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

  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

Are Kurds Descended From the Medes?

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  123>
Author
Angrals View Drop Down
Immortal Guard
Immortal Guard


Joined: 16-Mar-2012
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 7
  Quote Angrals Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: Are Kurds Descended From the Medes?
    Posted: 16-Mar-2012 at 15:19
Thu, 19/06/2008 - 20:46

A few years ago, I was given a letter from an American, non-academic individual, asking "Are Kurds descended from the Medes?" I responded as best I could avoiding the myriad of details which might well have diminished rather than enhanced interest in the topic. With the proliferation of printed matter on the Kurds since the Gulf War, this question-or presumption-increasingly arises in the media.

It is also difficult to set aside the political overtones attached to this otherwise academic question. Kurds and the Westerners interested in Kurdish topics--scholars, politicians, reporters, and the general public--have variously attempted to answer what is basically an academic pursuit. Unfortunately, the issue is too often raised to serve a political agenda and a scholarly pursuit. Consequently, this question can no longer be answered without crediting too much or denying too much of the Kurds history-a "history" necessary either to bolster or to deny Kurdish political claims. Apparently, there is an a-priori assumption that if Kurds descended from the ancient and illustrious Medes their claim to an identity, and therefore, to a modern homeland is more valid than would be the case had they simply appeared from nowhere on some auspicious occasion such as the advent of Islam in the 7th century. Admittedly and outside to the field of political gamesmanship, I can only attempt to respond to the question from an academic perspective.

Do Kurds descend from the Medes? Well, yes and no--the same "yes and no" response one might make to the question: "Are Italians descendants of the Romans?" Remember that the Italian peninsula (ancient Etruria) was well populated and boasted a sophisticated civilization before the coming of the Latin tribes who eventually established Rome and fostered what we know as Roman civilization. But they did not stop there. Latin-speaking Romans colonized and settled many lands in Europe and the Middle East. In the process, they imparted their language and many of their cultural traits to the local peoples. Linguistically, in addition to the Italians, the French, Romanians, Catalans, Corsicans, Portuguese, Spaniards (and all of Latin America) also speak Romance (Latin) languages. Thus at least linguistically, not just the Italians, but all these can claim to be the modern Romans.

After the fall of the Roman Empire, many other peoples (primarily Germanic, but Slavs as well) came to settle in Italy, superimposing new genetic and cultural material on what Romans left behind. Some of the most impressive examples of Roman art and architecture are found outside Italy in north Africa and the Middle East. The most important "Roman" thinkers and luminaries also came from outside Italy, from Greece, Spain, Anatolia, Syria…etc. If we were to honor the claim that the Byzantine Empire was in fact the "Eastern Roman Empire," the Greeks and the Anatolians (now Turkified) who spent 1400 years of their history under the "Roman" imperial rule and ran the region for all but 200 years, are more "Roman" than any one else. Italians ceased to be Roman subjects, when they fell outside the sphere of control of Constantinople-the "New Rome", after the 4th century AD.

If we were to call the Italians the modern descendants of the Romans, then it follows that we must also be ready to assume that the multitude of peoples and cultures that were there in the Italian peninsula before the coming of the Roman (Latin) tribes, and those who arrived after the demise of the Romans, all somehow vanished into the thin air. Are not the Italians the progeny of all these peoples and cultures and of the Romans as well? Of course they are.

Well then, are the Italians descended from the Romans? The answer still remains "yes and no." No, because linguistically and culturally, many other peoples share this Roman heritage, not just the Italians. All are equally right to assert that they are the descendants of the ancient Romans. Yes, because the Romans began their career in the Italian peninsula, and only then expanded out to form an empire and to cultivate their culture and language in other places. And when the Latin-speaking Romans were gone, their name and legend remained most tangible and concentrated in the region of their birth: the modern Lazio (ancient Latium), surrounding the city of Rome. On the question of Roman inheritance, Italians are therefore entitled to just a bit more, that which makes them first among equals-or prima inter pares, as a Roman might have put it.

