Print Page | Close Window

Gotvandi (Dezfuli), Guti and Gothic

Printed From: History Community ~ All Empires
Category: General History
Forum Name: Alternative History
Forum Description: Discussion of Unorthodox Historical Theories & Approaches
Moderators: Sarmat12, Sparten
URL: http://www.allempires.net/forum_posts.asp?TID=27064
Printed Date: 19-Oct-2018 at 01:22
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 11.10 - http://www.webwizforums.com


Topic: Gotvandi (Dezfuli), Guti and Gothic
Posted By: Cyrus Shahmiri
Subject: Gotvandi (Dezfuli), Guti and Gothic
Date Posted: 17-Apr-2009 at 08:13
I moved this post from this thread: http://www.allempires.net/forum_posts.asp?TID=27007 - Who were the black-headed nations? to here:
 
Gotvand is a village near the city of Dezful in the north Khuzestan province, this is its exact location: http://www.traveljournals.net/explore/iran/map/m4303006/gotvand.html - http://www.traveljournals.net/explore/iran/map/m4303006/gotvand.html , there is almost a large percent of light-haired people (Mam-ruti, according to Mesopotamian texts) in this region, for example one of the most famous Iranian who was born in this village is Mohammad-Ali Ramin who has blonde hair.


Mohammad-Ali Ramin, Presidential Advisor
 
A Gotvandi woman in traditional Khuzestani dress:
 
 
A Dezfuli boy in traditional costume:
 
 
And this the location of ancient Gutium (land of Gutians):
 
 
As you see this is almost the same location of Gotvand and Dezful in the north of Khuzestan province of Iran, we know the only people who were called Mam-ruti (light-haired) in the Mesopotamian texts were Gutians and we see in some Babylonian inscriptions that they are called blonde-headed people, like this one:
 


Gotvand means land of Goti in Dezfuli language, of course Dezfuli is also an Iranian language but the pronunciation of the words differ from Iranian languages, they themselves believe that this is similar to English, something about Dezfuli language in Persian: http://www.dezonline.ir/viewtopic.php?f=73&t=582 - http://www.dezonline.ir/viewtopic.php?f=73&t=582 , for example http://www.allempires.com/forum/uploads/Others/Dezfuli.mp3 - Click Here , you can hear Dezfuli words and their Persian translation.
 
There are some linguistic books about Dezfuli/Gotvandi language in Persian, most of them talk about a non-Iranian origin of this language, for example there is a book titled "Dezfuli - English common origin words", you can read here that it was among top linguistic books of 2008 in Iran:  http://www.ifriran.org/pdf/Bibliotheque/Nouvelles%20acquisitions%20iraniennes.pdf - http://www.ifriran.org/pdf/Bibliotheque/Nouvelles%20acquisitions%20iraniennes.pdf
 
NEJAT'ALI, Nosratollâh
Vâzhegân-e moshâbeh-e Dezfuli - Engelisi.- Qom : Nejâbat, 2007/1386.- 165 p.
 
More info about this book: http://www.adinebook.com/gp/product/9648527971 - http://www.adinebook.com/gp/product/9648527971
 
 
It talks about numerous common origin words in these two languages, one of these words is Dezfuli Vand and English Land.
 
http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?search=land&searchmode=none - http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?search=land&searchmode=none
 
http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=land - land (n.) http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=land">Look up land at Dictionary.com
O.E. land, lond, "ground, soil," also "definite portion of the earth's surface, home region of a person or a people, territory marked by political boundaries," from P.Gmc. *landom (cf. O.N., O.Fris. Du., Ger., Goth. land), from PIE *lendh- "land, heath" (cf. O.Ir. land, Middle Welsh llan "an open space," Welsh llan "enclosure, church," Breton lann "heath," source of Fr. lande; O.C.S. ledina "waste land, heath," Czech lada "fallow land"). Etymological evidence and Goth. use indicates the original sense was "a definite portion of the earth's surface owned by an individual or home of a nation."



Replies:
Posted By: Cyrus Shahmiri
Date Posted: 22-Apr-2009 at 19:39
I think Swastika could be originaly a Gutian symbol because the oldest ones have been found in this region.
 
About Swastika: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swastika - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swastika
 
The symbol has an ancient history in Europe, appearing on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artifact_%28archaeology%29 - artifacts from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indo-European - Indo-European cultures such as the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indo-Aryans - Indo-Aryans , http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persians - Persians , http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hittites - Hittites , http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slavs - Slavs , http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Celt - Celts and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greeks - Greeks , among others. The earliest consistent use of swastika motifs in the archaeological record date to the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neolithic - Neolithic . The symbol was found on a number of shards in the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khuzestan - Khuzestan province of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran - Iran and as part of the " http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vinca_script - Vinca script " of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neolithic_Europe - Neolithic Europe of the 5th millennium BC.


Posted By: Cyrus Shahmiri
Date Posted: 23-Apr-2009 at 15:15
I bought "Dezfuli - English common origin words", this book contains more than 5,000 Dezfuli/English common origin words, now I think some Persian words like Goda (God), Kian (King), ... could have Dezfuli/Gotvandi origin, one interesting word is Dezfuli Gudkhush which means "Temple", Hush means "House" in this language.
 
http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?search=house&searchmode=none - http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?search=house&searchmode=none
 
http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=house - house http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=house">Look up house at Dictionary.com
O.E. hus "dwelling, shelter, house," from P.Gmc. *khusan (cf. O.N., O.Fris. hus, Du. huis, Ger. Haus), of unknown origin, perhaps connected to the root of http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=hide - hide (v.). In Goth. only in gudhus "temple," lit. "god-house;" the usual word for "house" in Goth. being razn.

