Print Page | Close Window

Scythians

Printed From: History Community ~ All Empires
Category: Regional History or Period History
Forum Name: Steppe Nomads and Central Asia
Forum Discription: Nomads such as the Scythians, Huns, Turks & Mongols, and kingdoms of Central Asia
URL: http://www.allempires.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=17575
Printed Date: 28-Mar-2024 at 06:03
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 9.56a - http://www.webwizforums.com


Topic: Scythians
Posted By: Nick
Subject: Scythians
Date Posted: 03-Feb-2007 at 20:40
The Scythians

 

                              

 

Scythians (Sakas) are Eastern Aryanian, speaking Eastern Iranian language of Bactrian, somewhat like Pashtu/Avestian, living in eastern Iran in today's Afghanistan living among other Aryanic tribes. Their home was known as Sakastan which is today's Nimroz province at their capital of Zaranj (1000-800 BCE) "The capital of  Sistan (Sakistan) Land of the Saka. Persians of the earliest Aryan type. Zaranj was a London of the East'. The homes, like other towns in Central Asia were built from clay in the form of archlike vaults." (Barthold: 1984..pg 69). Others like George Morgenstierne, the linguist thinks that Sakas were from Bakhtar (Balkh) or Bactria brought Eastern Iranian Language of Pashtu to south-eastern Iran and southern Afghanistan. On the other hand Dariush inscription of Bisotun, placed Sakastan “Shahr-e –sukhteh” or "homeland of Scythians” near Koh-i-Kojha, (Mountain of leaders) located in Zaranj from archaeological point of view.

 

 

The Saka tribe managed to united other Aryan/Afghan tribes along. It was around 700 BCE that one of this Afghan tribe made their first cutting through the young Median empire and appeared in Assyrian border. The Scythian king, Partatua married an Assyrian princess in 674 B.C. and two nations remained allies from there the Scythians became entangled in Mesopotamian politics.

 

.

 

At the request of Ashurbanipal of Assyria, the Scythians in 650 BCE reinvaded the Median Empire this time from the northwest and East. Their campaigns were so effective that a Scythian, Madius, became ruler of the Medes for twenty-eight years (653 BC - 625 BC) and temporarily elimated the Medes as a threat to Assyria. After 625 BCE, however, the Scythians left the Median Empire - whether they did so voluntarily or were expelled is debated. At any rate, following the Median sack of Assur in 614 BC, the Sakas were compelled to switch sides and ally with the Medes. They comprised part of the force that sacked Nineveh 612 BC.

 

Some time afterwards, the Scythians returned to their homeland, but few Scythians did not leave they made themselves a new home. According ancient Diodorus Siculus at the 1st century B.C. Scythians "lived in very small numbers at the Araks River....that they gained for themselves a country in the mountains up to the Caucasus, in the lowland on the coast of the Ocean (Caspian Sea) and the Meot Lake (Azov Sea) and other territories up to the Tanais River (Don River). Born in that land from the conjugal union of Zeus and a snake-legged goddess was a son Scyth (Sakha) who gave the name Scythian to the people they won for themselves a country "behind the Tanais River up to the Egyptian Nile River"

(Diodorus II, 43).

 

From 5th century BCE to 1st century BCE Europeans have faced many difficulties with this small tribe reasonably big enough to cause distractions. Scythians attacked many parts of Europe, including Ukraine Rome, Greece. The Scythians left Caucasus and North western Persia the came back home (Sakastan). That doesn't mean end of Scythian invasion. Scythians attacked Altai regions many times and looted gold from its mountains after Alexander the Great 's run another very important event took place the Saka tribe made a new turning point to Indus valley from 250 BCE-50 BCE they are known as Indo-Scythians. This time Scythians were much more advanced bring a new history page to Indians.

 

 

Language:

 

Scythian tribe (Saka tribe) were somewhat illiterate when they first came to Europe, they left few records behind. However the Scythian language still survived, by no arguments Pashtu is classified as Scythian language, and we can still trace the remains of Scythians in Europe their language is known as Ossetic or Ossetian. Which by no means is the closest language to Pashtu.

 

 

Life Style of the Saka's:

 

The Scythians were famous for their bloody tribal custom.  Warriors not only cut off the heads of slain enemies but also made leather-bound drinking cups from their enemies' skulls. Scythians were traditionally polygamous and male- dominated society. A wealthy Scythian could take several wives. Scythian women had little power beyond the confines of their households.

 

 

Their staple diet consisted of kumis, a form of fermented mare's milk which is still popular in Afghanistan, a good deal of cheese, and vegetables such as onions, garlic and beans. They cooked their meat as a stew. As for cleaning, Herodotus noted that the Scythians did not use water for washing. Instead the women used a paste of pounded cypress, cedar and frankincense that, according to Herodotus, they applied to the face and body: "A sweet odour is thereby imparted to them, and when they take off the plaster on the day following, their skin is clean and glossy". Scythians are said to be passionate people - bearded men with dark, deep set eyes with long, wind-snarled hair.

 

 

The Death:

 

Prolonged and demonstrative grieving followed the death of every Scythian tribesman. At the death of a king all Scythian tribes joined a show of stupendous grief that last 40 days (Which is still practiced among muslim Afghans its called Da-Roz-i-Chil meaning the 40th day where prayers are made to mark 40 days from her/his death). Herodotus also noticed that the grave was to be covered with 60-feet hight mound.

 

 

Religion:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The religion of Scythians who came to Europe is not known since it has not been recorded. However we can see Avestia and Rigvada influence both books which were created in Afghanistan. Here this one can we distinguish signs 59-33 Tar(a) and a stylised drawing of a  pair of horses. On the other hand, a pair of horses – signs of the sun – is associated with the  god Andora/Indara according to old Aryan hymns of Rigvada (II, 11: 6, 7).




Replies:
Posted By: chimera
Date Posted: 03-Feb-2007 at 21:38
Persian/Sanskrit "braman(i)ya" means "religiously" and its IE word-root brih "praise. expand" Brahma is seen in Old Swedish "bram" as "state.pomp" and Polish/German "bram" meaning "ship top-mast" for state and admirals' flags, and OEnglish "breme' meaning "high.famous .noble".  These words were around the Baltic Sea, near where Sarmatians and Scythians were recorded from 6th cent BCE.
As Scythians of Ukraine had Danu, and Tocharians of the steppes had "brahmn.kte" Brahma , then logically Scythians also had Brahma, or brahm in general terms. This may explain the Vishnu idol recently excavated on the Volga river.(see Mesopotamia-Iran board thread).
chimera


Posted By: Nick
Date Posted: 03-Feb-2007 at 21:43
Originally posted by chimera

Persian/Sanskrit "braman(i)ya" means "religiously" and its IE word-root brih "praise. expand" Brahma is seen in Old Swedish "bram" as "state.pomp" and Polish/German "bram" meaning "ship top-mast" for state and admirals' flags, and OEnglish "breme' meaning "high.famous .noble".  These words were around the Baltic Sea, near where Sarmatians and Scythians were recorded from 6th cent BCE.
As Scythians of Ukraine had Danu, and Tocharians of the steppes had "brahmn.kte" Brahma , then logically Scythians also had Brahma, or brahm in general terms. This may explain the Vishnu idol recently excavated on the Volga river.(see Mesopotamia-Iran board thread).
chimera
 
Dear Chimera are your sources coming from Sanskirt, cause we know there are 4 versions of sanskirt and the oldest one is Reg-vada which was created in Afghanistan (In the border between Iran/Afghanistan)


-------------


Posted By: Nick
Date Posted: 03-Feb-2007 at 21:44
Sanskirt maybe religous book of hindus but to others its just a story book, and most Afghan king's were named their. So please don't abuse it.
thanks.


-------------


Posted By: chimera
Date Posted: 03-Feb-2007 at 22:19
The "braman(i)ya" words are from the Behistun Inscription of Darius I. The rest are from internet dictionary-etymology sites. My interest is the shape of fire-temples with 4 corner towers and central tower, connected with Mount Meru and Angkor Wat. In Armenia, the Mother Temple was built over a fire-temple and has that shape, which also is in Celtic temples in France and UK,4th cent BCE-1st cent CE, and on Church Gothic steeples. It seems that they all represent the same concept of rule by a religion/government to the "4 corners" of land area. It is open to debate whether the idea spread from the west of Europe 3000BCE or from central Asia 1400BCE or a combination of both.
chimera


Posted By: TeldeInduz
Date Posted: 03-Feb-2007 at 23:28
Originally posted by Nick

 
Dear Chimera are your sources coming from Sanskirt, cause we know there are 4 versions of sanskirt and the oldest one is Reg-vada which was created in Afghanistan (In the border between Iran/Afghanistan)
 
Silly thread but carry on, what you say above though isn't true. Rig Veda was composed within the borders of today's Pakistan. If you read the Rig Veda, it talks mainly about the Indus and the Saraswati Rivers as well as the Indus tributaries. Kabul River gets a mention but only breifly. So it's most unlikely to have been written anywhere in Afghanistan.
 
 


-------------
Quoo-ray sha quadou sarre.................


Posted By: chimera
Date Posted: 04-Feb-2007 at 05:03
You both agree that Afghanistan gets a mention, so evidently the Brahmin culture was in all the areas you have written. Mount Meru of Pamirs is their world-center, which suggests a wider region for Brahmins.
chimera


Posted By: TeldeInduz
Date Posted: 04-Feb-2007 at 06:05
Originally posted by chimera

You both agree that Afghanistan gets a mention, so evidently the Brahmin culture was in all the areas you have written. Mount Meru of Pamirs is their world-center, which suggests a wider region for Brahmins.
chimera
 
This has been discussed a thousand times before and I'm not going into all this again. Brahminism is something totally alien to Pakistan and Afghanistan. The evidence on how it originated and where it did is overwhelming, and you're just claiming something ludicrous here now.


-------------
Quoo-ray sha quadou sarre.................


Posted By: Leonidas
Date Posted: 04-Feb-2007 at 06:51
Originally posted by Nick

 

Scythian tribe (Saka tribe) were somewhat illiterate when they first came to Europe, they left few records behind. However the Scythian language still survived, by no arguments Pashtu is classified as Scythian language, and we can still trace the remains of Scythians in Europe their language is known as Ossetic or Ossetian. Which by no means is the closest language to Pashtu.

um how is pashto classified as scythian? Evidence for this is?


AFAIK, Pashto is classified as a south-east iranian language, and ive never heard of a 'scythian' classification. BTW Osset  is a north-eastern iranic language hence why they might not be so similar, yet you say they are both scythian.



Posted By: Cyrus Shahmiri
Date Posted: 04-Feb-2007 at 08:22
http://www.allempires.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=17151 - Scythian/Saka Inscription of Sakkez , as I said this is very similar to Persian language.

-------------


Posted By: Kerimoglu
Date Posted: 04-Feb-2007 at 09:36
Scytian, Sarmatian and Saka and their origin have been discussed, God, perhaps for several hundred times, especially by well known historian, ethnographs and so on. They.re ancestors of many of us. And they were indo-european, their language was IRANIAN, not turkish, not turkic and not hunnic, and not slavic and not germanic. Later in history, akmost all nomads living in eastern Iran, Asia, Euripe steppes were called as scythians, even goths - Germans said Attila came and drove out all scythians. Those are not real scythians. Of course. Also, talking in Ireani, does never ever means talking Persian. Iran is huge thing. Persian is very small comparing to it. Iran is general. It is not genetical, it is cultural, and a bit religional.

-------------
History is a farm. Nations are farmers. What they planted before will show what is going to grow tomorrow!


