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

  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

"Elamites were not Iranian"

 Post Reply Post Reply
Author
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
  Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: "Elamites were not Iranian"
    Posted: 19-Jun-2005 at 04:18

I am Zereshk, one of the editors of the free encyclopedia Wikipedia.org, where anyone can contribute.

For a while we had an edit war with some people about Khuzestan and Ahvaz. After proving to them that both historically were and are Iranian, they have now moved on to claim that Elam and Susiana were not Iranian.

Me and "SouthernComfort" have tried hard to stop this historical revisionism.

But we need help. Consensus plays an important part o Wikipedia pages.

Please register, and help us out. Wikipedia is the largest free online encyclopedia. many sources quote its contents.

The page where we have been debating and fighting this issue (where your voice is needed):

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Elamite_Empire

The actual page:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elamite_Empire

They have even made the same claims about The Achaemenids.

 

   

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: 19-Jun-2005 at 04:28
Geographically, Elamites were Iranians but ethnically not.
Back to Top
Zagros View Drop Down
Emperor
Emperor

Suspended

Joined: 11-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 8792
  Quote Zagros Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19-Jun-2005 at 07:31

The actual page seems correct.  What is the essence of the actual change the revisionists propagate? The first link seemed like a bunch of incoherant arguments. What exactly do they want to state?

But one thing is for sure and you must make it clear, the Elamites were in NO SHAPE NOR FORM ARAB - Khuzestan's history with Arabs does not extend beyond at most 1500 years and at least 500 years. Also a substantial amount of Arabs in that province today are Iraqi Shi'ite refugees that fled Saddam.

The Elmaites cannot be used as a historical justification for Arab nationalism in Iran.



Edited by Zagros Purya
Back to Top
Hormoz View Drop Down
Janissary
Janissary


Joined: 24-Jun-2005
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 28
  Quote Hormoz Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 24-Jun-2005 at 23:21

If I am correct, the Elamite language is not related to any other, which means they are neither Semitic nor Iranian.

Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
  Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 25-Jun-2005 at 15:09
Elamites were described as Middle Eastern/ Asian Africans. They had negroid or very dark skinned features.
Back to Top
Zagros View Drop Down
Emperor
Emperor

Suspended

Joined: 11-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 8792
  Quote Zagros Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 25-Jun-2005 at 15:11

Who described them as such? Because none of their skulls nor their humanoid artificats are of negroid form, I know black racists like nation of islam say they were negroid. 

By the way dark skin is not indicative of race, bone structure is.

Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
  Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 26-Jun-2005 at 03:03
And so what if they were "dark" anyways? Have you ever been
to South Iran? Everyone there is dark no matter where their
ancestors are from. The nomads there have their faces scarred
from how intense the sun beats down on their skin, burning it
away.

Elamites were Iranian, certainly not Semitic. If online places
such as "wikipedia" decide to say such outrageous statements
as such and base their opinions off of a "consensus" then it is
without a doubt an unreliable source of information. Before you
know it, the Persian Gulf is the Arabian Gulf.
Back to Top
Hushyar View Drop Down
Consul
Consul


Joined: 16-Apr-2005
Location: Iran
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 301
  Quote Hushyar Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 26-Jun-2005 at 04:16
I think oguzoglu is partially right(well partially).or maybe right.
Elamit language is considered as a single language, It has no relationship to semitic,IE or Hurrian and Sumerian language.In 50s some phylologists said that there are some evidances that Elamit language is related to dravidian language family and we know Dravidians originally have some negroid features.(ofcourse not all of them for example Brahui tribe in Baluchestan spoke a dravidain language but they have cacausoid features with burnt skin).
What confirms this hypothesis is that Herodotus names a province in Persian Empire by the name of Asian Ethiopia,this is same province that in Bhistun inscription named as Gedrosia-Mak which consists of Makran(nowadays iranian Baluchestan) and Baluchestan(or Pakistani-Baluchestan),Hrodotus said that people of there are Black people maybe came from Afrcia to there. It means that befor coming baluches to that Area original people of that Area were Dravidians.Another interesting point is that you can still see the negroid features in the face of some remote area of Kerman province and even Fars province (Eyes noses and specially thick lips).
Well Ofcourse problem is not so easy, recent discoveris in burnt city showed that ethnic composition was more diverse than imagined before and another point is that in khuzestan you can't find any traces of negroid features excepth remmanants of African slaves or Arab immirants that their difference is apparent.Well we can say that Khuzestan was raided many times and so many population displacement happened there,but there is another point,Kasians who invaded Babelion in 1700B.C. are considered as ancestors of nowadyas lurs,up until 60 years ago Kasians believed to be IEs ,in 60 years ago it was found that the god's name of Kasians could be explained in elamite language much better than IE.Well you can't find any traces of Negroid feature between Lurs although their population was more isolated.Again some say that Elamites just ruled Kasians and maybe some words has borrowed from Elamit language.
What I want to say is that the problem is more complicated than you think.

