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

  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

Who were Scythians?

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 78910>
Author
Afsar Beghi View Drop Down
Consul
Consul
Avatar

Joined: 18-Jun-2006
Location: Azerbaijan
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 341
  Quote Afsar Beghi Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: Who were Scythians?
    Posted: 23-Jul-2006 at 15:31
Originally posted by Savdogar

You are discussing about Scythians, Sakas.

Do you know anything about Tumaris, Shiroq , Spitamen - national heros of Central Asia?

Scythians are turkic or iranian!!! what a mess!!!

They were Central Asian nomads, that is all.

I am very unhappy of pan-turkists and pan-iranist who write all kind of mess about the history.
 
Why dont you come to Uzbekistan and learn the culture, myths of Uzbek and Tajik??? I am sure you will understand Central Asia is unique region where all those methodologies for historical analysis is useless for our culture, nation and land.
 
Please, note that Central Asia is such place where your arguments will not work.


First of all calling persian people turkic would be a pan-turkish thing. And if the subject doesnt interest you what are you doing here kardes.
And you saying schythians are turkic or iranian, thats what we are trying to find out. Add some useful post in the topic instead of insulting people.
Dadaloğlum bir gun kavga kurulur,
Oter tufek davlumbazlar vurulur,
Nice ko yiğitler yere serilir,
Olen lr kalan sağlar bizimdir!
Back to Top
Urungu Han View Drop Down
Samurai
Samurai
Avatar

Joined: 17-Jul-2006
Location: Turkey
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 130
  Quote Urungu Han Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 24-Jul-2006 at 03:59
Schytian people was iranian no one can change that but Their army and leader was Turk also no one can change that :D
Back to Top
Savdogar View Drop Down
Knight
Knight
Avatar

Joined: 20-Jul-2006
Location: Uzbekistan
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 58
  Quote Savdogar Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 24-Jul-2006 at 06:10
Originally posted by Urungu Han

Schytian people was iranian no one can change that but Their army and leader was Turk also no one can change that :D
 
what is Iranian?
I think the territory of Central Asia does not belong to IranAngryAngry
...i dont need this...
Back to Top
tadamson View Drop Down
Baron
Baron


Joined: 25-Jul-2005
Location: Scotland
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 451
  Quote tadamson Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 24-Jul-2006 at 08:11
Originally posted by Savdogar

Originally posted by Urungu Han

Schytian people was iranian no one can change that but Their army and leader was Turk also no one can change that :D
 
what is Iranian?
I think the territory of Central Asia does not belong to IranAngryAngry


Iranian as in ethnic/linguistig grouping,  not the modern country..
And it has nothing to do with modern territory, or beloning...
rgds.

      Tom..
Back to Top
Bulldog View Drop Down
Caliph
Caliph
Avatar

Joined: 17-May-2006
Location: United Kingdom
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2800
  Quote Bulldog Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 24-Jul-2006 at 08:22

The problem that is occuring here is that both Iranians and Turks are extremely proud, emotional and claim that everything is theirs not realising their both indirectly attacking each other.

It doesn't help either when there are views like this

actually, rumi fled the mongol invasion in the east and went to a town in the west of persia, which is now part of turkey, but at the time was still part of persia.

Rumi fled to the Selcuk Turkish Empire not into Persia, he was accepted and allowed to stay in their capitol. It was not at the time still a part of Persian and hadn't been for nearly a thousand years.
 
It doesn't help either when Turks claim Sychthians as their own personal and only their own anscestors.
 
Zagros raised an interesting point
 
Sassanid Kings, look at latter coins, all have the crescent and star.  This was easiest for me to find, but I know it has been used by sumerians etc, as there have been threads on this subject before.
 
Well the Turks had used the Crescent and Star for thousands of years, its in their mythology and old Tengrism religion. The Chinease records show them using these signs.
 
The Sassanid King coins first show of the Crescent and Star is Ardahir 379-383, they would have been in contact with the Turks and could have adopted the sign. I say this because there is also a coin called "Hormizd IV 'the Turk' which has a Crescent and Star sign. Don't know why he's got that name but maybe he had somthing to do with Turks, some kind of relation or agreement?
 