Another interesting word is Dezfuli Zherman which means "white race/people", the word "German" can be related to it.



Posted By: Suren
Date Posted: 23-Apr-2009 at 16:49
Regarding to zherman, it can not be related to German word. Zher probably is the same as Zar (Zhar) which means gold or yellow in old Persian and other Iranic langauges. If you read shahname you may find many Zhar (gold) and sim (silver).Wink 

-------------
Anfører


Posted By: Slayertplsko
Date Posted: 23-Apr-2009 at 17:47

Really?? Could you give us some more information about that book and possibly give a short sample list of those COWs?? I'm interested in the subject of pseudo-linguistics so I would be really pleased. Thanks in advance.Smile



-------------
A mind is like a parachute. It doesn't work if it's not open.


Posted By: Cyrus Shahmiri
Date Posted: 23-Apr-2009 at 17:55
I don't know about Dezfuli language but you are certainly right about Persian, Zharman can mean "yellow-headed or white people" in Persian, I haven't found Dezfuli word for "yellow" yet but "ger" means "green/grow" in this language.


Posted By: Slayertplsko
Date Posted: 23-Apr-2009 at 18:00

Originally posted by Cyrus Shahmiri Cyrus Shahmiri wrote:

There are some linguistic books about Dezfuli/Gotvandi language in Persian, most of them talk about a non-Iranian origin of this language, for example there is a book titled "Dezfuli - English common origin words", you can read here that it was among top linguistic books of 2008 in Iran: http://www.ifriran.org/pdf/Bibliotheque/Nouvelles%20acquisitions%20iraniennes.pdf

I can't see where it states it's among top linguistic books of 2008, in fact, it was published in 2007. It says, however, ''Nouvelles acquisitions iraniennes de la bibliothèque depuis avril 2008'', which according to my weak knowledge of French means ''new Iranian acquisitions of the library for April 2008'' (which makes perfect sense since it's a webpage of a library). But perhaps your knowledge of French is much better and the whole thing is some strange French idiom meaning ''the top Iranian books of 2008'', I really don't know.



-------------
A mind is like a parachute. It doesn't work if it's not open.


Posted By: Cyrus Shahmiri
Date Posted: 23-Apr-2009 at 21:45
I know almost nothing about French language, I read in the Persian websites that this book alongside other ones which have been mentioned in that French page are among top linguistic books of 2008 in Iran, so I thought it says the same thing. Anyway this book is similar to an alphabetic dictionary, for example some Dezfuli words which begin with the letter "G" are:
 
Gat "get"
Gatah "gate"
Geder "gather"
Ger "green,grow"
Gari "gray"
Geriva "grief"
Gal "girl"
Gelisan "glide"
Golnidan "glow"
Golume "gloom"
Gand "gaunt"
Gav "give"
Gir "gear"
Geiz "gaze"
...
 
Of course some of them are really similar to the Persians words, for example Persian Geda means "begger" or Gand means "ugly" but it seems these Dezfuli/Gotvandi words have almost the same origin of English words.


Posted By: Cyrus Shahmiri
Date Posted: 25-Apr-2009 at 18:45

Some Dezfuli words which begin with the letter "K":

Kak (Cake) {Of course "Kak" is one of the most famous sweetmeats of Iran from the ancient times, just search for "famous sweetmeat Iran": http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=famous-sweetmeat+Iran - http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=famous-sweetmeat+Iran }
Kot (Cut) { Persian Kutah means "short"}
Korpah (Crop)
Karossan (Cross)
Koromb (Crump)
Korna (Crown) { There is also an ancient region in Dezful named Kornasion: http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=Kornasion - http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=Kornasion }
Korong (Crank)
Korup (Group) { the Persian word is Goruh }
Kok (Quick)
Kalan (Clan) { Persian Kalantar means "elder, headman"}
Kalap (Clip)
Kolenjah (Cling)
Kolu (Clew)
Kali (Clay)
Kon (Can) { Kon in persian means "do" }
Kenj (Quench)
Kuf (Quaff) { Kuft in Persian means "eat/drink" }
Kul (Cool)
Kuku (Cook) { Kuku is also a very popular dish in Iran: http://www.irantour.org/Iran/food/Kuku.html - http://www.irantour.org/Iran/food/Kuku.html )
Kis (Kiss)
...



Posted By: Slayertplsko
Date Posted: 25-Apr-2009 at 19:12

Is there any serious attempt to explain the phonological shifts and are the proto-language roots provided for each?? Or is it just other long list of pseudo-cognates without any explanation??

Just at first glance I can see it corresponds to Voltaire's statement - the vowels are ignored completely. It seems to be another of those magna opera to which a great deal of work went, but little linguistic knowledge. Moreover, I can see several loanwords there and a distant backborrowing, so I'm again confused if it wants to prove something like ''English are just Dezfuli slaves'' or it is just ''hey, that's funny, but we have no point otherwise''. I also suspect the word 'kul' to be a loanword from English, since it's widespread nowadays and many languages have borrowed it.

Could you provide me with some further information, particularly whether it be just a long pseudo-cognate list or it provide some further evidence. Thanks in advance.



-------------
A mind is like a parachute. It doesn't work if it's not open.