Posted By: Bulldog
Date Posted: 04-Feb-2007 at 10:38

Kerimoglu has a good point, originally the Scythians most likely were Iranic tribes. However, every nomadic group from that period has incorrectly been labelled "Scythians", even Altaic tribes when it's known that they were Turkic.

Therefore it's likely that as Scythians expanded other tribes would have joined a tribal confederation with them, disbanded, started new confederations and so on.


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



Posted By: Nick
Date Posted: 04-Feb-2007 at 14:58
Originally posted by Leonidas

Originally posted by Nick

 

Scythian tribe (Saka tribe) were somewhat illiterate when they first came to Europe, they left few records behind. However the Scythian language still survived, by no arguments Pashtu is classified as Scythian language, and we can still trace the remains of Scythians in Europe their language is known as Ossetic or Ossetian. Which by no means is the closest language to Pashtu.

um how is pashto classified as scythian? Evidence for this is?


AFAIK, Pashto is classified as a south-east iranian language, and ive never heard of a 'scythian' classification. BTW Osset  is a north-eastern iranic language hence why they might not be so similar, yet you say they are both scythian.

 
Dear friend I wise i had an evidence that how Pashto is related to Scythain. The problem is Scythains were a new ethnic of Europe but not different from other Aryan tribe. The Westerners think Scythain as some different people, and they label all old (Avestian speakers) or Pashto speakers as "scythain". Scythaians were just a small Eastern Iranian tribe of Afghan tribe called Sakazia which still makeup the 3rd largest tribe of Afghanistan. Althought Sakazia's have many other tribes within them but over all they all relate themselves as the childern of Sakkatia.
 

Anthropology and linguistics

The origins of the Pashtuns are not entirely clear, but their language is classified as an Eastern Iranian tongue, itself a sub-branch of the Indo-Iranian branch of the greater Indo-European family of languages, and thus the Pashtuns are often classified as an Iranian peoples, notably as probable modern day descendants of the Scythians, an ancient Iranian group. According to many academics, such as Yu V. Gankovsky, the Pashtuns began as a, “union of largely East-Iranian tribes which became the initial ethnic stratum of the Pashtun ethnogenesis dates from the middle of the first millennium AD and is connected with the dissolution of the Epthalite (White Huns) confederacy.” These tribes, who most likely spoke an early version of modern  Pashto survived countless invasions and spread throughout the northeastern Iranian plateau.

 
Any how if you have any evidence or a source regarding Afghans not classified as scythian then please share it with us.
 
Pashtu is Pakhtrian, and Scythains of Europe spoke Pakhtrian Language. You can't simple then this. YES Some Scythains came back after defeating Assyrians and making peace with Western Aryan group of Medians. BUT Some or most of the scythain tribe disagree and continued to rule some regions of Europe. Their influnce is seen in slavik languages and that's how Russian share words with Eastern Iranians.
 
The remains of Scythains are non but Ossetic language still remain to have their roots as an Avestian language.


-------------


Posted By: Nick
Date Posted: 04-Feb-2007 at 15:48
Originally posted by TeldeInduz

Originally posted by Nick

 
Dear Chimera are your sources coming from Sanskirt, cause we know there are 4 versions of sanskirt and the oldest one is Reg-vada which was created in Afghanistan (In the border between Iran/Afghanistan)
 
Silly thread but carry on, what you say above though isn't true. Rig Veda was composed within the borders of today's Pakistan. If you read the Rig Veda, it talks mainly about the Indus and the Saraswati Rivers as well as the Indus tributaries. Kabul River gets a mention but only breifly. So it's most unlikely to have been written anywhere in Afghanistan.
 
 
 
 
 
Teldeinduz i am not really sure how silly it can get, but facts can not be pushed back.
 
Rig Veda was composed within the borders of today's Pakistan.
offcourse thats what everybody have been saying Rid Veda was created in Sariswati river (ie Punjab) but no-one really knew where is Sariswati (Offcourse there are many Indian rivers named sariswati but was identified as old as rig-vada.
 
The Vedic People: Their History and Geography (Orient Longman, New Delhi, 1999), where he decides that in the RAmAyaNa (which he examines for the geography of the Rigveda), SarasvatI is identified with Helmand and GaNgA and YamunA as its tributaries in the hilly areas of Afghanistan.
http://www.tri-murti.com/ancientindia/rigHistory/ch4.htm - http://www.tri-murti.com/ancientindia/rigHistory/ch4.htm
 
Forget about Aryan invasion there isn't enough prove of Aryan invasion and killing of massive local Pakistanis (Indus River) but there are fact thats that Aryan were not natives of hindus River, and that during rig-Vada Aryans (Aogyans in avesta) were already intermixed with local natives of Indus river (Pakistan) to Ganga river.
 
As we can see some conflicts between like the Bharata's Invasion which is right from Afghanistan.
 
And there are many hindu-Indians who study not just the region but also the book and from other evidence that Rig-Vada was created in Afghanistan. Its interesting how both languages are close to each other and both were created in Afghanistan. And that same old theory of Avesta being created from Azerbijan and And Rig-vada from Indus river is just off the topic.
 

Prof. Kochhar's thesis is briefly as follows. During the Harappan age, the Indo-Iranian tribes settled in Afghanistan, and started composing the hymns of the Avesta and Rg-Veda. The main lifeline of their civilization was the Saraswati river of southwestern Afghanistan, known as Harahvaiti in Avestan and Helmand (from Haetumant/Setumant) in modern Afghan. In the declining centuries of Harappa, ca. 1900 BC, some non-Vedic Aryans moved into India, and their imprint is visible in a few Aryan elements in late-Harappan cities, such as fire-altars, which AIT skeptics have prematurely taken as proof of the predominantly Aryan identity of the Harappan civilization ("Features like the fire altars at Kalibangan and Lothal and the horse at Surkotada appear in the late Harappan phase thanks to the arrival of the Indic-speaking elements", p.206). By 1400 BC, a second wave of Aryans, equipped with the first half or so of the hymns which make up the Rg-Veda, entered India.

 
 
http://koenraadelst.bharatvani.org/reviews/kochhar.html - http://koenraadelst.bharatvani.org/reviews/kochhar.html


-------------


Posted By: chimera
Date Posted: 04-Feb-2007 at 16:05
Hurrians of 1400 BCE in north Mesopotamia had Vedic gods such as Indra, Vayu,Svar,Soma, the Devas and Rta.  Its possible that various IE people contributed to Vedic ideas 1500-500BCE.
chimera


Posted By: TeldeInduz
Date Posted: 05-Feb-2007 at 03:25
Originally posted by Nick

offcourse thats what everybody have been saying Rid Veda was created in Sariswati river (ie Punjab) but no-one really knew where is Sariswati (Offcourse there are many Indian rivers named sariswati but was identified as old as rig-vada.  
 
The location of the Saraswati River is very well known. It is a dried up river that flowed through much of Sindh, Pakistan and crossed over into Eastern Punjab. Yes, there are people trying to manipulate things and claim the Saraswati was in Afghanistan, but the Rig Veda is very clear on where it is.
 
Favour ye this my laud, O Ganga, Yamuna, O Sutudri, Parusni and Sarasvati:
With Asikni, Vitasta, O Marudvrdha, O Arjikiya with Susoma hear my call.
First with Trstama thou art eager to flow forth, with Rasa, and Susartu, and with Svetya here,
With Kubha; and with these, Sindhu and Mehatnu, thou seekest in thy course Krumu and
Gomati.
(RV, Mandel 10, 75)
 
The rivers go Ganges, Yamuna, Sutudri....Saraswati.........Sindhu.......Krumu and Gomati from East to West. All these rivers excepting the Ganges and Yamuna are found in Pakistan. This is of course assuming you believe the Rig Veda, but the Rig Veda is the Vedic people's own records.
 
The Saraswati River was not the mightiest river according to the Rig Veda either, it was clearly the Indus River and it mentions this over many times.
 
The Rivers have come forward triply, seven and seven. Sindhu in might surpasses all the streams that flow.Varuna cut the channels for thy forward course, O Sindhu, when thou rannest on to win the race.
(RV, mandel 10, 75)
 
There is an weak argument that the Saraswati is in Afghanistan, but it wouldn't make much difference. According to the Rig Veda, the Indus is the main river of the Vedic people.
 
The Vedic People: Their History and Geography (Orient Longman, New Delhi, 1999), where he decides that in the RAmAyaNa (which he examines for the geography of the Rigveda), SarasvatI is identified with Helmand and GaNgA and YamunA as its tributaries in the hilly areas of Afghanistan.
http://www.tri-murti.com/ancientindia/rigHistory/ch4.htm - http://www.tri-murti.com/ancientindia/rigHistory/ch4.htm  
 
Does this honestly make sense to you? The Ganges is a tributary of Helmand? It's one of those pieces of desperate revisionism that doesn't work.
 
Forget about Aryan invasion there isn't enough prove of Aryan invasion and killing of massive local Pakistanis (Indus River) but there are fact thats that Aryan were not natives of hindus River, and that during rig-Vada Aryans (Aogyans in avesta) were already intermixed with local natives of Indus river (Pakistan) to Ganga river.
 
I don't believe in an Aryan invasion the way it's told. Just a migration into the region and perhaps intermixing with the natives in Pakistan to various degrees.
 
As we can see some conflicts between like the Bharata's Invasion which is right from Afghanistan.
 
And there are many hindu-Indians who study not just the region but also the book and from other evidence that Rig-Vada was created in Afghanistan. Its interesting how both languages are close to each other and both were created in Afghanistan. And that same old theory of Avesta being created from Azerbijan and And Rig-vada from Indus river is just off the topic.
 
It's off topic perhaps, but I'm not really interested in the topic, more interesting is your assertion of Helmand being the location of Saraswati and the main river of the Vedic civilization when it clearly isnt and wasnt.
 

Prof. Kochhar's thesis is briefly as follows. During the Harappan age, the Indo-Iranian tribes settled in Afghanistan, and started composing the hymns of the Avesta and Rg-Veda. The main lifeline of their civilization was the Saraswati river of southwestern Afghanistan, known as Harahvaiti in Avestan and Helmand (from Haetumant/Setumant) in modern Afghan. In the declining centuries of Harappa, ca. 1900 BC, some non-Vedic Aryans moved into India, and their imprint is visible in a few Aryan elements in late-Harappan cities, such as fire-altars, which AIT skeptics have prematurely taken as proof of the predominantly Aryan identity of the Harappan civilization ("Features like the fire altars at Kalibangan and Lothal and the horse at Surkotada appear in the late Harappan phase thanks to the arrival of the Indic-speaking elements", p.206). By 1400 BC, a second wave of Aryans, equipped with the first half or so of the hymns which make up the Rg-Veda, entered India.

 
Not interested in "Professor"  Rajesh Kocchar..I could quote you an equally weak version of everything from "India" by Koenraad Estl. What you've quoted contains no fact backed up by evidence. If you want evidence you can find it in the Vedic people's own book. The Indus River was the main river of the Vedic people in Pakistan, the Saraswati was most likely the dried up river that also flowed through Pakistan (and also into the extreme northwest of India also).


-------------
Quoo-ray sha quadou sarre.................


Posted By: kajdom
Date Posted: 05-Feb-2007 at 05:16
@ nick

with respect to pashtuns. your evidence doesn't show that pashtuns are from scythians. scythians lived in a vast area and most likely around caspian sea and north of black sea. since there is not much known scythian words you can't claim that pashtun language is close or closest one to scythian language. we just know that their language was similar to persian language and nothing else ( Greek historian mention that). about avestan I should to say old persian and pahlavi is closest language to avestan not pashtun. I speak one of the old and good preserved Iranian language very similar to pahlavi and beside I am zoroastrian and can understand old persian and avestan enough to judge which language is close to avestan.