The Italian example illustrates the complications that arise when attempting to apply simplistic questions to complex socio-cultural and processes. A more fundamental flaw in this line of questioning, i.e., Kurdish descent from Medes (or Italians from Romans), emanate from the common assumption that like movies, all peoples and cultures must have a "beginning." Presumably Kurdish descent from the Medes would then place their "beginning" with the reign of the first legendary Median king, Dioces, in 727 BC. But what was happening in 728 BC-a year before Dioces ascended the throne? Where were the Medes? Or were there any Medes before his coronation? Are we to presume that a populous ethnic group, a culture and a language-all appeared miraculously when Dioces decided it was time to crown?

Mesopotamian sources make reference to Medes nearly 500 years prior to this "beginning." Such sources also mention the Zagros and Taurus mountains teaming with other peoples, civilizations and governments with whom Mesopotamians conducted a bustling trade and cultural exchanges, or against whom they warred. What happened to all these sophisticated native populations and states in the area when the Medes "began"?

Median tribes first settled the areas between the modern Hamadan and Kirmanshah in southeastern Kurdistan--the very heartland of Media, and an area that came to be called in the Assyrian record, Medaya, in recognition of this settlement. Medes were a nomadic group who ventured into the Middle East along with other Indo-European-speaking nomads such as the Persians, Armenians, and Afghans. Soon, however, their fortunes eclipsed all others. The Medes first expanded from their heartland in southeastern Kurdistan and their capital, Hamadan (ancient Ecbatana), to cover the Zagros mountains, western parts of the Iranian Plateau and eastern Anatolia. This expanded territory is what the term "Media" meant to classical authors. From here the Medes would ultimately establish an empire stretching from Asia Minor to Central Asia. Their empire was ultimately eclipsed in 549 BC by the rising star of the Medes' cousins, the Persians.

Two thousand years ago, Strabo wrote: "The Medes are said to have been the originators of the customs for the Armenians, and also, still earlier, for the Persians, who were their masters and their successors in the supreme authority over Asia…" (Geography, XI.xiii.9). Strabo further asserts that the Median contributions included the costumes, ornaments, sports, court manners and the mode of kingship (Ibid.). To these Median contributions we also must add religion.

Now, where did the Medes acquire the sophisticated civilization they later passed on to the Persians and Armenians? Surely it could not have been a part of their primitive nomadic heritage that was shared with their fellow nomadic Armenians and Persians. At no time in history have nomads been known for civilized customs or cultural sophistication. And there is no reason to believe the Median nomads who arrived in the Zagros were any different. Most likely, Medes simply inherited the cultures which came under their suzerainty, and in time became their champions. Medes did however bring a language, which matters now, but in all likelihood did not matter then.

Modern Kurds speak a language akin to the Median, i.e., an Indo-European language of the Iranic branch. But so do most other ethnic groups in Iran, Afghanistan, Tajikistan, and Baluchistan. In a more restricted sense, the language of the modern Kurds belongs to a group of languages (Northwest Iranic) which is concentrated, with the exception of the Baluchi, within the territories of old Media. We can only surmise that the Medes also spoke a language of this branch because, except for a few words and proper names, there are no surviving records of the speech of the Medians. What remains can only affirm conclusively the Indo-European, Iranic identity of the Median language-nothing more. But someone must have originated the Northwest Iranic group of languages, and the Medes remain the best, if not the only known candidates to have done so.

But linguistically, the Gilanis, Mazandaranis, Tats, Talishis, and Baluchis, all have as much in common with the Medes as do the Kurds: they all speak Northwest Iranic languages! In fact, the now Turkic-speaking Azeris, if they so choose, can also lay strong claim to the legacy of the Medes. In classical times, Azerbaijan was nearly always included as a part of Media. Moreover, the Azeris became linguistically Turkified only a few centuries ago. Their very ethnic name still remains Iranic.

Clearly, this matter cannot be settled linguistically, even if we knew precisely what the Medes spoke. Too many other ethnic groups share their linguistic past with the Kurds, and presumably all of them with the Medes.