Posted By: Cyrus Shahmiri
Date Posted: 26-Apr-2009 at 14:29
There is no claim in this book that Dezfuli is a Germanic language or English is Iranian, in fact Dezfuli is considered by some linguists to be just a Persian dialect but as I said we see the same Persian words are pronounced differently in Dezfuli, the reason can be that, unlike Modern Persian, stress is fixed on the first syllable of the word in this language/dialect.
Anyway I believe it is very difficult to talk about the phonological shifts in the Persian words, for example we know for sure there was no "L" sound neither in Avestan nor in Old Persian language but we can find this sound in a large number of Middle Persian words that most of them are similar to the Germanic words, like this one:
 
http://starling.rinet.ru/cgi-bin/response.cgi?single=1&basename=/data/ie/piet&text_number=2309&root=config - http://starling.rinet.ru/cgi-bin/response.cgi?single=1&basename=/data/ie/piet&text_number=2309&root=config
 
Proto-IE: *lap-; *lab- / *leb-

Nostratic etymology: http://starling.rinet.ru/cgi-bin/response.cgi?single=1&basename=/data/nostr/nostret&text_number=+118&root=config">

Meaning: lip

Other Iranian: MPers lap `Lippe'

Slavic: http://starling.rinet.ru/cgi-bin/response.cgi?single=1&basename=/data/ie/vasmer&text_number=++7335&root=config - - *lobъzātī

Germanic: http://starling.rinet.ru/cgi-bin/response.cgi?single=1&basename=/data/ie/germet&text_number=++1526&root=config - - *lip-jan- m., *lip-jōn- f., *lip-an- n., *lip-uz-

Latin: labium/labeum, -ī n., labia f. `Lippe; Rand'; labrum, -ī n. `Lippe; Rand'

Russ. meaning: губа
 
What is your explaination about it? (I should mention here that in the Persian loanwords from other languages, we see "u", "i", "e" and other vowels are usually changed to "a", look at this thread: http://www.allempires.net/forum_posts.asp?TID=223 - http://www.allempires.net/forum_posts.asp?TID=223  )


Posted By: Cyrus Shahmiri
Date Posted: 29-Apr-2009 at 17:09

One interesting word is "Nal", this word means "shoe, sandal, sock" in Arabic and especially "horseshoe" in Modern Persian, but its original meaning in Gotvandi is "Needle", the reason could be that from this word, there was the Middle Persian "Nalbandi" which means "Sandal making", this Middle Persian word can be found in Old Arabic -> http://books.google.com/books?id=3JXQh09i2JwC&pg=PA1132&lpg=PA1132&ots=iJZsvNj-zz&sig=cjqsH9fFWbZqnReT0ba5ncpknBE&hl=en&ei=jHT4ScGENcHI-AbxxpTHDw&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=2 - Arabic-English Dictionary and some other languages, like Armenian, you probably know the famous tennis player David Nalbandian -> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nalbandian - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nalbandian

The second part of the word is band "bind":
 
PIE *bhendh- "to bind."
Sanskrit bandhah "a tying, bandage," Avestan band- "to bind," Old Persian band "to bind," Gothic bandi "that which binds; Middle Irish bainna "bracelet."
Persian "Nalbandi" can be compared with Scandinavian "Nålbinding": http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/N%C3%A5lebinding - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/N%C3%A5lebinding
 
>> literally "binding with a needle" or "needle-binding"
>> The oldest known samples of single-needle knitting include the color-patterned sandal socks of the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coptic_Christians - Coptic Christians of Egypt.
>>  It is still used in Iran to make socks, and in parts of Scandinavia to make hats, gloves and other items that are very warm.


Posted By: Cyrus Shahmiri
Date Posted: 30-Apr-2009 at 08:40

More Info about Nålbinding : http://www.geocities.com/sigridkitty/history.html - http://www.geocities.com/sigridkitty/history.html

"Nålbinding is currently done in many places around the world although it is definitely beginning to die out in our 21st century. According to my sources it is still practiced in at least the following places: the mountainous regions of Central Asia;24 Persia, i.e. Lurestan and Iran;25 Sweden;26 Norway;27 Denmark (possibly); ..."

North of Khuzestan is Luristan, in fact geographically, mountainous region of Dezful is considered to be in Luristan, not in Khuzestan Plain: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khuzestan_Plain - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khuzestan_Plain for this reason we see the famous Shevi waterfall of Dezful is among the tourist attractions of Luristan: http://wikitravel.org/en/Lorestan - http://wikitravel.org/en/Lorestan

Some pics of Shevi waterfall of Dezful:
 

General view:
 


Posted By: Cyrus Shahmiri
Date Posted: 30-Apr-2009 at 09:13

I just searched for the word "Luristan" in a famous book:

A History of art By Lawrence Gowing: http://books.google.com/books?lr=&id=I5BUAAAAMAAJ&q=luristan&pgis=1 - http://books.google.com/books?lr=&id=I5BUAAAAMAAJ&q=luristan&pgis=1



Posted By: Slayertplsko
Date Posted: 30-Apr-2009 at 09:39
Originally posted by Cyrus Shahmiri Cyrus Shahmiri wrote:

I just searched for the word "Luristan" in a famous book:

A History of art By Lawrence Gowing: http://books.google.com/books?lr=&id=I5BUAAAAMAAJ&q=luristan&pgis=1 - http://books.google.com/books?lr=&id=I5BUAAAAMAAJ&q=luristan&pgis=1

Firstly, you should read the whole paragraph, including the last clause (no direct connection possible).

Secondly, he was an artist and writer. Claiming relation according to some similarities in art is too dangerous. For instance, let us look at music. Much of Chinese traditional music is build on a pentatonic scale which is practically the same as much of modern popular music is build on. That does not mean, however, that there is some relation between Chinese and those who use that type of pentatonic scale as a basis for their music, or just between the music traditions. No. Many such similarities can be drawn.



-------------
A mind is like a parachute. It doesn't work if it's not open.