Posted By: EGETÜRK
Date Posted: 05-Feb-2007 at 10:25
sakas were turkic...

-------------
The lands of the of the West may be armored with walls of steel,
But I have borders guarded by the mighty chest of a believer...


Posted By: Batu
Date Posted: 05-Feb-2007 at 10:55
Shu Tegin : the Schtian khan who fought against Alexander.he got killed bu anyway,he showed courage,its something Smile
this guy has an epope and he is barely Turkic.
an armor which was found in a kurgan in Schtian region was totally the same as an other armor which was found in a kurgan in Kazakhistan.
they had the same horse archer tactics as Turks
they were nomads like Turks
they fought,they rode,they lived like Turks


-------------
A wizard is never late,nor he is early he arrives exactly when he means to :) ( Gandalf the White in the Third Age of History Empire Of Istari )


Posted By: Tar Szerénd
Date Posted: 05-Feb-2007 at 11:12

And the turks fought, rode and lived like scythians. It's equal.

 
TSZ


Posted By: Batu
Date Posted: 05-Feb-2007 at 11:20
there is also an another epope about Schtians.Alp Er Tunga,the Schtian Khan
women in military ranks and women leaders were very usual in Turks.Queen Tomryis is a good example.


-------------
A wizard is never late,nor he is early he arrives exactly when he means to :) ( Gandalf the White in the Third Age of History Empire Of Istari )


Posted By: Nick
Date Posted: 05-Feb-2007 at 20:53
Originally posted by kajdom

@ nick

with respect to pashtuns. your evidence doesn't show that pashtuns are from scythians. scythians lived in a vast area and most likely around caspian sea and north of black sea. since there is not much known scythian words you can't claim that pashtun language is close or closest one to scythian language. we just know that their language was similar to persian language and nothing else ( Greek historian mention that). about avestan I should to say old persian and pahlavi is closest language to avestan not pashtun. I speak one of the old and good preserved Iranian language very similar to pahlavi and beside I am zoroastrian and can understand old persian and avestan enough to judge which language is close to avestan.
 
Dear Kajdom I have said it before and i well say it  again NOT all Pashtuns are Scythians, Scythains was just a name they were refered to. Scythians are a tribe of Afghans. People think of Pashtuns as an one Ethinic/group/race, its like saying all English speakers are Angels or all the Parsi speakers (Persians) are from one race. No... Pashtu is the language the word Pashtun comes from Pashtuwan with the word "WAN" they mean the language. Pashtuns/Pathan etc etc are just words given to these Afghan people. They have always called themselves "AWghan" and having both the Language, culture, and racial backround of Pashtu you are considered 100% Afghan.
 
But Pashtu over time has been used as National langauge of Many empires like the Zafferides, even today modern Punjabis/Indics of Pakistan (Around 10 million) speak this Pashtu langauge (They are considered Pashtun) since they hav been living in the Afghan region Pashtunistan (Since 1965). If you ever go to Karachi, Pashtu is also spoken there, and what about Pashtu speakers of Iran (Sistan/Khorasan) So Pashtuns are not a single ethinic its just a langauge like Parsi/English/Franch etc etc.
 
DFear Think...Do you Think if i speak Persi, i am going to be a Persian??? NO that's why Persian in not Ethinic and so aren't the Pashtuns.
 
 
scythians lived in a vast area and most likely around caspian sea and north of black sea
 
There is no prove until this day to support this Idea. Even 200 years ago. European knew that Scythains were not natives of that area, they thought Scythains came from Siberia (North EAst Of China). And over time many other theories were present regarding the origions of Scythain, it wasn't until more discoveries found in Afghanistan which was older then the Achaemenid Empire, Assyrian Empire. And to date they never had any Empire until they faced pressure from north West "Achaemenid" Scythians had developed cities like Zarhaj south western Afghanistan bordered with Iran. And more Evidence from the Burned city founded in 2004 the city was dated 3500 years old, signs of Scythians were seen everywhere.
 
And name me any Euopean/Azerbjiani tribe or people bearing the evidence of Scythains? NON and over time even the Greek source mentions Sakazia.
 
we just know that their language was similar to persian language and nothing else ( Greek historian mention that)
 
dear first of all Scythain had no language other then Pakhtrian (Not until they reached Europe 800 BCE second how can Scythain be close to Persian when persian was not even around. Modern Persian is slang mixed Arabic/Samanidi. And the oldest Persian Langauge we have today is from Ferdowsi (Dari)
 
With all all restpact to people who created Parsi/Dari but dear Persian is not that old indeed far older then most of the European Langauges. And having the greatest Poets of all time.
 
about avestan I should to say old persian and pahlavi is closest language to avestan not pashtun.
 
dear you must have been mis-informed, yes i know there is a link between Medes and Avestains but not this far to say that Avesta belongs to Parsi or Palvi. they both are western Iranian languages and Pashto is the closest langauge to Avesta. Dear there are many sources out there which you might want to have a look at.
 
 
I speak one of the old and good preserved Iranian language very similar to pahlavi 
 
That has to be Kurdish cause there is no other langauge alive closest to Palavi other then Kurdish. BTW Kurdish is the oldest langauge in Iran, althought it has a lot of Islamic, Hebrew, Turkish words duo to different religions and believes of Kurdish people, but still older then Parsi.
 
 
  I am zoroastrian and can understand old persian and avestan enough to judge which language is close to avestan.
 
No hard feeling dear, but you need to prove yourself, cause i know there are many prefessors, ethnologist, lingustists, historians who believe Pashtu to be the closest to Avesta (And you what dear the Pashto langauge prove itself to be avestian either anyone agrees or disagree) yes indeed Parsi,Kurdi/Palavi and other iranian langauges were all influnced by Avestian after all it was the Language of Zoroastria. BTW if you read the book you would know that Zoroastria himself says that he's "Pakhtrian"
 
 
 
 


-------------


Posted By: Nick
Date Posted: 05-Feb-2007 at 21:11
Originally posted by TeldeInduz

Originally posted by Nick

offcourse thats what everybody have been saying Rid Veda was created in Sariswati river (ie Punjab) but no-one really knew where is Sariswati (Offcourse there are many Indian rivers named sariswati but was identified as old as rig-vada.  
 
The location of the Saraswati River is very well known. It is a dried up river that flowed through much of Sindh, Pakistan and crossed over into Eastern Punjab. Yes, there are people trying to manipulate things and claim the Saraswati was in Afghanistan, but the Rig Veda is very clear on where it is.
 
Favour ye this my laud, O Ganga, Yamuna, O Sutudri, Parusni and Sarasvati:
With Asikni, Vitasta, O Marudvrdha, O Arjikiya with Susoma hear my call.
First with Trstama thou art eager to flow forth, with Rasa, and Susartu, and with Svetya here,
With Kubha; and with these, Sindhu and Mehatnu, thou seekest in thy course Krumu and
Gomati.
(RV, Mandel 10, 75)
 
The rivers go Ganges, Yamuna, Sutudri....Saraswati.........Sindhu.......Krumu and Gomati from East to West. All these rivers excepting the Ganges and Yamuna are found in Pakistan. This is of course assuming you believe the Rig Veda, but the Rig Veda is the Vedic people's own records.
 
The Saraswati River was not the mightiest river according to the Rig Veda either, it was clearly the Indus River and it mentions this over many times.
 
The Rivers have come forward triply, seven and seven. Sindhu in might surpasses all the streams that flow.Varuna cut the channels for thy forward course, O Sindhu, when thou rannest on to win the race.
(RV, mandel 10, 75)
 
There is an weak argument that the Saraswati is in Afghanistan, but it wouldn't make much difference. According to the Rig Veda, the Indus is the main river of the Vedic people.
 
The Vedic People: Their History and Geography (Orient Longman, New Delhi, 1999), where he decides that in the RAmAyaNa (which he examines for the geography of the Rigveda), SarasvatI is identified with Helmand and GaNgA and YamunA as its tributaries in the hilly areas of Afghanistan.
http://www.tri-murti.com/ancientindia/rigHistory/ch4.htm - http://www.tri-murti.com/ancientindia/rigHistory/ch4.htm  
 
Does this honestly make sense to you? The Ganges is a tributary of Helmand? It's one of those pieces of desperate revisionism that doesn't work.
 
Forget about Aryan invasion there isn't enough prove of Aryan invasion and killing of massive local Pakistanis (Indus River) but there are fact thats that Aryan were not natives of hindus River, and that during rig-Vada Aryans (Aogyans in avesta) were already intermixed with local natives of Indus river (Pakistan) to Ganga river.
 
I don't believe in an Aryan invasion the way it's told. Just a migration into the region and perhaps intermixing with the natives in Pakistan to various degrees.
 
As we can see some conflicts between like the Bharata's Invasion which is right from Afghanistan.
 
And there are many hindu-Indians who study not just the region but also the book and from other evidence that Rig-Vada was created in Afghanistan. Its interesting how both languages are close to each other and both were created in Afghanistan. And that same old theory of Avesta being created from Azerbijan and And Rig-vada from Indus river is just off the topic.
 
It's off topic perhaps, but I'm not really interested in the topic, more interesting is your assertion of Helmand being the location of Saraswati and the main river of the Vedic civilization when it clearly isnt and wasnt.
 

Prof. Kochhar's thesis is briefly as follows. During the Harappan age, the Indo-Iranian tribes settled in Afghanistan, and started composing the hymns of the Avesta and Rg-Veda. The main lifeline of their civilization was the Saraswati river of southwestern Afghanistan, known as Harahvaiti in Avestan and Helmand (from Haetumant/Setumant) in modern Afghan. In the declining centuries of Harappa, ca. 1900 BC, some non-Vedic Aryans moved into India, and their imprint is visible in a few Aryan elements in late-Harappan cities, such as fire-altars, which AIT skeptics have prematurely taken as proof of the predominantly Aryan identity of the Harappan civilization ("Features like the fire altars at Kalibangan and Lothal and the horse at Surkotada appear in the late Harappan phase thanks to the arrival of the Indic-speaking elements", p.206). By 1400 BC, a second wave of Aryans, equipped with the first half or so of the hymns which make up the Rg-Veda, entered India.

 
Not interested in "Professor"  Rajesh Kocchar..I could quote you an equally weak version of everything from "India" by Koenraad Estl. What you've quoted contains no fact backed up by evidence. If you want evidence you can find it in the Vedic people's own book. The Indus River was the main river of the Vedic people in Pakistan, the Saraswati was most likely the dried up river that also flowed through Pakistan (and also into the extreme northwest of India also).
 
 
TeldeInduz after all that fact you get little emotional. Body You have the right to reject anything you want especially when it comes to religion. After all you live to believe in that book and i am sorry if i disturbed you. Sanskirt is a very sensitive book many Europeans and historians have pulled their hands off this book (Specially after they found that they (whites) were no-where near being Aryan).
 
It's very hard for Hindus/subcontinent of south Asia to believe that their holy book was created by the same reckless Afghans who over years have been destroying their tambles for years, and forcing Islam. We can feel that hate. And That's why i take back my words, so that other hindu friends don't get disturbed.
 
 
 
 
Nowdays we know more about Reg-vada then we ever did.  Anyhow if you are interested in further studing Reg-vada please keep researching. You will get the answer
 
 
 
 
BTW Important Personal Question.
 
Are you a hindu?