 
Now to the main point.
 
Herodutus called nearly everyone from the East on Horseback "Scythian". What is highly unlikely is that they were all the same people, the same ethnicity or even really "Scythians".
 
The people called Scythians ruled such a vast terrortory that to claim they were all the same people would be absurd. What would be even more absurd is to claim that they were the same people and yet still somehow died out. Nations who are so large cannot just vanish into the thin air.
 
This leads to the point that they were not all the same, there were different Nomadic people's and confederates. Iranic and Turkic tribes controlled the Steppes, not just one of them. As is common with Nomadic way of life, they don't have a concept of "race" and mix aswell as accept people into their clan's.
 
What this means is that, Iranic and Turkic people were probobly mixing since ancient times Tongue both their ancestors didn't have issues about being Turkic or Iranic they were more interested in the power of the clan.
 
Confederate Clans are quite common in such societies. One that spings to mind is the "Khamse" Clan of Iran in the Fars province, they are Arab and Turk tribes who belong to the same clan. Now is this Turk or Arab? its no more Turk than it is Arab, its both of theirs but wait! race doesn't mean much to them, being part of the Khamse however does.
 
This is the point most are forgetting. They are applying modern terms of Nationhood to people's who didn't have such a concept and had different ideals. Its likely there were Turks and Iranians in the same tribes and clans and what meant most to them was actually their clan and not their ethnicities.
 
The people in the Altay region obviously weren't Iranic, look at the face's on the statues they left, their descriptions in Chinease records and the ancient finds there. However, sometimes there referred to being Scythian.
Either they werent Scythian at all, or they were Turks who belonged to the Scythian State.
 
It must have been a confederate of clans and different people's because after the collapse of the Scythians they didn't remain. The collapse of the leadership left the different peoples to go their own way.
 
 

 
      What we do for ourselves dies with us. What we do for others and the world remains and is immortal.
Albert Pine

Back to Top
Aarya View Drop Down
Janissary
Janissary
Avatar

Joined: 17-Jul-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 28
  Quote Aarya Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 24-Jul-2006 at 11:28
All things are Iranic in this Forum,  They might even claim the duct of mars as theirs, thats the pity on this forum...
Back to Top
Afghanan View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar
Durr e Durran

Joined: 12-Jun-2005
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1098
  Quote Afghanan Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 25-Jul-2006 at 11:47
Originally posted by Bulldog

 
The people called Scythians ruled such a vast terrortory that to claim they were all the same people would be absurd. What would be even more absurd is to claim that they were the same people and yet still somehow died out. Nations who are so large cannot just vanish into the thin air.
 
This leads to the point that they were not all the same, there were different Nomadic people's and confederates. Iranic and Turkic tribes controlled the Steppes, not just one of them. As is common with Nomadic way of life, they don't have a concept of "race" and mix aswell as accept people into their clan's.
 
What this means is that, Iranic and Turkic people were probobly mixing since ancient times Tongueboth their ancestors didn't have issues about being Turkic or Iranic they were more interested in the power of the clan.
 
Confederate Clans are quite common in such societies. One that spings to mind is the "Khamse" Clan of Iran in the Fars province, they are Arab and Turk tribes who belong to the same clan. Now is this Turk or Arab? its no more Turk than it is Arab, its both of theirs but wait! race doesn't mean much to them, being part of the Khamse however does.
 
This is the point most are forgetting. They are applying modern terms of Nationhood to people's who didn't have such a concept and had different ideals. Its likely there were Turks and Iranians in the same tribes and clans and what meant most to them was actually their clan and not their ethnicities.
  
 
I agree with you.  If you look at history the Scythian language is clearly Iranian, their culture is clearly nomadic, and more in line with Turkic.  Now if we see the general progression of the Scythians and the Tocharians, and other groups of Nomads in Central Asia, you see them eventually replaced by a people known as the Huns.  And all of a sudden, they 'disappeared' and then we had the Turks.
 
These people don't just dissapear, most likely they made confederations, they grew accustomed to new cultures, new languages, and intermixed freely. 
 
The Afghans are exactly of this nature.  The Iranic Pashtun tribe Ghilzai are thought by historians to originate from the Turkic Khalaj, who they believe originate from Ephtalites, who are thought to be related to the ancient Tocharians. 
 