Posted By: Cyrus Shahmiri
Date Posted: 30-Apr-2009 at 10:30

Would someone please translate this Swedish article into English: http://fornvannen.se/pdf/1930talet/1934_239.pdf - http://fornvannen.se/pdf/1930talet/1934_239.pdf

and also this one: http://fornvannen.se/pdf/1950talet/1959_282.pdf - http://fornvannen.se/pdf/1950talet/1959_282.pdf
 
 


Posted By: Cyrus Shahmiri
Date Posted: 30-Apr-2009 at 12:09
From a proto-IE word which meant "Horn", there are the names of some wind musical instruments like Roman Cornu in the Centum languages and Persian Sorna in the Satem languages, you can read here about Sorna: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sorna - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sorna  that this is the main instrument of Luristan, so we see it is also called "Saz-e-Luri" (Luri musical instrument) in Persian too, the interesting thing is that Scandinavians also call it "Lur".


Posted By: Cyrus Shahmiri
Date Posted: 30-Apr-2009 at 12:31

Another interesting article: http://130.91.80.97:591/PDFs/49-1/Olofsson.pdf - http://130.91.80.97:591/PDFs/49-1/Olofsson.pdf

Horse Sacrifice at Eketorp Fort, Sweden
by jan olofsson and egil josefson

You can find the answer of the question here:

The Scandinavians By Judith Jesch



Posted By: Cyrus Shahmiri
Date Posted: 01-May-2009 at 07:52

I found something in English in that Swedish articles: http://fornvannen.se/pdf/1950talet/1954_257.pdf - http://fornvannen.se/pdf/1950talet/1954_257.pdf

SUMMARY

Birger Nerman: The Late Bronze Age
A First Swedish
During the late Bronze Age a fairly rapid development takes place, both quantitatively and qualitativcly, in the Mälar-Hjälmar district and in Gotland; the finds are still most numerous, however, in the soutlicrnmost parts of the Scandinavian cultural area. Each of the first-mentioned localitics creates its own special types, but at the same time there is evidence of a combined Central Swcden-Gotland cultural area.
The warm, dry climate and comparatively pcaceful conditions prevailing in the Bronze Age must have resulted in a large inerease in population, which in its turn must have sought an outlet in expansion. There are indeed signs of such activity having originated from South Seandinavia and from Central Sweden-Gotland.
If we confine ourselves to this latter expansion and first examine that originating in the Mälar valley, we find that the westerly Bronze Age culture in Finland, which is an offshoot of that in the Mälar valley, has extended further, individual finds of Scandinavian character from the late Bronze Age baving been found outside this area.
The expansion from the Mälar valley also affected areas in tlie neighbourhood and on this side of tlie great bend of the Volga. Here so-called Mälar valley axes have been found (e. g. Fig. 2) as well as an east Russian local form of this type (Fig. 4) and from here comes a tutulus (Fig. 5) derived from a Central Swedish prototype. These finds have been interpreted as proof of a Swedish settlement in these parts.
The Baltic countries exhibit both Central Swedish and Gotland elements during the late Bronze Age. During the early Bronze Age the Scandinavian elements are weak and restricted to Esthonia, but during the late Bronze Age they becomc much stronger. Among other things at least two Mälar valley axes (one shown in Fig. 3) have been discovered. But groups of graves of Scandinavian type are known from the late Bronze Age of the Baltic countries, although not from their early Bronze Age: from Esthonia low cairns or barrows of earth and stones (Fig. 6) with man's length cists (Fig. 7), usually containing skeletons but also with cremated remains, in which Scandinavian objects have been found (e. g. the pincette in Fig. 8 and the ring collar in Fig. 9, the latter a type from Central Sweden). For the period in question such skeleton graves are otherwise only known from Gotland. This colonization continued into the beginning of the Iron Age.
Further, there is a group of nine boat-shaped enclosures (e. g. Fig. 10) from the west coast of the Gulf of Riga, whose sbapes, grave sanctuaries and contents (clay vessels) reveal their origin from a Gotland colony. Certain non-Seandinavian features in the construction of some of the grave sanctuaries show that the colony bad gradually löst contact with the motherland.
But Seandinavia, primarily Gotland, also had connections further east.
This applies particularly to the Caucasus. The pin in Fig. 11 from Gotland is Imported from there (cf. Fig. 12). Caucasian influence can be detected in several objects: from per. 4 of the Bronze Age a tutulus with bird figure from Blekinge (see Fig. 13, cf. Fig. 14), from per. 5 a loop from Småland for instance (see Fig. 15, cf. Fig. 16), from per. 6 a pin from Halland for instance (see Fig. 19, cf. Fig. 20), from per. 1 of the Iron Age a pin from Gotland (see Fig. 17, cf. Fig. 18).
Influenccs are also observable from Luristan in west Persia, e. g. the bronze bowl in Fig. 21 from Västmanland from per. 5 (cf. Fig. 22).



Posted By: Cyrus Shahmiri
Date Posted: 11-May-2009 at 19:20
Something interesting about Goths: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gothsc - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goths
 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Etymology - Etymologically the oldest (300 BC) ethnonym for the Goths, "Guton-", http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goths#cite_note-lehmann164-2 - [3] derives from the same root as that of the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gotlander - Gotlanders ("Gutar"): the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proto-Germanic - Proto-Germanic *Gutaniz. Related, but not the same, is the Scandinavian tribal name http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geat - Geat , from the Proto-Germanic *Gautoz (plural *Gautaz). Both *Gautoz and *Gutaniz are derived (specifically they are two http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indo-European_ablaut - ablaut grades) from the Proto-Germanic word *geutan, meaning "to pour".
 