Edited by Hushyar
Back to Top
Zagros View Drop Down
Emperor
Emperor

Suspended

Joined: 11-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 8792
  Quote Zagros Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 26-Jun-2005 at 05:45

There is no conclusive proof that Elamite was a Dravidian language, that is why it is oart of the Elamo-Dravidian group, from what I have read it has just a little more commonality with Dravidian as it does with Sumerian.  And you are right modern Dravidian speakers in Iran do not have negro features and no historical finds in Khuzestan suggest that any of its Elamite inhabitants had negro features. You rightly stated that these are due to more modern events of Arab immigration and the slave trade of medieval/middle age.

Black racists claim that the original civilized population of Iran was Black, but I think this is because they have no real civilization South of the Sahara and whatever they have the chance to claim, they will.

Baluchis: Yes they do seem to have sometimes very prominent negro features.

 

Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
  Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 26-Jun-2005 at 14:47
Black racists are definitely among the most ignorant people
about. They claim that chess is African... I think I'll leave it at
that!
Back to Top
King_Cyrus View Drop Down
Janissary
Janissary
Avatar

Joined: 16-Sep-2005
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 28
  Quote King_Cyrus Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18-Sep-2005 at 19:05

 

I have also heard that Elamites langwage is related to Darvidian.  They should do a blood test between the two ethnicitys to see if they are genetically similar or not.  I have to say though they do look very similar to people from India.

Back to Top
Sharrukin View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain


Joined: 04-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1314
  Quote Sharrukin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18-Sep-2005 at 22:53
Regardless whether such genetic tests prove any such connection, ultimately the spread of a family of languages does so despite racial differences.  If the Elamite was a light-colored Mediterranean, that is inconsequential if his language is related to Dravidian.  The Brahui language is considered a Dravidian language but actually shows characteristics intermediate between Elamite and Dravidian, and the people are geographically located between the two.  If, as someone has stated, that the Brahui are racially different from "other" Dravidians, then, it would not be surprising that the Elamites were, likewise, different.
Back to Top
PrznKonectoid View Drop Down
Pretorian
Pretorian
Avatar

Joined: 27-Oct-2005
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 186
  Quote PrznKonectoid Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 28-Oct-2005 at 20:15

Finding the true races of Elam or ancient Iran has been a harsh debate. Indeed you have Nordic supremists who state that Iran was p[opulated by blonde-haired blue-eyed men all the way to black racists who say Iran was a land of negros.

Yet bone structures found in northern Ilam and south Luristan province show the same Irano-Nordoid physical form as most modern day Iranians do. They show the same characteristics, which makes sense, and refutes the theories that Iranians were "negroes" or some pale tribes men from central Asia.

Want to know more on ancient Iran?
http://www.parsaworld.com
or join our forums
FORUM
Back to Top
Rakhsh View Drop Down
Consul
Consul
Avatar

Joined: 23-Oct-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 331
  Quote Rakhsh Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 29-Oct-2005 at 01:25

Iranians where not Nordic nor Black, Elamites had dark skin but not all white people are Nordic nor all dark skinned or balck people negros (latin word for black). The fact is look at Sudan tho black they have straight noses, fine bones etc this type of stereo types are due to the slavery that took place by Europeans and their guilt.

It is just as false as calling Arabs negroid, they mixed yes because they took slaves from there and iran and other countries.

Elamities lived in Iran and it has even been suggested Iranic tribes settles and mixed with them till the Persians and Medes displaced them.

 

Never under estimate the predictablity of stupidity! - Bullet Tooth Tony
Back to Top
Janissary View Drop Down
Baron
Baron


Joined: 02-Oct-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 446
  Quote Janissary Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 29-Oct-2005 at 12:25

yesssssssssssss

thenk u Ciry, thank u

I got how to xplain

All nations-Turks, Kurds, Lors-Are geographically may consider as Iran

But turk is turk, it is etnically

Back to Top
PrznKonectoid View Drop Down
Pretorian
Pretorian
Avatar

Joined: 27-Oct-2005
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 186
  Quote PrznKonectoid Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 29-Oct-2005 at 12:30

well now that depends though.

For example some Turk groups like Turkmen are Ethnic Turks. But some Iranian Turks like the Qashqaie are physically and genetically more similar to other Iranian groups, but dress and talk Turkish.

Azeris for example in Iran, are similar to Armenians and Persians, as opposed to Mongoloid Turks, they only adopted Turkic culture and language.

Want to know more on ancient Iran?
http://www.parsaworld.com
or join our forums
FORUM
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply

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 0.047 seconds.