Pashtuns can range from light hair to dark hair, from caucasian features to asiatic features.  Their language has archaic Eastern Iranian base (such as the ancient Bactrians, Saka) but it has loan words from Turkish, Sanskrit, Persian, and even Arabic.  Their closest linguistic cousins live directly north of them in the Pamir Mountains.  Some tribes of Pashtuns are still even nomadic. 
 
I think its possible to ascertain that the nomadic Scythians were related to the Iranian people, as well as the  Huns, and the Turks. 
 
If I put a picture of a Turk, Tajik, Afghan, and Iranian, I bet you can not tell the difference between them.
 
 
 
 
The perceptive man is he who knows about himself, for in self-knowledge and insight lays knowledge of the holiest.
~ Khushal Khan Khattak
Back to Top
Afghanan View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar
Durr e Durran

Joined: 12-Jun-2005
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1098
  Quote Afghanan Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 25-Jul-2006 at 13:39

On the lighter side of things, I made a parody of this topic here:

 
The perceptive man is he who knows about himself, for in self-knowledge and insight lays knowledge of the holiest.
~ Khushal Khan Khattak
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
  Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 25-Jul-2006 at 14:26

racist discussion is everywhere on this forum...

Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
  Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 25-Jul-2006 at 14:27
one day is iran, other day is turk, today is hun, tomorrow is mongol...
 
 
Back to Top
Seko View Drop Down
Emperor
Emperor
Avatar
Spammer

Joined: 01-Sep-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 8596
  Quote Seko Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 25-Jul-2006 at 16:03
Looks like you will do anything to get back to AE though you've been banned numerous times already. Ain't that right Mr. Arashomid, karnagir, Banned One, Arash-e-Archer, etc., etc., etc.
 
A few words of advice. Stop your trolling and get a life. Anyways your banned again.
Back to Top
lasttime View Drop Down
Immortal Guard
Immortal Guard


Joined: 25-Jul-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 0
  Quote lasttime Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 25-Jul-2006 at 22:15
before i leave, i have a question
 
I am always curious about you Mr.seko...
 
Where are you from? 
 
tell me and I will be gone forever.
Back to Top
lasttime View Drop Down
Immortal Guard
Immortal Guard


Joined: 25-Jul-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 0
  Quote lasttime Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 25-Jul-2006 at 22:17
Seko, you spell kamangir wrong...
 
It's kamangir not kanaragir...
 
It means "Archer" in farsi.
Back to Top
Bulldog View Drop Down
Caliph
Caliph
Avatar

Joined: 17-May-2006
Location: United Kingdom
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2800
  Quote Bulldog Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 26-Jul-2006 at 07:38
Afganan
I agree with you. If you look at history the Scythian language is clearly Iranian, their culture is clearly nomadic, and more in line with Turkic. Now if we see the general progression of the Scythians and the Tocharians, and other groups of Nomads in Central Asia, you see them eventually replaced by a people known as the Huns. And all of a sudden, they 'disappeared' and then we had the Turks.

These people don't just dissapear, most likely they made confederations, they grew accustomed to new cultures, new languages, and intermixed freely.

The Afghans are exactly of this nature. The Iranic Pashtun tribe Ghilzai are thought by historians to originate from the Turkic Khalaj, who they believe originate from Ephtalites, who are thought to be related to the ancient Tocharians.

Pashtuns can range from light hair to dark hair, from caucasian features to asiatic features. Their language has archaic Eastern Iranian base (such as the ancient Bactrians, Saka) but it has loan words from Turkish, Sanskrit, Persian, and even Arabic. Their closest linguistic cousins live directly north of them in the Pamir Mountains. Some tribes of Pashtuns are still even nomadic.

I think its possible to ascertain that the nomadic Scythians were related to the Iranian people, as well as the Huns, and the Turks.

If I put a picture of a Turk, Tajik, Afghan, and Iranian, I bet you can not tell the difference between them.




Exactly!

The problem some Iranians and Turks are having in that they are applying archaic European ethno-centric/racial Nationalism to great states which thrived thousands of years ago.