So how about geography or ethnography? Median territories included mountains as well as the neighboring plains. Strabo tells us that most of Media is cold and mountainous, particularly "those mountains which lie above Ecbatana/Hamadan"; but he also recognizes the extension of greater Media into the balmier plains to the east where one now finds the bustling Persian communities and cities such as Teheran and Isfahan.(Geography, XI.xiii.7)

During the period of their ascendancy, all earlier peoples who inhabited the territories that came to be called Media were lumped together and called Medes by outsiders. On the other hand, when Strabo wrote his geography, the ethnic name "Mede" (if it ever had such connotation, particularly after the establishment of the empire), was already dead. Old ethnic names had re-emerged, or new ones had appeared in place of those that died out. However, "Media" as a geographical designator remained. And this geographical designator, like that of Rome after its political demise, kept shrinking until in Islamic times it had receded to were the ancient Median began their expansive careers in southeastern Kurdistan--the area between Hamadan (their ancient capital) and Kirmanshah. Until about eight centuries ago, that region in southeastern Kurdistan was still called Mah (i.e., Media). Like Latium and Rome in Italy--and their special place in the story of rise and twilight of the Romans--what little remains today of the old Medians and the name "Mede," is found densely concentrated in southeastern Kurdistan--the site of the rise and twilight of the Medes. In fact there are still some Kurdish tribes and clans who carry the evolved forms of the name "Mede." Among these are the Meywandlu, Meymand, Mamand, and the Mafi, to name a few. The largest plain in that entire region is still called, Mahy Dasht, "The Plain of Medes."

A composite past is virtually the norm for every old civilization. It would be very strange otherwise. The Persians, Arabs and (though they prefer not to admit it), the Turks--all have similarly composite pasts, as do the Italians and all other peoples and culture that have evolved in these, some of the planet's oldest civilized parts.

Considering this complicated picture, which ethnic groups can claim to be the descended from the Medes? If it mattered--and I do not believe it does--then Kurds along with a few others can make this claim. But like the Italians, who can claim a little bit more of the Roman legacy than the others on geographical and chronological grounds , the Kurds can do likewise in respect to the Medes. For like the Italians, they too are 'first among equals.'

The Medes added nothing of particular cultural value to justify fighting over their inheritance. The civilization and cultural lux ascribed to the elusive Medes they had adopted from the indigenous peoples and illustrious cultures they found already in place when they arrived in western Asia as nomadic immigrants in circa 1100 BC. Kurdish culture, which identifies the Kurdish people, has its native roots in the distinguished legacy of all those who preceded the Medes, but also includes the Medes. Only for a relatively short time did those mountains come to be called Media. And the Medes who settled in the Zagros brought little but they learned much from the local indigenous people with an ancient and sophisticated civilization. Before merging their identity with them, the Medes enriched the local cultures with one more layer of experience and one more addition of genes into their racial pool. And what they left behind after their ethnic name disappeared, continued to evolve through cultures and peoples who came after them, settled in the area and in turn disappeared into the local milieu.

Yes, Kurds as the descendants of the Medes inasmuch as they contributed genetically and linguistically to the formation of what the Kurds are today. No, Kurds are not descendants of the Medes as their civilized ancestors were already in place when the Medes appeared, flourished, and ultimately disappeared. Kurds need not have come at some given date from some other place into their present homeland; indeed they did not. They and their culture are the progeny of an evolution of native inhabitants and cultures of the Zagros-Taurus mountain systems, coming to us from remote antiquity. The addition of a Median ingredient was only one of countless many.

Let us conclude that neither Kurds or any other nation require ad discrete beginning. Only the most fanciful movie buffs can think of the intricate processes of the evolution of nations as one that needs a beginning, and an end.

Source: “Are Kurds descended from the Medes?”, Kurdish Life, Number 10, 1994

 

Back to Top
Don Quixote View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar

Retired AE Moderator

Joined: 29-Dec-2010
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4734
  Quote Don Quixote Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 16-Mar-2012 at 15:48
I enjoyed the article, thank you. It seems well balanced and countering the most lamentably modern practice of using history for variety of political agendas.
Back to Top
Nick1986 View Drop Down
Emperor
Emperor
Avatar
Mighty Slayer of Trolls

Joined: 22-Mar-2011
Location: England
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 7940
  Quote Nick1986 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 16-Mar-2012 at 19:19
Agreed. This isn't really my area of expertise, but i enjoyed reading your work. Have you thought about incorporating it into a larger, published work?
Me Grimlock not nice Dino! Me bash brains!
Back to Top
Ince View Drop Down
Colonel
Colonel


Joined: 24-Dec-2009
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 550
  Quote Ince Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 17-Mar-2012 at 06:24
Some Kurds descend from the Medes where as others descened from other groups, due to different dialects of Kurdish languages it is very hard to pin point which group descends from which group and the lack of anceint sources does not help either.  