-------------


Posted By: Nick
Date Posted: 05-Feb-2007 at 21:17
Originally posted by EGETÜRK

sakas were turkic...
 
Egeturk we still havn't found the root of Turks and you think Scythains were Turks????
 
All we know about Turks is their massive expantion during central Asian Massive waves of movement less then 1700 years, and the second Turkish movement known as Mongols, and then 3rd one into modern Turkey and intermarriages with Europeans (And with Native  Aryanics)
 


-------------


Posted By: TeldeInduz
Date Posted: 06-Feb-2007 at 03:44
Originally posted by Nick

TeldeInduz after all that fact you get little emotional.
 
?
 
Body You have the right to reject anything you want especially when it comes to religion. After all you live to believe in that book and i am sorry if i disturbed you. Sanskirt is a very sensitive book many Europeans and historians have pulled their hands off this book (Specially after they found that they (whites) were no-where near being Aryan).
 
I see, so you're saying that the Europeans (whites) got a hold of that there Rig Veda, cast a spell over the subcontinental people who knew the Rig Veda so they forgot what was in it, then manipulated the Rig Veda to prove that the Vedic civilization existed only in Pakistan. A question, why in the world would they want to do this?
 
It's very hard for Hindus/subcontinent of south Asia to believe that their holy book was created by the same reckless Afghans who over years have been destroying their tambles for years, and forcing Islam. We can feel that hate. And That's why i take back my words, so that other hindu friends don't get disturbed.
 
It might well have been created by an Afghan ancestor who lived in the region of modern day Pakistan on the Indus. What's known is that the Vedic civilization existed all over Pakistan and minorly overlapped into Afghanistan and North West India.
 
Nowdays we know more about Reg-vada then we ever did.  Anyhow if you are interested in further studing Reg-vada please keep researching. You will get the answer
 
I've given you the references from the Rig Veda itself, you havent given anything except an unimaginative hypothesis that Europeans fooled everyone by changing a scripture to shift the location of Vedic civilization from Afghanistan to Pakistan for some reason, and that people in the subcontinent paid no attention.
 
BTW Important Personal Question.
 
Are you a hindu?
 
Confused 


-------------
Quoo-ray sha quadou sarre.................


Posted By: arfunda
Date Posted: 06-Feb-2007 at 03:55
I liked this topic so much.
Then what do you think about my opinions (on Schytians/Askenazi jews and on similarity of DNAs of Askenazi Jews and Kurds) discussed on topic Jewish Nation in Khazar in http://www.allempires.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=16924&KW=&PID=324919#324919 - http://www.allempires.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=16924&KW=&PID=324919#324919
 
DNA research results make me conclude that Arian/Iranian Meds (who are accepted to be origin of Kurds  in some sources) and and Arian/ıranian Scythians (who are accepted to be synonym of Askenazi) share similar DNAs because of comman ancestors


Posted By: kajdom
Date Posted: 06-Feb-2007 at 05:17
Originally posted by Nick

Originally posted by kajdom

@ nick

with respect to pashtuns. your evidence doesn't show that pashtuns are from scythians. scythians lived in a vast area and most likely around caspian sea and north of black sea. since there is not much known scythian words you can't claim that pashtun language is close or closest one to scythian language. we just know that their language was similar to persian language and nothing else ( Greek historian mention that). about avestan I should to say old persian and pahlavi is closest language to avestan not pashtun. I speak one of the old and good preserved Iranian language very similar to pahlavi and beside I am zoroastrian and can understand old persian and avestan enough to judge which language is close to avestan.
 
Dear Kajdom I have said it before and i well say it  again NOT all Pashtuns are Scythians, Scythains was just a name they were refered to. Scythians are a tribe of Afghans. People think of Pashtuns as an one Ethinic/group/race, its like saying all English speakers are Angels or all the Parsi speakers (Persians) are from one race. No... Pashtu is the language the word Pashtun comes from Pashtuwan with the word "WAN" they mean the language. Pashtuns/Pathan etc etc are just words given to these Afghan people. They have always called themselves "AWghan" and having both the Language, culture, and racial backround of Pashtu you are considered 100% Afghan.
 
But Pashtu over time has been used as National langauge of Many empires like the Zafferides, even today modern Punjabis/Indics of Pakistan (Around 10 million) speak this Pashtu langauge (They are considered Pashtun) since they hav been living in the Afghan region Pashtunistan (Since 1965). If you ever go to Karachi, Pashtu is also spoken there, and what about Pashtu speakers of Iran (Sistan/Khorasan) So Pashtuns are not a single ethinic its just a langauge like Parsi/English/Franch etc etc.
 
DFear Think...Do you Think if i speak Persi, i am going to be a Persian??? NO that's why Persian in not Ethinic and so aren't the Pashtuns.
 
 
scythians lived in a vast area and most likely around caspian sea and north of black sea
 
There is no prove until this day to support this Idea. Even 200 years ago. European knew that Scythains were not natives of that area, they thought Scythains came from Siberia (North EAst Of China). And over time many other theories were present regarding the origions of Scythain, it wasn't until more discoveries found in Afghanistan which was older then the Achaemenid Empire, Assyrian Empire. And to date they never had any Empire until they faced pressure from north West "Achaemenid" Scythians had developed cities like Zarhaj south western Afghanistan bordered with Iran. And more Evidence from the Burned city founded in 2004 the city was dated 3500 years old, signs of Scythians were seen everywhere.
 
And name me any Euopean/Azerbjiani tribe or people bearing the evidence of Scythains? NON and over time even the Greek source mentions Sakazia.
 
we just know that their language was similar to persian language and nothing else ( Greek historian mention that)
 
dear first of all Scythain had no language other then Pakhtrian (Not until they reached Europe 800 BCE second how can Scythain be close to Persian when persian was not even around. Modern Persian is slang mixed Arabic/Samanidi. And the oldest Persian Langauge we have today is from Ferdowsi (Dari)
 
With all all restpact to people who created Parsi/Dari but dear Persian is not that old indeed far older then most of the European Langauges. And having the greatest Poets of all time.
 
about avestan I should to say old persian and pahlavi is closest language to avestan not pashtun.
 
dear you must have been mis-informed, yes i know there is a link between Medes and Avestains but not this far to say that Avesta belongs to Parsi or Palvi. they both are western Iranian languages and Pashto is the closest langauge to Avesta. Dear there are many sources out there which you might want to have a look at.
 
 
I speak one of the old and good preserved Iranian language very similar to pahlavi 
 
That has to be Kurdish cause there is no other langauge alive closest to Palavi other then Kurdish. BTW Kurdish is the oldest langauge in Iran, althought it has a lot of Islamic, Hebrew, Turkish words duo to different religions and believes of Kurdish people, but still older then Parsi.
 
 
  I am zoroastrian and can understand old persian and avestan enough to judge which language is close to avestan.
 
No hard feeling dear, but you need to prove yourself, cause i know there are many prefessors, ethnologist, lingustists, historians who believe Pashtu to be the closest to Avesta (And you what dear the Pashto langauge prove itself to be avestian either anyone agrees or disagree) yes indeed Parsi,Kurdi/Palavi and other iranian langauges were all influnced by Avestian after all it was the Language of Zoroastria. BTW if you read the book you would know that Zoroastria himself says that he's "Pakhtrian"
 
 
 
 


Dude I feel really sorry for you and the source you use for your information. who said zoroaster is so called pakhterian. He and his family are from Land of holy fire Azarabadegan ( today azarbaijan ) and his birth place was near Aras river. later he went to bacteria. Parthian and today tajiks are closest people to bacterians. I should to tell you for last time pashtu language maybe is similar to avestan because it is one of the Iranic languages so it is not new, but pahlavai language and  today persian is more similar to avestan.  I can't understand why you are try hard to claim such things. what is your sources for your claims. I can speak and understand avestan because it is the language that we pray every time. so why are you trying to convince me pashtu language is closest language to avesta. Agian you are wrong about  kurdish language is only close language to pahlavi. in diffrent places in iran you can find some local dialect of persian that is similar to pahlavi for example I know  awrami, sangesari and some local dialects around yazd and kerman in iran are very close to pahlavi too. I speak kermani dialect of old Dari (not Afghani Dari).Smile


Posted By: kajdom
Date Posted: 06-Feb-2007 at 05:27
I don't need to prove anything since I don't claim strange things you do. You need to back up your claims with relaiable sources,


Posted By: Nick
Date Posted: 06-Feb-2007 at 14:28
Originally posted by kajdom

Originally posted by Nick

Originally posted by kajdom

@ nick

with respect to pashtuns. your evidence doesn't show that pashtuns are from scythians. scythians lived in a vast area and most likely around caspian sea and north of black sea. since there is not much known scythian words you can't claim that pashtun language is close or closest one to scythian language. we just know that their language was similar to persian language and nothing else ( Greek historian mention that). about avestan I should to say old persian and pahlavi is closest language to avestan not pashtun. I speak one of the old and good preserved Iranian language very similar to pahlavi and beside I am zoroastrian and can understand old persian and avestan enough to judge which language is close to avestan.
 
Dear Kajdom I have said it before and i well say it  again NOT all Pashtuns are Scythians, Scythains was just a name they were refered to. Scythians are a tribe of Afghans. People think of Pashtuns as an one Ethinic/group/race, its like saying all English speakers are Angels or all the Parsi speakers (Persians) are from one race. No... Pashtu is the language the word Pashtun comes from Pashtuwan with the word "WAN" they mean the language. Pashtuns/Pathan etc etc are just words given to these Afghan people. They have always called themselves "AWghan" and having both the Language, culture, and racial backround of Pashtu you are considered 100% Afghan.
 
But Pashtu over time has been used as National langauge of Many empires like the Zafferides, even today modern Punjabis/Indics of Pakistan (Around 10 million) speak this Pashtu langauge (They are considered Pashtun) since they hav been living in the Afghan region Pashtunistan (Since 1965). If you ever go to Karachi, Pashtu is also spoken there, and what about Pashtu speakers of Iran (Sistan/Khorasan) So Pashtuns are not a single ethinic its just a langauge like Parsi/English/Franch etc etc.
 
DFear Think...Do you Think if i speak Persi, i am going to be a Persian??? NO that's why Persian in not Ethinic and so aren't the Pashtuns.
 
 
scythians lived in a vast area and most likely around caspian sea and north of black sea
 
There is no prove until this day to support this Idea. Even 200 years ago. European knew that Scythains were not natives of that area, they thought Scythains came from Siberia (North EAst Of China). And over time many other theories were present regarding the origions of Scythain, it wasn't until more discoveries found in Afghanistan which was older then the Achaemenid Empire, Assyrian Empire. And to date they never had any Empire until they faced pressure from north West "Achaemenid" Scythians had developed cities like Zarhaj south western Afghanistan bordered with Iran. And more Evidence from the Burned city founded in 2004 the city was dated 3500 years old, signs of Scythians were seen everywhere.
 
And name me any Euopean/Azerbjiani tribe or people bearing the evidence of Scythains? NON and over time even the Greek source mentions Sakazia.
 
we just know that their language was similar to persian language and nothing else ( Greek historian mention that)
 
dear first of all Scythain had no language other then Pakhtrian (Not until they reached Europe 800 BCE second how can Scythain be close to Persian when persian was not even around. Modern Persian is slang mixed Arabic/Samanidi. And the oldest Persian Langauge we have today is from Ferdowsi (Dari)
 
With all all restpact to people who created Parsi/Dari but dear Persian is not that old indeed far older then most of the European Langauges. And having the greatest Poets of all time.
 
about avestan I should to say old persian and pahlavi is closest language to avestan not pashtun.
 
dear you must have been mis-informed, yes i know there is a link between Medes and Avestains but not this far to say that Avesta belongs to Parsi or Palvi. they both are western Iranian languages and Pashto is the closest langauge to Avesta. Dear there are many sources out there which you might want to have a look at.
 
