be discovred by scientists, this is a historical fact.


Edited by Cyrus Shahmiri - 10-Oct-2009 at 07:35
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 10-Oct-2009 at 09:01
What about alp er tunga (afrasiab) . Scytian and Turkic. National hero o Turks

Scytian iranian war call turk iran wars too. Turan aganist İran. ()

Cyrus your words write here nothing to me. and other ones who think like me.
I put my sources here. You put your sources here.
You cant change my idea, i cant change yours.
Back to Top
Messopotamian View Drop Down
Knight
Knight
Avatar

Joined: 22-Sep-2009
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 56
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 10-Oct-2009 at 09:08
This thread not Schytians. This threats Kurds and thems relatives with Medes!
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
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 10-Oct-2009 at 09:21
It is better to stick on the topic, talking about Turan, descendants of Turaj (Middle Persian Tuzh), Tur-ik (Turk) or Tuj-ik (Tajik), ... needs another thread.
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 10-Oct-2009 at 09:47
ok. but ı want to say  last thing at this topic about scytians;  Real historians dont find new things. They are ameliorating the history knited by lies, fiction and  racism. They are showing the people what truht is. Not manipulating the people like made by İe historians.
Back to Top
Miller View Drop Down
Baron
Baron
Avatar

Joined: 25-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 487
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 10-Oct-2009 at 14:26

Iskit, not trying to offend you , but The point was not to argue about where Sythians and Turks came from.

There are tens of topic just in this forum covering that just search for them . The point was to show the general logic of thinking and what could have caused that.

This thread has picture of today’s central Asian Turks

http://www.allempires.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=3007&PN=1

and you insist that they are the same ethnicity as people living in Istanbul . The only thing they have in common with Anatolian Turks is that they speak a Turkic based language but at the same time like to deny historical evidence because the language argument is not sufficient,

If you think today’s linguistics connections points to something the ancient connections are ten times more valid because people lived more sparsely and were isolated from each other.

Based on what you are saying it seem that Turkish government has created its own ultra nationalistic version of history and bombards the kids with that. Now the kids have grown up and try to fit realty that the rest of world believes in into what hey have been told rather than the other way around.

First Kurds didn’t exist and now other Iranians and Indian need to disappear from history. The danger is not toward you is toward the Kurdish kid that has to deny his/her identity just to fit the stories you have told all your life

Back to Top
Messopotamian View Drop Down
Knight
Knight
Avatar

Joined: 22-Sep-2009
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 56
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11-Oct-2009 at 06:41
For Medes ,
 

Medean Tribes in Kurmanji.

 
 
 Busae, the Paretaceni, the Struchates, the Arizanti, the Budii and The Magi
 
in English
 
 
 
From Wikipedia:
 
One other theory is that the term Kurmanji is believed by some scholars to mean Median Kurd.[1]
 
 

 The Magi Theory

Other scholars dismiss the above theories as false. These scholars claim the term Kurmanji originates from the two distinct words, kur (“boy” or “child”) and magi. Magi refers to one of the ancient tribes of the Median Empire whose priests are referenced in the Bible and are commonly known as the Three Wise Men from Medya.[2] The direct translation applied to the term Kurên Magî is “Children of Magi”. Scholars say that Manji is simply a distorted form of the original term. These scholars also claim that the Magi tribe, or followers of the priests that were referred to as “Magi of the people”, may have been the original speakers of Proto-Kurdish.[3] Indeed pre-modern documents write the name Kurmanj as Kurmaj; For instance Masture Ardalan writes: ... the third group of Kurmaj are Baban... Also there is a desire in Kurdish to add a n before j. (ex. Iranian taj in Kurdish becomes tanj.and " n" in some words is optional eg. "mi" English" i" can be spoken "min"). But probably it has more than one meaning as it is seen above since all these meanings fully related to each other and as many important names and countless words in Kurmanci/Kurdish has more than one meaning.Thus the name/word Kurmanc and Kurmanci has e few meanings

 

From : http://www.ldolphin.org/magi.html

 

The ancient Magi were a hereditary priesthood of the Medes (known today as the Kurds) credited with profound and extraordinary religious knowledge. After some Magi, who had been attached to the Median court, proved to be expert in the interpretation of dreams, Darius the Great established them over the state religion of Persia. (2) (Contrary to popular belief, the Magi were not originally followers of Zoroaster. (3) That all came later.)



Edited by Messopotamian - 11-Oct-2009 at 06:45
Back to Top
Messopotamian View Drop Down
Knight
Knight
Avatar

Joined: 22-Sep-2009
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 56
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11-Oct-2009 at 07:04
in Cigerxwîn's poem,Shiwan Perwer's song:
 
Kine Em ( Who are We )
 
Em in ew Kardox Xaldêwê kevnar,
Em in ew Mîtan, Nayrî û Sobar.
Em in ew Lolo,
Kardox û Kudî,
Em in Mad û Goş,
Horî û Gudî.
Em in Kurmanc û Kelhor, Lor û Gor,
Em in, em Kurd in li jêr û li jor
We are Karduchians,Khaldis
We are Mittanis , Nayris, Subarians,
We are Lolos,Karducians , Kutians
Wea re Medes and Goshians
Hurrians and Guttians
 
We are Kurmanji , Kelhorians , Lurians û Goranians ( Today's tribes)
We are Kurd North and South
 
Back to Top
Messopotamian View Drop Down
Knight
Knight
Avatar

Joined: 22-Sep-2009
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 56
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11-Oct-2009 at 07:09
Descendents of BedirKhan tribe, Writer Edip Bedirxan writed  Median history in :
 
Kurmanji: BAZE MÊD FERWERTISH , Turkish : Med Kartali Fervertish , English Eagle of Medes Phraortes
 
Medean Rebel King  "Phraortes"
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11-Oct-2009 at 07:47
Originally posted by Messopotamian

Descendents of BedirKhan tribe, Writer Edip Bedirxan writed  Median history in :
 
Kurmanji: BAZE MÊD FERWERTISH , Turkish : Med Kartali Fervertish , English Eagle of Medes Phraortes
 
Medean Rebel King  "Phraortes"



Big smile Big smile i thinks cycrus will find this book very scientific.
Big smile
Back to Top
Messopotamian View Drop Down
Knight
Knight
Avatar

Joined: 22-Sep-2009
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 56
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 13-Oct-2009 at 10:07
It's same as Dead of Wolves ( Bozkurtlarin olumu ) not Scientifiti ( anyway:D ) book !

Edited by Messopotamian - 13-Oct-2009 at 10:08
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 13-Oct-2009 at 10:24
Originally posted by Messopotamian

It's same as Dead of Wolves ( Bozkurtlarin olumu ) not Scientifiti ( anyway:D ) book !



Thanks for the info. Wink


Scytho-Sarmatian ethnic roots of Türks ;

http://www.allempires.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=27833




Edited by İskit - 13-Oct-2009 at 10:37
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1234>

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 0.070 seconds.