Edited by Ince - 17-Mar-2012 at 06:27
Back to Top
Ince View Drop Down
Colonel
Colonel


Joined: 24-Dec-2009
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 550
  Quote Ince Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 17-Mar-2012 at 06:26
Originally posted by Nick1986

Agreed. This isn't really my area of expertise, but i enjoyed reading your work. Have you thought about incorporating it into a larger, published work?


The article was written by Kurdish historian Mehrdad Izady, who my self am not really fan of.
Back to Top
Angrals View Drop Down
Immortal Guard
Immortal Guard


Joined: 16-Mar-2012
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 7
  Quote Angrals Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 17-Mar-2012 at 09:16
Originally posted by Ince

Some Kurds descend from the Medes where as others descened from other groups, due to different dialects of Kurdish languages it is very hard to pin point which group descends from which group and the lack of anceint sources does not help either.  
You cannot really say that, Zazas/Kurmanjis are jsut as Median as Faylees(my tribe) located in South-east of Kurdistan.
 
Yeh thisi s a fairly old article, but I decidied to post it, due to the fact it hasn't been posted before.
Back to Top
Angrals View Drop Down
Immortal Guard
Immortal Guard


Joined: 16-Mar-2012
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 7
  Quote Angrals Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 17-Mar-2012 at 09:17
In respect to the article its right, we Kurds don't claim that our ancestors only were the Medes, peoples like Talysh, Gilakis etc.. can also make the same claim.
Back to Top
Angrals View Drop Down
Immortal Guard
Immortal Guard


Joined: 16-Mar-2012
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 7
  Quote Angrals Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 17-Mar-2012 at 09:24
The fact of the matter is most of us Kurds believe our ancesors were the Medes. I mean theres no way of uncovering the genetics of the Medes, not unless bodies are found. Although Kurds are quite genetically akin and similar to North Iranians, especially the roups I mentioned earlier, such as Gilakis, Talysh etc.
Back to Top
Ollios View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar

Joined: 22-Feb-2011
Location: Diyar-ı Rum
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1130
  Quote Ollios Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18-Mar-2012 at 02:59
What about Mitannis? I have believed that Mitanni theory was a common theory in Kurds

CIA map of Kurdistan                                          Mitanni Kingdom

The Kurds as an ethnic group appear in the medieval period. The Kurdish people are believed to be of heterogenous origins[36] combining a number of earlier tribal or ethnic groups[28] including Median[28][36][37] Semitic,[28][38][39][40][41] Turkic[42][43][44][45] and Armenian[28][46][47][48][49][50] elements. (from vikipedia)

there are also Semetic, Turkic and Armenian origin theories (5-4-6 sources)
Ellerin Kabe'si var,
Benim Kabem İnsandır
Back to Top
Angrals View Drop Down
Immortal Guard
Immortal Guard


Joined: 16-Mar-2012
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 7
  Quote Angrals Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18-Mar-2012 at 06:06
Originally posted by Ollios

What about Mitannis? I have believed that Mitanni theory was a common theory in Kurds

CIA map of Kurdistan                                          Mitanni Kingdom

The Kurds as an ethnic group appear in the medieval period. The Kurdish people are believed to be of heterogenous origins[36] combining a number of earlier tribal or ethnic groups[28] including Median[28][36][37] Semitic,[28][38][39][40][41] Turkic[42][43][44][45] and Armenian[28][46][47][48][49][50] elements. (from vikipedia)

there are also Semetic, Turkic and Armenian origin theories (5-4-6 sources)
The Mitannis were just Hurrians ruled by an Iranic upper class. Yes Kurds in Turkey and Iraq have Hurrian ancestry aswell. In a sense our ancestry comes from both Hurrians, Medians, Gutians etc.. I suppose its like any peoples.
Back to Top
Ince View Drop Down
Colonel
Colonel


Joined: 24-Dec-2009
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 550
  Quote Ince Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18-Mar-2012 at 08:01
Originally posted by Angrals

Originally posted by Ince

Some Kurds descend from the Medes where as others descened from other groups, due to different dialects of Kurdish languages it is very hard to pin point which group descends from which group and the lack of anceint sources does not help either.  
You cannot really say that, Zazas/Kurmanjis are jsut as Median as Faylees(my tribe) located in South-east of Kurdistan.
 