 
I speak one of the old and good preserved Iranian language very similar to pahlavi 
 
That has to be Kurdish cause there is no other langauge alive closest to Palavi other then Kurdish. BTW Kurdish is the oldest langauge in Iran, althought it has a lot of Islamic, Hebrew, Turkish words duo to different religions and believes of Kurdish people, but still older then Parsi.
 
 
  I am zoroastrian and can understand old persian and avestan enough to judge which language is close to avestan.
 
No hard feeling dear, but you need to prove yourself, cause i know there are many prefessors, ethnologist, lingustists, historians who believe Pashtu to be the closest to Avesta (And you what dear the Pashto langauge prove itself to be avestian either anyone agrees or disagree) yes indeed Parsi,Kurdi/Palavi and other iranian langauges were all influnced by Avestian after all it was the Language of Zoroastria. BTW if you read the book you would know that Zoroastria himself says that he's "Pakhtrian"
 
 
 
 


Dude I feel really sorry for you and the source you use for your information. who said zoroaster is so called pakhterian. He and his family are from Land of holy fire Azarabadegan ( today azarbaijan ) and his birth place was near Aras river. later he went to bacteria. Parthian and today tajiks are closest people to bacterians. I should to tell you for last time pashtu language maybe is similar to avestan because it is one of the Iranic languages so it is not new, but pahlavai language and  today persian is more similar to avestan.  I can't understand why you are try hard to claim such things. what is your sources for your claims. I can speak and understand avestan because it is the language that we pray every time. so why are you trying to convince me pashtu language is closest language to avesta. Agian you are wrong about  kurdish language is only close language to pahlavi. in diffrent places in iran you can find some local dialect of persian that is similar to pahlavi for example I know  awrami, sangesari and some local dialects around yazd and kerman in iran are very close to pahlavi too. I speak kermani dialect of old Dari (not Afghani Dari).Smile
 
There is no prove where he was born however he said he's pakhtrian and he spoke the pakhtrian language. Saying that he's from Azerbijan is off the since many of the safivadi book wrote about without any source. AND just to let you know the modern Avesta is not the same as it was 3000 years ago. If you study history of Avesta you would know what i am talking about. Avesta was distroyed by The Great Alexander. So be aware of that.
 
so why are you trying to convince me pashtu language is closest language to avesta
 
Dear I am not talking about the same Avesta that nowdays you can buy for $50.00 But the Old AVESTIAN, the real language of real Avestain is known as "OLD Pakhtrian"  and believe me there is alot of difference between "OLD" MIDDLE and NEW.
 
If you can't connect Avesta with Pashtu, then that's not AVESTA or Pakhtrian is just a lie and that Pakhtrian never existed. LOL we can't say that can WE????
 


-------------


Posted By: Nick
Date Posted: 06-Feb-2007 at 14:33
Originally posted by kajdom

I don't need to prove anything since I don't claim strange things you do. You need to back up your claims with relaiable sources,
 
I am not claiming anything??? But must modern Historians call Avestian the OLD Pakhtrian and that Avesta is a Eastern Aryanic langauge, not Western like Medians who had some Aryanic and some mixed with Assyrian, armenic etc etc.
 
 
And if you need some sources just tell me regarding What.
 
What part of this you don't understand???


-------------


Posted By: Nick
Date Posted: 07-Feb-2007 at 18:59
Originally posted by kajdom

Originally posted by Nick

Originally posted by kajdom

@ nick

with respect to pashtuns. your evidence doesn't show that pashtuns are from scythians. scythians lived in a vast area and most likely around caspian sea and north of black sea. since there is not much known scythian words you can't claim that pashtun language is close or closest one to scythian language. we just know that their language was similar to persian language and nothing else ( Greek historian mention that). about avestan I should to say old persian and pahlavi is closest language to avestan not pashtun. I speak one of the old and good preserved Iranian language very similar to pahlavi and beside I am zoroastrian and can understand old persian and avestan enough to judge which language is close to avestan.
 
Dear Kajdom I have said it before and i well say it  again NOT all Pashtuns are Scythians, Scythains was just a name they were refered to. Scythians are a tribe of Afghans. People think of Pashtuns as an one Ethinic/group/race, its like saying all English speakers are Angels or all the Parsi speakers (Persians) are from one race. No... Pashtu is the language the word Pashtun comes from Pashtuwan with the word "WAN" they mean the language. Pashtuns/Pathan etc etc are just words given to these Afghan people. They have always called themselves "AWghan" and having both the Language, culture, and racial backround of Pashtu you are considered 100% Afghan.
 
But Pashtu over time has been used as National langauge of Many empires like the Zafferides, even today modern Punjabis/Indics of Pakistan (Around 10 million) speak this Pashtu langauge (They are considered Pashtun) since they hav been living in the Afghan region Pashtunistan (Since 1965). If you ever go to Karachi, Pashtu is also spoken there, and what about Pashtu speakers of Iran (Sistan/Khorasan) So Pashtuns are not a single ethinic its just a langauge like Parsi/English/Franch etc etc.
 
DFear Think...Do you Think if i speak Persi, i am going to be a Persian??? NO that's why Persian in not Ethinic and so aren't the Pashtuns.
 
 
scythians lived in a vast area and most likely around caspian sea and north of black sea
 
There is no prove until this day to support this Idea. Even 200 years ago. European knew that Scythains were not natives of that area, they thought Scythains came from Siberia (North EAst Of China). And over time many other theories were present regarding the origions of Scythain, it wasn't until more discoveries found in Afghanistan which was older then the Achaemenid Empire, Assyrian Empire. And to date they never had any Empire until they faced pressure from north West "Achaemenid" Scythians had developed cities like Zarhaj south western Afghanistan bordered with Iran. And more Evidence from the Burned city founded in 2004 the city was dated 3500 years old, signs of Scythians were seen everywhere.
 
And name me any Euopean/Azerbjiani tribe or people bearing the evidence of Scythains? NON and over time even the Greek source mentions Sakazia.
 
we just know that their language was similar to persian language and nothing else ( Greek historian mention that)
 
dear first of all Scythain had no language other then Pakhtrian (Not until they reached Europe 800 BCE second how can Scythain be close to Persian when persian was not even around. Modern Persian is slang mixed Arabic/Samanidi. And the oldest Persian Langauge we have today is from Ferdowsi (Dari)
 
With all all restpact to people who created Parsi/Dari but dear Persian is not that old indeed far older then most of the European Langauges. And having the greatest Poets of all time.
 
about avestan I should to say old persian and pahlavi is closest language to avestan not pashtun.
 
dear you must have been mis-informed, yes i know there is a link between Medes and Avestains but not this far to say that Avesta belongs to Parsi or Palvi. they both are western Iranian languages and Pashto is the closest langauge to Avesta. Dear there are many sources out there which you might want to have a look at.
 
 
I speak one of the old and good preserved Iranian language very similar to pahlavi 
 
That has to be Kurdish cause there is no other langauge alive closest to Palavi other then Kurdish. BTW Kurdish is the oldest langauge in Iran, althought it has a lot of Islamic, Hebrew, Turkish words duo to different religions and believes of Kurdish people, but still older then Parsi.
 
 
  I am zoroastrian and can understand old persian and avestan enough to judge which language is close to avestan.
 
No hard feeling dear, but you need to prove yourself, cause i know there are many prefessors, ethnologist, lingustists, historians who believe Pashtu to be the closest to Avesta (And you what dear the Pashto langauge prove itself to be avestian either anyone agrees or disagree) yes indeed Parsi,Kurdi/Palavi and other iranian langauges were all influnced by Avestian after all it was the Language of Zoroastria. BTW if you read the book you would know that Zoroastria himself says that he's "Pakhtrian"
 
 
 
 


Dude I feel really sorry for you and the source you use for your information. who said zoroaster is so called pakhterian. He and his family are from Land of holy fire Azarabadegan ( today azarbaijan ) and his birth place was near Aras river. later he went to bacteria. Parthian and today tajiks are closest people to bacterians. I should to tell you for last time pashtu language maybe is similar to avestan because it is one of the Iranic languages so it is not new, but pahlavai language and  today persian is more similar to avestan.  I can't understand why you are try hard to claim such things. what is your sources for your claims. I can speak and understand avestan because it is the language that we pray every time. so why are you trying to convince me pashtu language is closest language to avesta. Agian you are wrong about  kurdish language is only close language to pahlavi. in diffrent places in iran you can find some local dialect of persian that is similar to pahlavi for example I know  awrami, sangesari and some local dialects around yazd and kerman in iran are very close to pahlavi too. I speak kermani dialect of old Dari (not Afghani Dari).Smile
 
 
Dear here is another sources from Iran "CAIS" it has some good facts.
 
In case if you are not aware of about eastern or western Aryanic languages. Dear there is nothing wrong with learning new things, as long as it makes sense.
 
 
Red tends to be older althought in decline. And i don't like the way these Iranians colour the Dari as same as Parsi, two reason.
a) Dari is older,
b) Dari has different accent, and its different from western Iranian "Persian"
c) The other reason Dari is older because its close to Avesta or Pashtu.
 
 
So many lingusitics may disagree with Dari as being the same as Iranian Farsi but over all Educated Iranian and historians think Iranians should speak Dari, and Iranians do write in Dari form. 
 
 
Besides Dari should not be western or Eastern since it was made of Palavi (western iranian), Quranic (Arabic) and Avestian (Pashtu/Pakhtrou). Another words its mixed.
 
As you can see Pashtu is also spoken in Khorasan province. However they have forgotten that sistani (South Eastern Iranians also speak Pashtu not Balochi) So the map is a bid of track and notice Ossetic is just place in one region of Europe, it's not true since they were very influncial their peck has reach Scandinavians.
 
 

Iranian Speaking World

 

 

Orange:  Western-Iranian Languages     

    Red:  Eastern-Iranian Languages
 
 
user%20posted%20image
 


-------------


Posted By: Suren
Date Posted: 07-Feb-2007 at 22:38

Hey Nick bro where did you find your Information?Wacko



-------------
Anfører


Posted By: Nick
Date Posted: 08-Feb-2007 at 16:42
Originally posted by sirius99

Hey Nick bro where did you find your Information?Wacko

 
I am Sorry boddy, (my bad habit) I don't give the web-address for everything i say.i just mention the sites (look above from Iranian source), i If you want just let me know.


-------------


Posted By: Suren
Date Posted: 08-Feb-2007 at 17:29
Give me a good source for last map. that sounds very silly. whoever paint this map is uneducated. this map hasn't all Iranian provinces and it is like a guy just used paint program to draw a map.

-------------
Anfører


Posted By: Suren
Date Posted: 08-Feb-2007 at 17:33
As far as I know in Baluchistan province of Iran we don't have any native pashtu speakers. they are illegal imigrants or refugees that just came to Iran during civil war in afghanistan. Iranian government has some plan to deports or send them back to afghanistan in next years.

-------------
Anfører


Posted By: Nick
Date Posted: 08-Feb-2007 at 20:39
Originally posted by sirius99

Give me a good source for last map. that sounds very silly. whoever paint this map is uneducated. this map hasn't all Iranian provinces and it is like a guy just used paint program to draw a map.
 