You probably know some great Parthian kings named Gotarzes (Persian Gudarz), the interesting thing is that this is the name of an ancient region near Borujerd (Middle Persian Vorugard) in Luristan province too, some years ago in this thread: http://www.allempires.net/forum_posts.asp?TID=70&OB=ASC - Origins of polish , I said:
 
Quote Kashubi -> Kashian (Kassite) or Kashvad (One of descendants of Kaveh, founder of Gudarzian dynasty)
 
Gutarzian or Gudarzian was in fact a mythological dynasty of Greater Iranian tradition and folklore and you can read here about Kassites: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kassites - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kassites  "The original homeland of the Kassites is obscure, but appears to have been located in the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zagros_Mountains - Zagros Mountains in http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lorestan_Province - Lorestan in Iran."


Posted By: Cyrus Shahmiri
Date Posted: 14-May-2009 at 15:30

A linguistic book: http://books.google.com/books?id=V4KKN_oByKMC - http://books.google.com/books?id=V4KKN_oByKMC

The Nordic languages: an international handbook of the history of the North Germanic languages
By Oskar Bandle, Kurt Braunmüller, Lennart Elmevik, Gun Widmark
Published by Walter de Gruyter, 2002

There are some very interesting points in this book, lets read a page (page 687):



Posted By: Cyrus Shahmiri
Date Posted: 14-May-2009 at 16:38

Anthropology

Other than archaeologists, we see anthropologists also say that there is a connection betweem people of Lorestan, the Caucasus (North Armenia) and Scandinavia and consider them as belonging to a common Nordic-Iranian race, you can read here: http://209.85.129.132/search?q=cache:gwIKy1CD-DUJ:www.hossank.com/forum/archive/index.php%3Ft-14.html+nordic-Iranian+iran&cd=2&hl=en&ct=clnk - Nordic race in north Armenia -> "People of Lori province of north Armenia are mainly Nordic with slight local Armenoid admixture.", this is really interesting that this part of the Caucasus has been also called "Lori" from the ancient times, so for "Lori" there are: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lori - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lori

Lori may refer to:

  • http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lori_Province - Lori Province , Armenia
  • http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luri_language - Luri language , spoken by the Lur people Lorestān, Iran
  • http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kingdom_of_Lori-Joraget - Kingdom of Lori-Joraget , an Armenian kingdom from c. 980 to 1240

About Nordic-Iranian, Phallanx has posted a good article which mentions it in this thread: http://www.allempires.net/forum_posts.asp?TID=3900 - http://www.allempires.net/forum_posts.asp?TID=3900  (Who are the modern day "Greeks"?)

Nordic-Iranians (Type D)
Nordic-Iranians (Type D: Plate XL, m-q) have long and high heads with peculiarly deep occiputs, smooth ovoid-ellipsoid contour, sharply-cut muscle impressions, strong browridges, and tilted and capacious foreheads. Marked facial height and narrowness of cheeks compared to wide forehead and jowls makes a rectangular, horse-faced impression. Large but slightly retreating cheekbones enclose drooping orbits, and big, salient, and aquiline noses, long-arched palates, muscular jaws wide at the angles, and cleft chins lacking prominence all add to the same effect. Nordic-Iranians were tall and muscular, strong-necked, and probably included tawny-haired blue- or green-eyed blonds as well as brunets. Approximate identity, and noteworthy resemblances to North Iranian Bronze Age Proto-Nordics, to Anglo-Saxons, and to medieval Irish Monks show the divided eastern and northern relations of this Greek type. And although Type D has low variability, it includes four slightly different tendencies: a cylindrical-skulled, slab-faced Iron-Age Nordic one (D1: Chalcidian and E. Thracian, in Plate XL, n and o), a high-skulled, ellipsoid, “Corded” tendency (D2: Chalcidian in Plate XL, p slightly “dinaricised”), a long byrsoid, deep-skulled, huge-nosed, convex-profiled Iranian trend (D4: Athenian of Arcadian parentage, in Plate XL, m), and a small-faced Iranian-Mediterranean divergence approaching Coon's Cappadocian and Danubian types (D3: Athenian in Plate XL, q).


Posted By: King John
Date Posted: 14-May-2009 at 18:50
Originally posted by Cyrus Shahmiri Cyrus Shahmiri wrote:

Anthropology

Other than archaeologists, we see anthropologists also say that there is a connection betweem people of Lorestan, the Caucasus (North Armenia) and Scandinavia and consider them as belonging to a common Nordic-Iranian race, you can read here: http://209.85.129.132/search?q=cache:gwIKy1CD-DUJ:www.hossank.com/forum/archive/index.php%3Ft-14.html+nordic-Iranian+iran&cd=2&hl=en&ct=clnk - Nordic race in north Armenia  

Not that it really matters anymore because nobody takes your theories seriously, but do you really want us to take an Armenian nationalist website as a credible source?  This website has many characteristics in common with sites like Stormfront.  How does this site support your claim with any facts?  If you find good information why not go independently verify it.


*Edit: I added a question mark after the word source at the end of my first sentence.



Posted By: Cyrus Shahmiri
Date Posted: 14-May-2009 at 19:19
Those who read and understand these valid evidences and sources, take it seriously but those who can't realize these things or their bias doesn't allow them to do it, never take anything about this topic seriously and I have never expected them to do it.


Posted By: King John
Date Posted: 14-May-2009 at 19:36
That-a-way to dodge my points and questions.  People don't take them seriously because you use a theory to find evidence and you don't have a firm understanding of the things about which you speak.  Please answer my questions: do you really want us to take an Armenian Nationalist site (with posts like why I admire Hitler) seriously and How does this site support your claim with any facts?  These are two questions I posed to you in my last post please answer them.  