Yeh thisi s a fairly old article, but I decidied to post it, due to the fact it hasn't been posted before.


I did not say Zaza and Kurmanji was a offshoot of Median.  I think actually they are unlikely to be.  Sorani Kurdish is most probably offshoot of Median as it is spoken in the regions of where Medes. 

The name Feyli is believed to come from the name Pahli, the name of the Parthians.

Medes were not the only Iranic group who settled in Kurdish regions, there was also the Parthians and Scythians and Cimmerians.


Back to Top
Ince View Drop Down
Colonel
Colonel


Joined: 24-Dec-2009
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 550
  Quote Ince Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18-Mar-2012 at 08:04
Originally posted by Ollios

What about Mitannis? I have believed that Mitanni theory was a common theory in Kurds

CIA map of Kurdistan                                          Mitanni Kingdom

The Kurds as an ethnic group appear in the medieval period. The Kurdish people are believed to be of heterogenous origins[36] combining a number of earlier tribal or ethnic groups[28] including Median[28][36][37] Semitic,[28][38][39][40][41] Turkic[42][43][44][45] and Armenian[28][46][47][48][49][50] elements. (from vikipedia)

there are also Semetic, Turkic and Armenian origin theories (5-4-6 sources)


I would not take what Wikipedia says to heart.  There is is pre-iranic ancestry of course, as the Iranians did not whipe out the natives.  

Turkic and Armenian?  Based on DNA Kurds do not show any genetic tie that can be considerd Turkic, as for Armenians their was probably some mixing and Iranization of some Armenians.

Based on Genetics, Kurds are nearly identical to Iranians, which is probably due to combination of the Iranic and pre-iranians ancestry of the region.  


Edited by Ince - 18-Mar-2012 at 08:06
Back to Top
Ollios View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar

Joined: 22-Feb-2011
Location: Diyar-ı Rum
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1130
  Quote Ollios Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18-Mar-2012 at 12:50
Originally posted by Ince


I would not take what Wikipedia says to heart.  There is is pre-iranic ancestry of course, as the Iranians did not whipe out the natives.  


I am also viki writer in my mother tongue. Yes, it is difficult to completely believe viki. However it opens a door in many cases.

Originally posted by Ince


Turkic and Armenian?  Based on DNA Kurds do not show any genetic tie that can be considerd Turkic, as for Armenians their was probably some mixing and Iranization of some Armenians.


I don't agree. I can't make generalization but I know that there are some Kurds who are descended from Turks and Armenians in Turkey.

Sorry, I will give again viki samples but you can search same thema in your sources

*Some Armenians became Turk or Kurd for save the
compulsory immigration(Turkish:Tecrit) 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crypto-Armenians


*Küresünni tribe in Iran (Turk origin Kurd people)
http://www.iranicaonline.org/articles/kurdish-tribes

And also some Armenians call the Mitanni as Armenian kingdom.


 
Ellerin Kabe'si var,
Benim Kabem İnsandır
Back to Top
Don Quixote View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar

Retired AE Moderator

Joined: 29-Dec-2010
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4734
  Quote Don Quixote Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18-Mar-2012 at 13:41
People take sometimes  another citizenship for variety of reasons, nowadays as well as in olden times, there is nothing strange and new to it. Every culture, nation ate, has a flow from others outside of it. We are talking here in general, and all possibilities are to be considered, since they are all in existence in reality.
I never heard of Mitanni being considered Armenian kingdom, it was Hurian, AFAIK.

As for wiki - I think it's very useful, because of all the references that it gives and one can follow, it's like a portal to references. Someone mentioned once something  like "wiki is an aperitif, not a meal" - as with all encyclopedias, it's meant to be the beginning, not the end of a research. I use it a lot to begin a research I know nothing about, to get a hold on references, and to use maps.