Sure this is where i got this map from, http://www.tarjomeh.com/images/map-languages.gif - http://www.tarjomeh.com/images/map-languages.gif
 
 
 
http://www.tarjomeh.com/index.htm - http://www.tarjomeh.com/index.htm  Tarjomeh Localization Ltd as an international Farsi translation provider has a Dutch company as its mother company. They have staff from Iran to Iraq etc etc
 
Sounds silly LOL maybe but they're not bad, they have considered the history of the region.
 
Have you ever asked yourself why does iran calls one of their province as "sistan/Balochistan" its like two provinces right, w'll yes its two province combined. South are the balochis (Western Iranian who came to that Area).
 
Althought the historians have considered Sakastan/sistan to be much bigger but ever since that south area is taken by balochis, it wouldn't be right to count as Sistan.
Here is the map of later Sakastan during sussanian time. Note that Sistani is pashtu not Balochi.
  http://img411.imageshack.us/img411/2130/sakastanws7.jpg - http://img411.imageshack.us/img411/2130/sakastanws7.jpg  ">
 
BTW When Afghans took over Kandahar, then Kandaharis claimed Sistan as their own. In fact many wars did take place. Anyhow later the Qajers allowed sistanis to go to Afghanistan, Amullah Khan of Afg recorded 39,000, even today if you go to karachi you would find Shepari tribe who claim to be from sistan. In fact sistan is always mention in Afghan tribal songs along with Khorasan. Anyways you get my point.
 
"This was a direct challenge to both Kandahar and Persia since they both claimed Seistan" http://www.iranchamber.com/history/articles/siege_of_herat08.php - http://www.iranchamber.com/history/articles/siege_of_herat08.php
 
And the reason Eastern Khorasanis have been coloured as Green (Dari) is because Eastern Khorasanis were Pashtun at one time, And Pashtuns speak Dari. Not different from Afghans. The Number of native Afghan-Iranian reported by iranian government was always low. During the Shah's time they were numbered as 290,000 but current government count the number as 3000, according to other sources (Iranian Sunnis) the number of Afghans are as high as 3.5 million in Khorasan alone including 2 million Afghan refugees it could reach 5 million. So anyways that's political/religous we're not going there.
 
 


-------------


Posted By: Suren
Date Posted: 08-Feb-2007 at 21:29

First of all, I don't accept your idea about sistan belong to pashtu speaker and second your idea about khorasani peaple were  pashtu people at one time. it is totaly wrong becuze those area you mentioned were always under farsi speaker domination and pashtu speakers came from multan to central afghanistan around 250-300 years ago. beside one of you afghan users mentioned before that pashtu is not a race but a confedrasion of diffrent etnicities who speak pashtu language.



-------------
Anfører


Posted By: Nick
Date Posted: 08-Feb-2007 at 22:04
Originally posted by sirius99

First of all, I don't accept your idea about sistan belong to pashtu speaker and second your idea about khorasani peaple were  pashtu people at one time. it is totaly wrong becuze those area you mentioned were always under farsi speaker domination and pashtu speakers came from multan to central afghanistan around 250-300 years ago. beside one of you afghan users mentioned before that pashtu is not a race but a confedrasion of diffrent etnicities who speak pashtu language.

 
 
beside one of you afghan users mentioned before that pashtu is not a race but a confedrasion of diffrent etnicities who speak pashtu language.
 
 
That may have been me. anyways its true pashtu is a language, and pashtuns are pashtu speakers, (It should be more like Pashtuwan). Just like how we say persian and count persian as an ethnic, but its not really an ethnic, same goes for Pashtu.
now notice i said "Afghan" not pashtun.
 
 
it is totaly wrong becuze those area you mentioned were always under farsi speaker domination
yeah so?? Even right now all of Afghanistan is under and was always under Farsi Domination. In fact Farsi was created in Afghanistan. SO they also speak the DAri "Real FArsi" language (language of Rumi)
 
 
First of all, I don't accept your idea about sistan belong to pashtu speaker and second your idea about khorasani peaple were  pashtu people at one time.
My friend i really can't make you accept anything everyone has their own point of views.
 
I think i already broken the rule by jumbing to different topics, if you want we can discuss this in another section. You might know something that i may not know so we can share ideas, But not in here.
Thanks boddy
 


-------------


Posted By: the_oz
Date Posted: 21-Feb-2007 at 13:52
Originally posted by Nick

Originally posted by EGETÜRK

sakas were turkic...
 
Egeturk we still havn't found the root of Turks and you think Scythains were Turks????
 
All we know about Turks is their massive expantion during central Asian Massive waves of movement less then 1700 years, and the second Turkish movement known as Mongols, and then 3rd one into modern Turkey and intermarriages with Europeans (And with Native  Aryanics)
 


you still havent found the root of Turks or you didnt want to learn?

root of turks is written here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orhon_inscriptions - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orhon_inscriptions

sorry for disturbing you white aryanic friendWink


Posted By: Tar Szerénd
Date Posted: 22-Feb-2007 at 04:34
Hi!
 
The scythians were the iranian nomad tribes who lived north from Persia, and from the territ. of Mezopotamia, in Mezopotamia, in the Pontus steppe, In the Ukranian steppe, in Moldavia, some of them in Walachia and in East-Hungary, from the 9-8 Cent. BC to the 3-1 cent. BC (in different regions in different cent-s, and certenly the people survived the collaps of their tribes and states, and lived after that under other rulers, tribes etc)
 
All the others were nomads , who were living a scythian way of live. They were turcic (not 'turk', taht is the name of the 550's-740's  tribe union leaded by ogus tribes (f.e. turges, on ok etc), paleo siberian, ugrian, bajkalian, mongolian etc. Not scythian originated. Bad english, I know, but I hope it is clear what  I mean.
 
TSZ
 


Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: 23-Feb-2007 at 11:15
"Egeturk we still havn't found the root of Turks and you think Scythains were Turks???? "
 
You don't found,but it is already found by many Turkologists including Peter B. Golden.
 
You just don't want to accept and you always lie about history because of your ideals.


Posted By: shinai
Date Posted: 25-Feb-2007 at 18:43

the term iranic is diffrent form what Iranian are today.Iranian peopel are mostly assimilated by Iranic Tribes.

When It has been said that the scythian were Iranic it does not mean they remaind Iranic.Their nomadic culture was so close to the Turkic tribes so they mixed and assimilated by the Turkic tribes.
Their race should not be diffrent too much from these day Turks.
Scythian took the caucase , and Khorasan pathes to reach to Turkisatn, Azerbaijan, and Anatolia.
Oghuz peopel took the same way. Their social life was very simialr,
I guess after scythian peopel called them Turks


Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: 18-Mar-2007 at 15:44
Originally posted by the_oz

Originally posted by Nick

Originally posted by EGETÜRK

sakas were turkic...
 
Egeturk we still havn't found the root of Turks and you think Scythains were Turks????
 
All we know about Turks is their massive expantion during central Asian Massive waves of movement less then 1700 years, and the second Turkish movement known as Mongols, and then 3rd one into modern Turkey and intermarriages with Europeans (And with Native  Aryanics)
 


you still havent found the root of Turks or you didnt want to learn?

root of turks is written here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orhon_inscriptions - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orhon_inscriptions

sorry for disturbing you white aryanic friendWink


Aryanic friend ? :) since when iranians are aryan. as all we know they are arabic, indian mixture who consider they are actually white :D


-------------


Posted By: shinai
Date Posted: 18-Mar-2007 at 20:08
Originally posted by Kipcak

Originally posted by the_oz

Originally posted by Nick

Originally posted by EGETÜRK

sakas were turkic...
 
Egeturk we still havn't found the root of Turks and you think Scythains were Turks????
 
All we know about Turks is their massive expantion during central Asian Massive waves of movement less then 1700 years, and the second Turkish movement known as Mongols, and then 3rd one into modern Turkey and intermarriages with Europeans (And with Native  Aryanics)
 


you still havent found the root of Turks or you didnt want to learn?

root of turks is written here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orhon_inscriptions - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orhon_inscriptions

sorry for disturbing you white aryanic friendWink


Aryanic friend ? :) since when iranians are aryan. as all we know they are arabic, indian mixture who consider they are actually white :D
First of all We, Iranians, do not know ourselves white, And second aryans were not white, they were central asian as we are now. We do not need to consider ourselves white because we have contributed to the world more than many nation around us.Do you have any problem whith that we are aryan?Wink I donot have any problem with you being a Turk even you may have a light skin.


Posted By: Suren
Date Posted: 19-Mar-2007 at 00:35
We don't consider ourselve white european but simply white even if a lot of us will pass a european white.
 
@ Kipcak
 
Your comment about Iranians is wrong, it is just like saying turks are a mixture of Chinese and Indians.


-------------
Anfører


Posted By: Maharbbal
Date Posted: 19-Mar-2007 at 19:44
Originally posted by shinai


We do not need to consider ourselves white because we have contributed to the world more than many nation around us.


Show me the scale of "regional comparative contribution to the world" better known as RCCTTW... Confused


-------------
I am a free donkey!


Posted By: Bulldog
Date Posted: 20-Mar-2007 at 14:56
Shinai
We do not need to consider ourselves white because we have contributed to the world more than many nation around us.
 
Oh hasn't everyone, ask any extremist nationalist and he/she'll tell you exactly the same, just instead of Iranian they'll be another nation LOL Sorry but that was a very silly and childish comment.
 
Most Persians I know arn't particularly "white", standing next to an Englishmen they look Arab or Indian, most Persians I know have pretty dark skin. Infact the Iran Turks I know in general have lighter skin.


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



Posted By: Suren
Date Posted: 20-Mar-2007 at 16:05
Originally posted by Bulldog

Shinai
We do not need to consider ourselves white because we have contributed to the world more than many nation around us.
 
Oh hasn't everyone, ask any hardcore nationalist and he/she'll tell you exactly the same, just instead of Iranian they'll be another nation LOL Sorry but that was a very silly and childish comment.
 
Most Persians I know arn't particularly "white", standing next to an Englishmen they look Arab or Indian, most Persians I know have pretty dark skin. Infact the Iran Turks I know in general have lighter skin.
 
Maybe you hang out with Khuzestanis. They are Arabs and some mixed with Persian. They are darker than normal Persian. I can tell you I have seen the same degree dark Azaris in baku and Kayseri, too.


-------------
Anfører


Posted By: Bulldog
Date Posted: 20-Mar-2007 at 17:09

Well a few of them are from Shiraz but one girl is from Isfahan and she has light skin.

Your right some Turks are pretty dark aswell.
 
Basically basing a nation upon a certain colour is wrong, there are always exceptions.


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



Posted By: shinai
Date Posted: 20-Mar-2007 at 17:52
Iranian do not have the inferiority problem, we look like arabs or Indian, so?


Posted By: Suren
Date Posted: 20-Mar-2007 at 18:22
Exactly, we like each other no matter from which ethnicity background, which color, and have which religion. We are Iranian and proud of that.

-------------
Anfører


Posted By: Bilgin
Date Posted: 24-Mar-2007 at 15:12
Hi, i was searching about Scythian suits, and found here. I like your topics. Moderator is right, it doesnt matter who we are. Because the most important thing in our lives is to die in one day. All of us has the same things, we are from the same origin, humanbeings. And we are going to go to the same place, ground. On the other hand, cultures are important in history. In the last 200 years mostly western people searched old history. So their ideas are very different, we can say that their opions are little selfish, and politic. Most of the scientists are thinking everything from their own angle. So science must be for science, not for other purposes. We have to search and learn everything for science, not for politic orientation. Otherwise we lie. Or it is not a history science, it will be a official history like Kurdish history. Then we may look at to history in the right way. You can not erase historical realities by accepting they are absent. Culture is important, genealogy also. We must notice history in cultural angle. And we must accept that everything about our ancestries are logical acceptance. Who can say 50 step ancestries? :)


Posted By: DayI
Date Posted: 24-Mar-2007 at 17:50
Originally posted by sirius99

Originally posted by Bulldog

Shinai
We do not need to consider ourselves white because we have contributed to the world more than many nation around us.
 