Are we to believe that your "valid evidence" comes from a site full of hate and propaganda?  I would think somebody who holds a PhD would be able to find better sources than that.  People who don't buy so called "valid evidence" from sites like Hossank aren't biased or unwilling to take evidence seriously, they are just skeptical of sourcing from a site like Hossank or Stormfront.  These skeptics are also hesitant to accept information that is not verifiable from other fora no matter what the fora's subject mater might be.

Again I ask you to actually address the points I made in my above post.


Posted By: Slayertplsko
Date Posted: 14-May-2009 at 19:39

Originally posted by Cyrus Shahmiri Cyrus Shahmiri wrote:

Those who read and understand these valid evidences and sources, take it seriously but those who can't realize these things or their bias doesn't allow allow them to do it, never take anything about this topic seriously and I have never expected them to do it.

It's actually vice versa. Those who don't fully understand pseudoscientific arguments have a strong tendency to believe them, those who do fully understand them, have no other option than to dismiss them.



-------------
A mind is like a parachute. It doesn't work if it's not open.


Posted By: Cyrus Shahmiri
Date Posted: 14-May-2009 at 20:53
King John, you again found something among my several posts, ignored all other important ones and focused on an insignificant thing, I can't advise you to "Go after what he says not who he is." becuase it is not only important for you what he says but also who says it, the important thing for you is already where it is said! I don't see anything nationalistic in that page, is it possible to not accuse everyone who talks about the race and anthropology, a racist?!


Posted By: King John
Date Posted: 14-May-2009 at 21:25
Originally posted by Cyrus Shahmiri Cyrus Shahmiri wrote:

King John, you again found something among my several posts, ignored all other important ones and focused on an insignificant thing, I can't advise you to "Go after what he says not who he is." becuase it is not only important for you what he says but also who says it, the important thing for you is already where it is said! I don't see anything nationalistic in that page, is it possible to not accuse everyone who talks about the race and anthropology, a racist?!
1. What somebody says is important, that's the exact reason I went to the site; I wanted to see if it said what you claim it said.  You haven't always been accurate in reporting what a source says.

2. I didn't say anything about racism, I said nationalism.  The name of the site is Hossank: Armenians of the World Unite, how is this not nationalistic?  Let's also look at the internal "s's" of the site name.  If you look at them for a second you will see they look eerily similar to the SS logo used by the Nazis.

3. Look at two of the main posters in that thread; a person named Armanum and another named Leo_Matousian.  Leo_Matousian has an avitar/icon by his name that is a maltese cross with a swastika in the middle of it.  Armanum has started threads like "Hitler, Budha, Krishna" and "Heinrich Himmler."  A simple examination of the site would lead anybody to conclude that what ever is said on the site should be taken with a grain of salt.

4. I went to the site thinking it was going to be a real informational site.  I went there with no bias and an open mind.  I read the thread and noticed the things I have outlined above.  I did a little perusal of the site and evaluated it on what I saw.  My conclusions about the site are based on all the threads I have seen, the posts I have read, and other symbols on that site.

5. Am I not supposed to look at your sources?  Am I not supposed to criticize your sources?  If your source was good you wouldn't have this problem.  

6. You still have not answered my points and questions.  Please show me the same courtesy that I have shown you.  Please tell us how that thread/site helps your claim, it's a bunch of amateurs and nationalists that let their ideas get clouded by propaganda and personal agendas.


As I have said in other threads; if you provide sound evidence then I will criticize and analyze it and then gladly accept it, but when you provide shoddy/weak evidence I will criticize and analyze it and then reject it.  So far you have not provided sound evidence on the connections between Germanic society/culture/people/language and Iranic society/culture/people/language.  


Posted By: Cyrus Shahmiri
Date Posted: 16-May-2009 at 16:59
Would you please criticize my archaeological evidences or linguistic and other ones here? The first post in that thread in the Armenian forum is "Map based on the theories of Ewald Banse, a German scientist and writer, who wrote Raum und Volk in Weltkrieg and believed in the Lebensraum concept.", isn't it?
 
This is the map:
 
 
I had posted this article about "Kurds and Gutians" by Samir Abbas: http://www.iranian.com/History/2005/March/Gutians/ - http://www.iranian.com/History/2005/March/Gutians/
 
As you see after the Germanic lands, red lines can be seen at most in the region where Kurds and Lurs already live and Gutians lived in the ancient times, would you please tell me your opinion about it? Is it nationalistic?!!


Posted By: King John
Date Posted: 16-May-2009 at 19:56
Originally posted by Cyrus Shahmiri Cyrus Shahmiri wrote:

Would you please criticize my archaeological evidences or linguistic and other ones here? The first post in that thread in the Armenian forum is "Map based on the theories of Ewald Banse, a German scientist and writer, who wrote Raum und Volk in Weltkrieg and believed in the Lebensraum concept.", isn't it?
That's what they claim it is.  However that doesn't negate my criticism of the site.  Whether these people provide a map or not has nothing to do with their ideology.
 
Quote This is the map:
 
 
I had posted this article about "Kurds and Gutians" by Samir Abbas: http://www.iranian.com/History/2005/March/Gutians/ - http://www.iranian.com/History/2005/March/Gutians/
it's nice that you posted the article since it actually states:
Quote when he announced in 1911 his discovery of the Guti Dynasty in Mesopotamia, and at the same time remarked that "nothing yet proves that they were the ancestors of the Goths. (Academie des Inscript. et Belles Lettres, Comptes Rendus, Paris, , 1911, p.327)" (Waddell 1929, p.358)
 
Quote As you see after the Germanic lands, red lines can be seen at most in the region where Kurds and Lurs already live and Gutians lived in the ancient times, would you please tell me your opinion about it? Is it nationalistic?!!
I'm failing to see how the map helps your cause.  I have criticized your evidences before anybody who wants to see them can go to your other threads re: Iranians and Germans (language, people, and others).  