Edited by Don Quixote - 18-Mar-2012 at 13:45
Back to Top
Qaradag View Drop Down
Knight
Knight


Joined: 27-Jan-2011
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 64
  Quote Qaradag Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21-Mar-2012 at 15:30
"In classical times, Azerbaijan was nearly always included as a part of Media. Moreover, the Azeris became linguistically Turkified only a few centuries ago. Their very ethnic name still remains Iranic."

I don't want to spoil the actual discussion, but this is written by who?

Azerbaijani Turks did not become "liguistically Turkified" by nomadic Oghuz tribes who had no real advanced culture to able to do such a thing and themselves adopted foreign languages (Turkifying theory are the most absurd one you can find on earth, have anyone heard of a people being linguistically "Mongolified"? Well, it dosen't sound any different really. Nomadic population would be never able to do such thing...). Azerbaijani Turks are formed-up by Oghuz tribes themselves, ethnically.

"Their very ethnic name remains Iranic".

"Azeri" term to describe Azerbaijani Turks was not used before 1936. Today in Iran "Azeri" are rarely used among population, it's "Turk". The language is "Turki". During Russian empire period, ethnic name of Azerbaijani Turks was "Tatar". So usage of "Azeri" as an ethnic term (which is still not used in Republic of Azerbaijan) dates back to 1936, and this was done for political purposes.

Likewise on territority of northern Azerbaijan (republic of Azerbaijan) existed a state and nation called "Albania" or "Caucasian Albania". Now it dosen't means that people there are descendeds of this extint nation...

I simple can't believe how one can write such things...


Edited by Qaradag - 21-Mar-2012 at 15:35
Back to Top
Don Quixote View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar

Retired AE Moderator

Joined: 29-Dec-2010
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4734
  Quote Don Quixote Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21-Mar-2012 at 17:52
Well, people write what they read, we all read different books, do of course we have different info. This is why those forums are such a  great educational opportunity, because one get to hear info that he/she can't never come upon of their own. There is no need for anyone to get frustrated if the info they see here is not what they agree with, we are here to exchange info and POv that are bound to be different.

This said, for all I know Azeri are Turkic, together with language, music, etc; but as for when they became so, I don't know. There is cultural assimilation in all cultures, and the term "Turkified" is a legitimate one, in the same way in which large sections of the Balkans were Turkefied, so we have now Albanians whose language is a mix between Turkish and local ones - the Albanians weren't Turks to begin with, nor Muslims. As about the "Mongolifycation" - I had never heard such a term, but then I had never researched the subject either, so is it possible or not I don't know.
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: 22-Mar-2012 at 05:09
Kurds are the same Corduchi or Cyrtii people who were mentioned in the ancient sources, there were several Iranian peoples and they were one of them, the important point is that they could preserve their ancient culture but some other ones, such as Medes, Parthians, Sagartians, Sogdians, Scythians, ... lost their ancient culture, in fact most of them were Persianized.
Back to Top
Ince View Drop Down
Colonel
Colonel


Joined: 24-Dec-2009
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 550
  Quote Ince Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22-Mar-2012 at 08:21
Originally posted by Cyrus Shahmiri

Kurds are the same Corduchi or Cyrtii people who were mentioned in the ancient sources, there were several Iranian peoples and they were one of them, the important point is that they could preserve their ancient culture but some other ones, such as Medes, Parthians, Sagartians, Sogdians, Scythians, ... lost their ancient culture, in fact most of them were Persianized.


Well yes and no, some Kurds do descend from those people that were reffered to as Carduchians.  For example did Strabos not refer to Carduchians as Parthians?  He wrote that the Parthians were known as Carduchians, it is very odd that he made that connection, but why?  I my self believe it is because the Carduchians were a Iranic people who were similar to Parthians hence why Strabos made the connection it is very probable that they were Scythian as the names of the Kings some say were Scythian like. 