Oh hasn't everyone, ask any hardcore nationalist and he/she'll tell you exactly the same, just instead of Iranian they'll be another nation LOL Sorry but that was a very silly and childish comment.
 
Most Persians I know arn't particularly "white", standing next to an Englishmen they look Arab or Indian, most Persians I know have pretty dark skin. Infact the Iran Turks I know in general have lighter skin.
 
Maybe you hang out with Khuzestanis. They are Arabs and some mixed with Persian. They are darker than normal Persian. I can tell you I have seen the same degree dark Azaris in baku and Kayseri, too.
ahwaz is in Khuzestan wright? I knew a persian guy from there and he didnt look like you've described them :) Even for joking i called him "arab" or "tazy" (this ones history is long to tell) he gone mad :D


-------------
Bu mıntıka'nın Dayı'sı
http://imageshack.us - [IMG - http://www.allempires.com/forum/uploads/DayI/2006-03-17_164450_bscap021.jpg -


Posted By: northpakistani
Date Posted: 31-Mar-2007 at 15:34
THE SCYTHIANS MIGRATED ORIGINALLY FROM SIBERIA (WIKIPEDIA.COM) AND THEY LATER ON INVADED THE SOUTHERN REGIONS WHICH THEREFORE CONTRIBUTES TO THE PERSIAN IN THEIR BLOOD.  PLEASE DO NOT CONFUSE THEM AS BEING iRANIAN, THEY WERE MIGRANTS FROM NORTH SIBERIA.

STUDY PROPERLY BEFORE POSTING REPLIES.


-------------
A man should look for what is, and not for what he thinks should be.

-- Albert Einstein


Posted By: northpakistani
Date Posted: 31-Mar-2007 at 15:36
I KNOW THE SCYTHIANS, BECAUSE MY FAMILY NAME IS DERIVED FROM THAT TRIBE. I AM FROM NORTH PAKISTAN, AND THERE ARE MANY GENERATIONS OF SCYTHIAN TRIBES SCATTERED THROUGHOUT PERSIA, AFGHANISTAN AND NORTHERN PAKISTAN REGIONS.

-------------
A man should look for what is, and not for what he thinks should be.

-- Albert Einstein


Posted By: Kerimoglu
Date Posted: 01-Apr-2007 at 01:31
No, this is just one of theories about the origin of Saka's , that they may be are descendants of Sakha Yakuts. But not proven though. I believe, according to Rene Grousset, Huns are also seperated from Scythians, as did German tribe (only German).

-------------
History is a farm. Nations are farmers. What they planted before will show what is going to grow tomorrow!


Posted By: Tar Szerénd
Date Posted: 01-Apr-2007 at 12:25
I don't understand the last sentence.
 
TSZ


Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: 01-Apr-2007 at 13:15
Originally posted by Kerimoglu

No, this is just one of theories about the origin of Saka's , that they may be are descendants of Sakha Yakuts. But not proven though. I believe, according to Rene Grousset, Huns are also seperated from Scythians, as did German tribe (only German).
 
Saka Turks and Iranic Saka's are different.And Huns have no relation with Schytians.


Posted By: northpakistani
Date Posted: 01-Apr-2007 at 19:15
exactly. your right Xiongnu Hun.
 
(are you really a Hun??)


-------------
A man should look for what is, and not for what he thinks should be.

-- Albert Einstein


Posted By: Bulldog
Date Posted: 02-Apr-2007 at 08:43
Were the Hun branch of Doqquz Oghuz Hun-Xiongu?

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



Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: 03-Apr-2007 at 22:01
http://csen.org/Pubs_Sales_Reviews/Nomads_Eurasian_Steppes_Text/DownLoadBooksIndex.html -
http://csen.org/Pubs_Sales_Reviews/Nomads_Eurasian_Steppes_Text/DownLoadBooksIndex.html
 
399 pages of (mainly) Scythian Archaeology and origin theories (obviously you should pay before downloading).
 
I think to suggest that the Scythians were Turks is equivalent to suggesting that the Romans were Brazilian - i.e. Some of the Scythians were just one of the many groups that went on, much, much later to form the people known as Turks. Just as other groups of Scythians contributed to all the peoples later living in the areas they dominated at various times.
 


Posted By: DerDoc
Date Posted: 05-Apr-2007 at 18:34
Originally posted by Xiongnu Hun

Originally posted by Kerimoglu

No, this is just one of theories about the origin of Saka's , that they may be are descendants of Sakha Yakuts. But not proven though. I believe, according to Rene Grousset, Huns are also seperated from Scythians, as did German tribe (only German).
 
Saka Turks and Iranic Saka's are different.And Huns have no relation with Schytians.


The term "Sakha" (self-designation of Turkic Yakuts) is evidently derived from the word "Saka" ("Scythian").

But this does not mean that Scythians were proto-Turks. It is the other way around. The "Sakhas" (modern Yakuts) are - in part - descendats of early Indo-European nomads who - at some time in the course of history - adopted a Turkic language.

The early Turkic confederations were only centered around the Altay mountains and expanded from there throughout Eurasia. They conquered other peoples, and they were conquered by others. In the same fassion, they adopted other languages or imposed their own language on others.

The use of Non-Turkic words in early Turkish languages gives a small insight into this process. The Turkish title "Khan", for example, is derived from the proto-Mongolic "Khaqan", first used by the Mongolic Zuan-Zuan (Rouran). The ancient Turkic military title "Yabghu" is derived from an Indo-Europan word. The lack of vowel-harmony in the word ("Y-a-b-gh-u") clearly proves the Non-Turkic origin of the word.

Besides that, the early Turkc belonged to the Mongoloid  cluster of East Asian peoples - in total contrast to the Caucasian Tokharians and Iranians. Early art works of the Scythians in Central Asia clearly show Western Eurasian features:





Turkic peoples had East Asian features when they moved into Greater Iran. The Mongoloid features of the Turks are described in many Persian poems, and - because of their East Asian looks - the Turks were regarded as very handsome and pretty by the Persian writers. The term "Turk" has different meanings in Persian poetry. Depending on the poem's plot and mysticism, iIt can eather mean "barbaric" and "nomadic" (as in Ferdowsi's "Shâhnâma"), or - in this context - also "free" and "independent". On the other hand, Turks were also known as fierce and successful fighters, and the word "Turk" may also mean "strong", "handsome", "pretty".

In anyway, the Mongoloid features of the Turks were always mentioned by Persian poets, especially by the Persian poet Nizami who wrote many love poems for his Qipchaq-Turkic wife whom he had freed from slavery.

The East Asian looks of the early Oghuz Turks - and of the Seljuq ruling family - is also attested in many art works:



The most interesting of all is this sculpture:




It's a depiction of an early Seljuq prince and clearly shows the Mongoloid features.

Please also keep in mind that the word "Scythian" is related to "Sogdian", a related Iranian-speaking people in Central Asia. The Scythians are also shown as Caucasian looking in many historical Chinese paintings:



Two Sogdian and Chinese Buddhist monks:



So, in either way, the Scythians were Non-Turks and Indo-Europeans. Both, their language and the way they are shown in historical sources, point toward a Western (Indo-European) origin.

All other views are minority views with no academic value.



Posted By: Bulldog
Date Posted: 05-Apr-2007 at 19:05
Saka-Yakuts are not descendants of Indo-European people's, if the Scythians were in these regions its likely they would have had Turkic tribes among them, Turkic people's always inhabbited the Altay region, Scythian tribal confederaton seems to have stretched to there according to maps.

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



Posted By: DerDoc
Date Posted: 05-Apr-2007 at 20:18
Originally posted by Bulldog

Saka-Yakuts are not descendants of Indo-European people's, if the Scythians were in these regions its likely they would have had Turkic tribes among them, Turkic people's always inhabbited the Altay region, Scythian tribal confederaton seems to have stretched to there according to maps.


The Yaquts are in part descendants of Indo-European nomads, although their East Asian nomadic (Turkic) origin is far more significant. However, their self-designation "Sakha" is evidently derived from "Saka" ("Skythian").

The Yaquts are inhabitants of Siberia, and not of the Altay region. So, the Yaquts are neither descendants of the original Turks nor of the Indo-European Scythians, although both groups had their influences on them. The still very present nomadic life-style of the Yakuts reflects the strong Turkic on them:

http://home.centurytel.net/westernhorde/Tents/lotsofkids.gif

Map of Turkic expansion (note the origins of the Turks and the small geographical area they inhabitted in the 6th century):


Their language today is not Indo-European, but the origin of the self-desigantion is clearly Scythian and Indo-European. It's kind of comparable to the Bulgarians. Although modern Bulgarians are mostly descendants of Indo-European Slavs and speak a Slavic language, their self-designation - "Bulgar" - is derived from a Medieval Turkic nomadic confederation.


Posted By: Anton
Date Posted: 06-Apr-2007 at 19:06
Originally posted by DerDoc


The Yaquts are in part descendants of Indo-European nomads, although their East Asian nomadic (Turkic) origin is far more significant. However, their self-designation "Sakha" is evidently derived from "Saka" ("Skythian").

The Yaquts are inhabitants of Siberia, and not of the Altay region. So, the Yaquts are neither descendants of the original Turks nor of the Indo-European Scythians, although both groups had their influences on them. The still very present nomadic life-style of the Yakuts reflects the strong Turkic on them:

http://home.centurytel.net/westernhorde/Tents/lotsofkids.gif

 
My wife (who is Yakut herself) made a comment on this picture. She said that those kind of Jurts are made in the very north of Yakutia inhabited by Evenks and Jukogirs but not Yakuts. Yakuts do not build them for centuries, probably since the time of their coming to Yakutia. Instead they built a kind of wooden houses (initially the looked more like Jurts but nowadays the are more Russian style houses). This is logical since most of them live in places rich in forrests. Nomadic life-style obviously is not needed (and is difficult) for those conditions. Hence, there is no need to create houses that are easy to move from place to place. Which basically probably means that people in the photo you posted are not Yakuts Wink 
 
Also keep in mind that temperature there goes to -50 during winter and gets higher  than 30-35 in summer. In this case wooden houses seem to be more appropriate to keep the temperature inside close to normal. Well.. I don't know but that seems logical to me.
 
Their "Turkicness" as you call it is seen in their Turkic language and still very strong habit to breeding of horses for food (in addition to hunting and fishing). They are rather small in size, cute...
 
...and very tasty Smile
 
Word Saha had initially two meanings in Yakutian -- Yakut and "human". Although being clearly turkic tribes they do have some connection to Skythian tribes (at least according to some scholars) with whom they intermixed somewhere somehow.


-------------
.


Posted By: DerDoc
Date Posted: 06-Apr-2007 at 22:16
Originally posted by Anton

... Their "Turkicness" as you call it is seen in their Turkic language and still very strong habit to breeding of horses for food (in addition to hunting and fishing). ...


I agree with the language part, but not with the horse breeding part. Breeding horses is not really a "Turkic habit" (or maybe you mean only "breeding for food"?!)