Posted By: Cyrus Shahmiri
Date Posted: 17-May-2009 at 12:43
Originally posted by King John King John wrote:

]That's what they claim it is.  However that doesn't negate my criticism of the site.  Whether these people provide a map or not has nothing to do with their ideology.
Are you an ideological inquisitor?! People have right to have their own ideology and it doesn't relate to you or me at all!
 
Quote it's nice that you posted the article since it actually states:
Quote when he announced in 1911 his discovery of the Guti Dynasty in Mesopotamia, and at the same time remarked that "nothing yet proves that they were the ancestors of the Goths. (Academie des Inscript. et Belles Lettres, Comptes Rendus, Paris, , 1911, p.327)" (Waddell 1929, p.358)
Yes nothing was yet proved in 1911, what do you mean?
 
Quote I'm failing to see how the map helps your cause.  I have criticized your evidences before anybody who wants to see them can go to your other threads re: Iranians and Germans (language, people, and others).
One important thing has been changed in this thread, now by Iranians I mean people of Iran, not Iranian speaking people, it seems Germanic peoples were among the native people of Iran and they were forced to migrate to north by Iranian-speaking people. This can be the reason that there is a large number of Germanic words even in the Old Iranian languages and vice versa.


Posted By: Slayertplsko
Date Posted: 17-May-2009 at 12:50
Originally posted by Cyrus Shahmiri Cyrus Shahmiri wrote:

Quote I'm failing to see how the map helps your cause.  I have criticized your evidences before anybody who wants to see them can go to your other threads re: Iranians and Germans (language, people, and others).
One important thing has been changed in this thread, now by Iranians I mean people of Iran, not Iranian speaking people, it seems Germanic peoples were among the native people of Iran and they were forced to migrate to north by Iranian-speaking people. This can be the reason that there is a large number of Germanic words even in the Old Iranian languages and vice versa.

At first Saxons were not Germanic, then all Germans were Iranian speaking, now they're just a people from Iran?? What comes next??



-------------
A mind is like a parachute. It doesn't work if it's not open.


Posted By: Cyrus Shahmiri
Date Posted: 17-May-2009 at 13:35
Originally posted by Slayertplsko Slayertplsko wrote:

Originally posted by Cyrus Shahmiri Cyrus Shahmiri wrote:

Quote I'm failing to see how the map helps your cause.  I have criticized your evidences before anybody who wants to see them can go to your other threads re: Iranians and Germans (language, people, and others).
One important thing has been changed in this thread, now by Iranians I mean people of Iran, not Iranian speaking people, it seems Germanic peoples were among the native people of Iran and they were forced to migrate to north by Iranian-speaking people. This can be the reason that there is a large number of Germanic words even in the Old Iranian languages and vice versa.

At first Saxons were not Germanic, then all Germans were Iranian speaking, now they're just a people from Iran?? What comes next??

I don't know, I am discovering more and more! Smile


Posted By: gcle2003
Date Posted: 17-May-2009 at 15:05
You need to recognise the difference between discovering and inventing.

-------------
Citizen of Ankh-Morpork
Never believe anything until it has been officially denied - Sir Humphrey Appleby, 1984.


Posted By: Cyrus Shahmiri
Date Posted: 17-May-2009 at 15:28

The possible relation between Gutians (Goths) and Hittites, an ancient people who lived in the eastern Turkey and spoke a certain Indo-European language (of Centum branch), is also interesting, http://books.google.com/books?id=wqaH5kj2gCAC&pg=PA358&lr=&as_brr=3&as_pt=ALLTYPES&source=gbs_search_s&cad=0 - This book mostly talks about these things (Guti, Kudti, Kurdi, ...) this is a page of it:



Posted By: Cyrus Shahmiri
Date Posted: 17-May-2009 at 15:39
Originally posted by gcle2003 gcle2003 wrote:

You need to recognise the difference between discovering and inventing.
About this current topic, I am neither discovering nor inventing but just collecting evidences and sources.


Posted By: Slayertplsko
Date Posted: 17-May-2009 at 17:26
Originally posted by Cyrus Shahmiri Cyrus Shahmiri wrote:

Originally posted by gcle2003 gcle2003 wrote:

You need to recognise the difference between discovering and inventing.
About this current topic, I am neither discovering nor inventing but just collecting evidences and sources.

Sorted! You're just collecting and cherry-picking inventions of others.

Khatti was not the way Hittites referred to themselves, that's a misconception based on the place name and only later it was proved wrong. Khatti refers to Hattians, a Caucasian people occupying Asia Minor prior to IE invasion. Hittites called themselves Neshili.



-------------
A mind is like a parachute. It doesn't work if it's not open.