Though western writers have not denied the descent from the ancient kings of Persia which those of the east claim for Ashk or Arsaces they have almost all agreed in describing the Par thianst as originally Scythians or Tartars who ruled over Persia for several centuries There are however several reasons for doubting this fact and Strabo expressly states that the Parthians whose territories were on the Tigris were formerly called Carduchi The geographical position of Carduchia the modern Kurdistan the character of its barbarous and unsubdued inhabitants and their constant hostility t to the kings

The history of Persia: from the most early period to the present time

authors There seems to be considerable doubt however as to its origin Strabo asserts that the Parthians whose territories were upon the banks of the Tigris were formerly called Carduchi the Carduchi inhabited Carduchia the Kurdistan and the character of the Kurds accords remarkably with that of the Parthians The name Parthian probably identical with Parsi or Farsi the inhabitants of the Persian province of Fars

Outlines of universal history: in three parts; with a copious
 By Joseph J. Reed


Then their are other Kurds who live further away like in other parts of Kurdistan, like the Kurds in Kurdistan province, they probably descend from the ancient Iranians that inhabited that part, their is even still a tribe who call themselves Ard'Alan.   Even in Fars province their is a Kurdish tribe by the name of Saqqez who also live in other parts of Iran.   The large Shabankara tribe that inhabited the southern Zagros who's name still survives in the Kurdish tribe by the same name who live in northern parts of Kermanshah.   

I believe Kurds are a mix of different Iranic groups, who adopted the term Kurd.   As the the term Kurd had different meanings pre-islamic era like Nomads.   Unlike other Kurds I do not hold on to the Medes as the ancestors of the Kurds, the Medes were located further east and only Kurds who live in those regions descend from them like some Kurds in Kurdistan province and Kermansheh and also some parts of Iraqi Kurdistan.


Edited by Ince - 22-Mar-2012 at 08:32
Back to Top
Qaradag View Drop Down
Knight
Knight


Joined: 27-Jan-2011
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 64
  Quote Qaradag Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22-Mar-2012 at 13:35
Originally posted by Don Quixote

Well, people write what they read, we all read different books, do of course we have different info. This is why those forums are such a  great educational opportunity, because one get to hear info that he/she can't never come upon of their own. There is no need for anyone to get frustrated if the info they see here is not what they agree with, we are here to exchange info and POv that are bound to be different.

This said, for all I know Azeri are Turkic, together with language, music, etc; but as for when they became so, I don't know. There is cultural assimilation in all cultures, and the term "Turkified" is a legitimate one, in the same way in which large sections of the Balkans were Turkefied, so we have now Albanians whose language is a mix between Turkish and local ones - the Albanians weren't Turks to begin with, nor Muslims. As about the "Mongolifycation" - I had never heard such a term, but then I had never researched the subject either, so is it possible or not I don't know.


I just find that unnecesarry, to be mentioned in first place, and to mention something made-up as a fact.

We cannot become "Turkified" because we ARE Turks. "Azeri" name to describe people of Azerbaijan are a very new one like said. I m not sure what you mean by "Albanian example", as these are 2 whole different things...

In Iran today the ethnic designation are Turk and language Turki. Only official designation by state is "Azeri", but that is rarely used among peopl. If we take a look at history of northern Azerbaijan, the ethnich name during Russian empire period for Azerbaijani Turks was Tatar.

Today's Iraqi Turkomans in fact speak a dialect of South Azeri Turkish. I would say that Turkoman is the real name of Azeri Turks, as it was our name during most of medieval times. But later it changed to Turk.

Iraqi Azerbaijanis are still called Turkoman because they were fortunate enough to not become affected by assimiliation policy of Iran or Soviet Union...




Edited by Qaradag - 22-Mar-2012 at 13:44
Back to Top
Qaradag View Drop Down
Knight
Knight


Joined: 27-Jan-2011
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 64
  Quote Qaradag Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22-Mar-2012 at 13:39
The medieval states of Kara-Koyunlu and Ak-Koyunlu, both Turkoman, spoke Azerbaijani Turkish as their language. We know it because we have texts surviving from them. It's Azerbaijani Turkish, and not Anatolian or Central Asian Turkmen. Uzun Hasan's letters in Azerbaijani Turkish survives to this day.

Now there is a direct connection between these states and Azerbaijani Turks...Can someone tell me what kind of connection can there be between Medes and Azerbaijani Turks in this regard? Confused

So I don't understand why some people, instead of facts, stick to fantasy for their liking...


Edited by Qaradag - 22-Mar-2012 at 13:48
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  123>

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 0.063 seconds.