The domestication of the horse is strongly connected to the Indo-European expansions more than 4000 years ago (or even more?!). In fact, the domestication of the horse was one of the main reasons for the vast expansion of Indo-European languages accross Eurasia, more than 3000 years before the Turkic expansion. The horse was a holy animal in the PIE society, and Indo-European names, such as "Hippocrates" (Greek) or "Tahmasp" (Persian) - all containing the word "horse" - reflect this society.


Posted By: Anton
Date Posted: 07-Apr-2007 at 09:10
Originally posted by DerDoc



The domestication of the horse is strongly connected to the Indo-European expansions more than 4000 years ago (or even more?!). In fact, the domestication of the horse was one of the main reasons for the vast expansion of Indo-European languages accross Eurasia, more than 3000 years before the Turkic expansion. The horse was a holy animal in the PIE society, and Indo-European names, such as "Hippocrates" (Greek) or "Tahmasp" (Persian) - all containing the word "horse" - reflect this society.
 
I agree. Even Moesi (branch of Thracians) in the north of Balkans used horse breeding. Most likely they adopted this habbit from Skythians or Sarmats.


-------------
.


Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: 07-Apr-2007 at 15:17
Schtians were Iranıc Nomads with Turkic leaders and some Turkic tribes in People,also most of the army.


Posted By: DerDoc
Date Posted: 07-Apr-2007 at 16:47
Actually, it was mostly the other way around. After the expansion of Altaic peoples, Indo-European-speaking peoples still formed the ruling elite of many of these nomadic confederations, including certain, so-called "Hunnic" tribes.

Two of these "Indo-European Hunnic tribes" were the Xionites/Chionites and the Hephthalites ("White Huns"). The Indo-European ruling class of these two confederations is accepted by the majority of scholars, since it was first proposed by the Japanese scholar Enoki. The use of Indo-Euopean (in this case East-Iranian) languages in Hephthalite and Xionite realms is attested. What is also important is that these tribes were mostly Caucasian, in stark contrast to the East Asian Turkic and Mongol hordes.


Posted By: northpakistani
Date Posted: 07-Apr-2007 at 20:16
check out the scythians :  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scythian - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scythian


-------------
A man should look for what is, and not for what he thinks should be.

-- Albert Einstein


Posted By: barbar
Date Posted: 08-Apr-2007 at 12:03
Originally posted by DerDoc



Map of Turkic expansion (note the origins of the Turks and the small geographical area they inhabitted in the 6th century):


 
First of all, you should have given your reference. Otherwise you are just making nonesense.
 
In that map, the first region only designated to one of the small turkic tribe: Ashina Turks (Gok-turks), not to the whole Turkic tribes. Here is the quote from Suishu, about the Sixth century Turkic tribes:
 
Suishu, v.84:

The forebear of the Tiele belonged to the Xiongnu descendants. The Tiele had the largest divisions of tribes. They occupied along the valleys, scattering in the vast region west to the Western Sea (Caspian). In the area north of Tula River, are the Pugu, Tongluo, Weihu (Uyghur), Bayegu, Fuluo, which are composited into the Sijin legion, other tribes such as Mengchen, Turuhu, Sijie, Hun, Huxue and so forth, also dwelled in this area. They have a 20,000 invincible armies. In the west of Hami, the north of Karashahr, near the edge of Sayan, dwell the Qipi, Boluozhi, Yizhi, Supo, Nahe, Wuhu (Oguz), Hugu, Yezhi, Yunihu and so forth. They have a 20,000 invincible armies. From the south-west of Altai Mount, are the Xueyantuo (Syr-Tardush), Zhileer, Shipan, Daqi and so forth. They have a 10,000 invincible armies. In north of Samarkand and by the river of Volga, dwell the Hedie, Hejie, Bahu, Bigan, Juhai, Hebixi, Hecuo, Suba, Yemo, Keda and so forth. They have a 30,000 invincible armies. From the east to the west of Caspian, are the Sulu, Hesan (Khazar), Suoye, Miecu, Longhu and so forth. They have a 8,000 invincible armies. In the east of Byzantine, they are the Enqu, Alan (Alani), Beiru, Jiuli, Fuwahun and so forth. They have a nearly 20,000 invincible armies. To the south of Lake Baikal, dwell the Dubo (Tuva) and some other tribes. The names of these tribes are different, but all of them can be classified as Tiele. The Tiele don't have a master, they are subjected to both Eastern and Western Gokturks separately. They don't have permanent residence, moved with the change of grass and water. They are only characteristic are fierce and brutal. But also a good rider and archer. They are especially greed without restraint and make their lives by looting. These tribes toward the west are more cultivated, they breed a lot more on cattles and sheeps, but are shortage of horses. Since the Gokturks had established a state, they have been recruited as the auxiliary of empire and conquered both east and westard, thus annexed the all of the northern lands.
 
 
 
 


-------------
Either make a history or become a history.


Posted By: barbar
Date Posted: 08-Apr-2007 at 12:12
Originally posted by DerDoc

What is also important is that these tribes were mostly Caucasian, in stark contrast to the East Asian Turkic and Mongol hordes.
 
So we are having another racist. LOL
 
Turkic people are not, were not East Asian since their known history. They were known to be originated from Central Asia. Yes.  they were mixed with their neighbouring groups, as they were not racist.  This doesn't make them East Asian, as their history and culture were based in Central Asia.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 


-------------
Either make a history or become a history.


Posted By: DerDoc
Date Posted: 08-Apr-2007 at 14:03
Originally posted by barbar

So we are having another racist. LOL


It is not racist to speak out facts. However, distorting facts is considered "racism". Since the vast majority of modern Turkic-speakers are not East Asian looking, and since the time of Mustafa Kemal Atatürk, these Turkic-speakers believe that they are descendants of ancient Turks and Huns, they are trying to falsify history by claiming that "ancient Turks were also Caucasian looking". This contradicts all historical sources available.

The Chinese chronicle Zhou Shu clearly differenciates between Caucasian "Hephthalites" and their East Asian, Turkic neibours "Tüe'chi" (see Enoki, "On the nationality of Hephthalites", 1955).

Even frescos from the 9th and 10th century clearly prove the East Asian features of Turks - here the Uyghurs, for example:



And here a Seljuq prince:



"... There may have also been ancient Indo-European influenc among the Turkic speaking peoples of the Altai and Sayan, as Shor and their neighbors seem to have fewer Mongoloid traits than the ancient Turks. ..." - Prof. http://pandora.cii.wwu.edu/vajda/ - Edward Vajda ,  Western Washington University, "Altai Turks" (http://pandora.cii.wwu.edu/vajda/ea210/Altai.htm)

I guess you also call Prof. Vajda a "racist", right?!
 
Turkic people are not, were not East Asian since their known history. They were known to be originated from Central Asia.


Now, THIS is racism ...


Posted By: barbar
Date Posted: 09-Apr-2007 at 06:55
Originally posted by DerDoc


It is not racist to speak out facts. However, distorting facts is considered "racism". Since the vast majority of modern Turkic-speakers are not East Asian looking, and since the time of Mustafa Kemal Atatürk, these Turkic-speakers believe that they are descendants of ancient Turks and Huns, they are trying to falsify history by claiming that "ancient Turks were also Caucasian looking". This contradicts all historical sources available.
 
 
As far as I know, Panturkists claim otherwise that their ancestors were Mongoloid, even Korean and Japanese are their kins.
 
I really want to see the historical facts you are talking about.  Before you tell us how ancient Turks looked like, give us historical facts about who were the ancient Turks.


The Chinese chronicle Zhou Shu clearly differenciates between Caucasian "Hephthalites" and their East Asian, Turkic neibours "Tüe'chi" (see Enoki, "On the nationality of Hephthalites", 1955).
 
Show us the exact qoute from Zhoushu. Tue'chi if Enoki meant to be Tujue were only a small leading tribe among Turkic groups. According to Chinese chrinicles, Yetai (Hephthlites) was one of the Tiele (Tura) tribes as those of the Oghuz and other Turkic tribes. Tiele were Gaoche, Gaoche were the decendants of Dingling, Dingling were the nephews of Xiongnu.  Dingling were clearly discribed to have strong caucausoid features. Historical records, archeological and even genetic studies are proving the very early existance of caucasoid people in the north of present day China and southern Siberia.  
 
Even frescos from the 9th and 10th century clearly prove the East Asian features of Turks - here the Uyghurs, for example:



And here a Seljuq prince:


 
 
These only show the later mixed features of the Turkic people, you can't back up your theory for the original Turkic people using these, as Turkic people had much much longer history.  
 

"... There may have also been ancient Indo-European influenc among the Turkic speaking peoples of the Altai and Sayan, as Shor and their neighbors seem to have fewer Mongoloid traits than the ancient Turks. ..." - Prof. http://pandora.cii.wwu.edu/vajda/ - Edward Vajda ,  Western Washington University, "Altai Turks" (http://pandora.cii.wwu.edu/vajda/ea210/Altai.htm)

I guess you also call Prof. Vajda a "racist", right?!
 
 
You should know there are many theories. A claim without any solid proof is lack of credential which is only useful for revisionists.
 
  
Turkic people are not, were not East Asian since their known history. They were known to be originated from Central Asia.


Now, THIS is racism ...
 
Hope you don't have problem in understanding English, and try to look up the definition of Racism.
 


-------------
Either make a history or become a history.


Posted By: gman
Date Posted: 17-Jun-2007 at 02:11
 
The East Asian's features on those frescos don't really say much about their true racial look. The art of portrait, drawing the exact look of a person actually started in Europe with the Renaissance. Topkapi place has some miniatures from the 15th and 16th centuries ,You can actually see that the majority of those people in the miniatures have East Asian facial features on them.The reason is, they are not the exact portraits of those people.The Ottomans and Persians miniatures borrowed many technics from the Chinese miniature and fresco arts. Drawing the face of non-chinese as a Chinese face was one of those technic. Many Persian miniatures and frescos from the early times also used slanted eyes and the round face  in their drawings as well.The realism in drawings were the product of the the rennaissance movement. Symbolic and stylized styles were favoured by the artists before the realism. Eastern Asian features were a style and copied by Turks and Persian  from the earliest times.
 
regards
 
Originally posted by DerDoc

Originally posted by barbar

So we are having another racist. LOL


It is not racist to speak out facts. However, distorting facts is considered "racism". Since the vast majority of modern Turkic-speakers are not East Asian looking, and since the time of Mustafa Kemal Atatürk, these Turkic-speakers believe that they are descendants of ancient Turks and Huns, they are trying to falsify history by claiming that "ancient Turks were also Caucasian looking". This contradicts all historical sources available.

The Chinese chronicle Zhou Shu clearly differenciates between Caucasian "Hephthalites" and their East Asian, Turkic neibours "Tüe'chi" (see Enoki, "On the nationality of Hephthalites", 1955).

Even frescos from the 9th and 10th century clearly prove the East Asian features of Turks - here the Uyghurs, for example:



And here a Seljuq prince:



"... There may have also been ancient Indo-European influenc among the Turkic speaking peoples of the Altai and Sayan, as Shor and their neighbors seem to have fewer Mongoloid traits than the ancient Turks. ..." - Prof. http://pandora.cii.wwu.edu/vajda/ - Edward Vajda ,  Western Washington University, "Altai Turks" (http://pandora.cii.wwu.edu/vajda/ea210/Altai.htm)

I guess you also call Prof. Vajda a "racist", right?!
 
Turkic people are not, were not East Asian since their known history. They were known to be originated from Central Asia.


Now, THIS is racism ...



Print Page | Close Window

Bulletin Board Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 9.56a - http://www.webwizforums.com
Copyright ©2001-2009 Web Wiz - http://www.webwizguide.com