The ancestors of Turks and Iranians didn't care who was a Turk who was an Iranian, they were people of the Steppes, they are HUMAN BEINGS. They didn't have an imaginary wall between them with wacky professors carrying out cranal size measurements and testing the DNA banning Turks from Iranian areas and Iranians from Turk areas.

Its very natural for Nomads to travel, mix, influence others be influenced themselves. Race wasn't a big issue at all.

Afgans are actually loved by all their neighbours its rare for this to happen but its true. The Iranians, Turks, Pakistani's all like them. Maybe its because they don't have racist agenda's and show respect to everyone.
      What we do for ourselves dies with us. What we do for others and the world remains and is immortal.
Albert Pine

Back to Top
noble savage View Drop Down
Immortal Guard
Immortal Guard
Avatar

Joined: 08-Sep-2007
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 0
  Quote noble savage Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 08-Sep-2007 at 19:41
In responce to your comment, "this says that they were iranic. i dont know why you posted it.". I guess you are referring to the part that claims that according to Greek sources some Scythian words have similarities to Iranic languages. But most of this text overwhelmingly leans toward the Turkic argument, so you are simply cherry-picking a small part of the it which you agree with and simply ignoring the rest which makes up the majority. Especially the DNA evidence, this is very strong evidence. If it is correct, which it looks to be, and the Kazakhs are the closest living relatives of the Sakas then you dont have much of an argument, and in fact you are knowingly denying it and stubbornly holding on to your nationalistic view on the matter
Logic is sometimes the only tool available to humanity. Know it, feel it, and pass it on.
Back to Top
noble savage View Drop Down
Immortal Guard
Immortal Guard
Avatar

Joined: 08-Sep-2007
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 0
  Quote noble savage Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09-Sep-2007 at 20:30
Iranian4life, you wrote,

"this article obviously has an agenda, and that agenda is to create a history for the Tatar nation. it says it very clearly right there.  this article is not coming from an unbiased balanced source, but its coming from a tartar turkic person who set off on the goal to create a version of history that will fit tatarstan, much like many turkic nations in central asia have done."

  So do you not think that the western mainstream historians have an agenda? You are basically saying that Tatar research, facts, and opinions do not count, and that the west has the final say. Then you must also agree with the west when it projects on to the big screen the story of how 300 Spartans defeated the 1 million man Persian army. Getting back to the subject, a good part of the archeological research on the Scythians was  done in Russia in which the Tatars played no small part. The first university in Russia was the Univ. of Kazan in Tataristan (Leo Tolstoy was an alumni of this univ.) So to dismiss what the Tatars have to say and to whole-heartedly accept the west's account is neither scholarly nor honest. As a college student, (and also as a person who spent most of his life) in America, I saw the anti-Turkish bias in history first hand. Take any History 101-102 class in any college in the U.S and you will feel this bias. Until the 60's the Turks appeared on the world stage 1000 years ago as the Seljuks,  barbaric savages with no past. After the 60's with  overwhelming evidence pointing to a Turk-Hun relation, western mainstream history reluctently revised the beginning of the Turks to about 300-400 A.D. Their bias continues today, although not as overt as it used to be, credit is given to the Turks grudgingly. Of course this is hardly fair or honest, but who cares about that in the west anyway. Really the current politics are no different from the revised history that is presented.
    Which brings me to a related topic. You seem to always bring up what western encyclopedias say about the Scythians as your last line of defense. Well here is the thing, if the people in this forum were satisfied with what the encyclopedias has to say, well they would not be here in the first place. They are well aware of what these books have to say, its primarily why they are here, because they do not find the evidence convincing. So if your ultimate responce to evidence other than that of mainstream western thought is going to be referring to the encyclopedias, then why waste your time referring to them?
Logic is sometimes the only tool available to humanity. Know it, feel it, and pass it on.
Back to Top
Asawar Hazaraspa View Drop Down
Samurai
Samurai
Avatar

Joined: 21-Apr-2008
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 104
  Quote Asawar Hazaraspa Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 16-Aug-2008 at 19:21
First of all I'd like to clarify that it is crystal clear that talking about the origins of a historical ethnic group, studying for example it's Iranian or turkic origin is not racialist at all as it is an historical discussion, as long as there hasn't been mentioned any racist superiority over another.

regarding Scythian and Saka history, there has been always this problem of lacking evidences of the Scythians themselves. So they are historically known through the references they neighbors over time made of them. But it's not the end of way, archaeologists, linguists etc. have been to some extent successful in gathering critical information regarding them so far.
For example our perspective of their language has become more clearer as the time passes.
some texts found in Khotan which were a translation of Buddhist works concluded in the fact that linguist start to call them as Khotanese-Scythian, though through comparative way they already had clue to what Scythian or saka language possibly looked like thus categorizing it in iranian languages branch. some people tend to deny this amount of work has done calling it western or russian references, though to my knowledge those are more scientific (if be compared).
About the genetical relations mentioned about kyrguz and Kazakh after testing of some genetical evidences like the mummies found in eastern Altai or the areas like Turkistan, some say it  is a testimony that the Scythuans were of Altaic origin, I think this to our knowledge of the history of the Central Asia can actually proves the vice versa, i.e. that Kyrgyz and Kazakh people are somehow descendancy of Scythians. But i'd like to bring into attention of those who insist on this claim to study and discuss these first:
- the tribes , ethnicities, groups who were first inhabited these areas of Central Asia and Altai, i.e. regarding what is our archaeological evidences.
- Studying of the first Indo-european and Altaic people interactions throughvarious sources
- Study of the first typical steppe culture which may consists of the study of the fisrt domestication and employment of the horses, origins of the steppe horsemanship, archery studying the variant sources and references as possible.

I saw that it is said that there are biased views of the turks in the west or non- turkic/altaic countries. Not knowing of the one's expriences concerning this but I should say that giving raccounts of for example Hunnic invasion of Europe despite many exaggerations which  have been normal during histrography during invasions by both conflicting nations, and  despite it shows cruelty and gives image of barbarism. as the same goes for the Mongol conquests. It doesnt ever mean that has to do something with todays nations. So in studying historical matter do not confuse it. Somehow it is not to my opinion nice and seems primitive and offensive to back the deeds of the military commanders of the past who took many lives and spilled  many bloods.  The case is clear if someone does so, the other may react not properly. But to inform you, those interested in historical researches will do continue using encyclopaedias and various first hand sources than sided ones.


  
Back to Top
Scythian51 View Drop Down
Immortal Guard
Immortal Guard
Avatar

Joined: 12-Jul-2015
Location: iran
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2
  Quote Scythian51 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 12-Jul-2015 at 02:15
No the scythians were not caucasoid , the caucasoid people were always distinct in all historical sources there are, be it biblical or academic . Unfortuantely the scythians don't have much text left behind , even the scythian Parthians who ruled the iranian plateau aren't mentioned in any historical books , let alone the people who roamed the steppe deserts before the monogl / turkic hords ;

 This said they were quite important people , the formation of both christianity and islam has a guge deal to do with scythians and wars they waged on the semitic people of sumer , assyria , babylon and etc. , the bible refers to a land were there is "no scythian nor slave" and islam's holy book too talks a good deal about the tribes of gog and magog' , 

and i must emphasize the average american or european tourist will shortly realize how the central asian republics of today are not home to the mongloid people who occupy them today just by visitng them once ...
Back to Top
Centrix Vigilis View Drop Down
Emperor
Emperor
Avatar

Joined: 18-Aug-2006
Location: The Llano
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 7392
  Quote Centrix Vigilis Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 12-Jul-2015 at 06:03
Welcome Scythian.

I recommend: ''The Horse, the Wheel, and Language: How Bronze-Age Riders from the Eurasian Steppes Shaped the Modern World''; David W. Anthony.

And

''Early Riders: The Beginnings of Mounted Warfare in Asia and Europe.''

Robert Drews.
"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'

Back to Top
tudhaliaIV View Drop Down
Immortal Guard
Immortal Guard
Avatar

Joined: 18-Jul-2015
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4
  Quote tudhaliaIV Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18-Jul-2015 at 07:56
I thought his father fled with him from Khorisan because of the eminent Mongol threat. No?
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 78910>

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 0.125 seconds.