Posted By: King John
Date Posted: 17-May-2009 at 17:28
Originally posted by Cyrus Shahmiri Cyrus Shahmiri wrote:

Originally posted by King John King John wrote:

]That's what they claim it is.  However that doesn't negate my criticism of the site.  Whether these people provide a map or not has nothing to do with their ideology.
Are you an ideological inquisitor?! People have right to have their own ideology and it doesn't relate to you or me at all!
People do have a right to their own ideology, however, when you cite something the ideology of the author comes into play.  By this I mean, ideology whether academic or political is important when examining a source.  Asking things like "what is the author's intent, agenda, objective, ideology, method?" are all valid questions when evaluating a source; this is basic source criticism, Cyrus.  Furthermore, ideology relates to you and me because it helps establish the veracity of a claim and the author's propensity for falsification for instance, when you provide theories about other cultures being Iranic in origin one can easily see your ideology is Iranian Nationalist.  I'm not saying there is anything wrong with that; I'm just saying that that is your ideology, as well as I can gather.  Now if somebody wants to read your argument and counter knowing your ideology helps.  When evaluating claims from known nationalists the evaluator has to note the high propensity for falsification or misrepresentation by the claimer.  You have already shown, in other topics and this one, that you cherry-pick your evidence; you have also shown that you come up with a theory and then find evidence that supports it and not the other way around (the academically right way).  It is wrong to take a claim from known nationalists with a grain of salt?  Let me ask the question another way: is it wrong to be cynical of the claims of nationalists?
 
Quote
Quote it's nice that you posted the article since it actually states:
Quote when he announced in 1911 his discovery of the Guti Dynasty in Mesopotamia, and at the same time remarked that "nothing yet proves that they were the ancestors of the Goths. (Academie des Inscript. et Belles Lettres, Comptes Rendus, Paris, , 1911, p.327)" (Waddell 1929, p.358)
Yes nothing was yet proved in 1911, what do you mean?
What I mean is that nothing has proven that the Guti were ancestor of the Goths, just as the quote says.  The quote was from a source that you provided, so I'm assuming it was satisfactory to you.  I read the page and found no proof there, especially in the section titled something like "Guti and Goth."  Would you care to tell me when after 1911 this connection was proven and could you do it from the source you provided from which I took the above quote?
 
Quote
Quote I'm failing to see how the map helps your cause.  I have criticized your evidences before anybody who wants to see them can go to your other threads re: Iranians and Germans (language, people, and others).
One important thing has been changed in this thread, now by Iranians I mean people of Iran, not Iranian speaking people, it seems Germanic peoples were among the native people of Iran and they were forced to migrate to north by Iranian-speaking people.
Do you have any real proof that goes beyond the name of a ethnic group?
Quote This can be the reason that there is a large number of Germanic words even in the Old Iranian languages and vice versa.
Or, and hear me out on this, the reason for similar words is a common Indo-European Origin for both language families.  


Posted By: Cyrus Shahmiri
Date Posted: 17-May-2009 at 18:16
King John, your above post shows that you have never read my previous posts, for example if you read those archaeological evidences in the first page of this thread, you will see that there is almost no doubt among the great Swedish archaeologistse, like Dr. Birger Nerman and Dr. T. J. Arne, that there was a migration from Luristan (western Iran) where ancient Gutians lived to Gotland and other parts of Scandinavia.


Posted By: King John
Date Posted: 17-May-2009 at 19:38
Oh I read your posts on the first page of the thread, Cyrus.  But, if I didn't that still doesn't negate my point about source criticism and your general modus operandi.  To show you that I have read your posts on page one I will go through a rough overview of them and address certain points you made in said posts.  I will expect you to answer these points before I comment again, since I have seen a consistent misrepresentation of sources on your part.  You start the thread with your typical etymological work then you provide a bunch a pictures which prove nothing.  From there you go into a discussion of art and provide this: 
Originally posted by Cyrus Shahmiri Cyrus Shahmiri wrote:

I just searched for the word "Luristan" in a famous book:

A History of art By Lawrence Gowing:  http://books.google.com/books?lr=&id=I5BUAAAAMAAJ&q=luristan&pgis=1 -

However you say nothing about the last sentence, all you say is "I just searched the word Luristan."  If you notice the last sentence says "in Sweden and Denmark human and animal figures appear as knife-handles and heads of pins, of as scepter-ornaments, some of them having an odd likeness to the bronzes from Luristan (Persia), though no direct connection is possible."  You provided this quote so how does it support your thesis?  The author explicitly states no connection is possible.  

After this discussion you move to articles which appear to be in Swedish, I unfortunately can't read Swedish and you did not provide a translation.  I however did read the English excerpt a few posts later.  That excerpt, while claiming, in the last paragraph, that there was connection between the East and Scandinavia says nothing about a migration it actually implies trade and at one point actually says that certain objects were imported.  Objects being imported have nothing to do with the migration of people importing objects is an effect of trade.  In fact the next two paragraphs of the source that you cite from Birger Nerman (the one in English second to last on page one) argues only for trade.  Migration isn't even a thought in regards to this argument.  The rest of the summary reads:
Originally posted by Birger Nerman Birger Nerman wrote:

What is most surprising, however, is that parallels can be found between Seandinavia on the one hand and Siberia, North China and perhaps even Indo-China on tlie other. Thus the animal beads on processional requisites (Fig. 24) from the neighbourhood of Falköping belonging to per. 5 and the animal heads on stern and stern of the rock-carved ship (Fig. 23) from »Brandskogen» forest near Enköping have counterparts in Siberia and North China (Fig. 25). Indeed, a knife from Holstein (Fig. 26) and a similar one from Jutland may have affinitles with knives in Annam (Fig. 27). These types probably originated in the Caucasus and Persia, whence they spread both to the north-west and to the east. 


Commcrcial intercourse with the east brought ricbes to the motherland areas. The expansion may perhaps best be explained by assuming a fairly large Central Sweden-Gotland realm with its centre in that case in the Mälar valley. It was from bere that the conquests were made, trading activities being mainly left to the people of Gotland. Gotland and presumably even other Scandinavian traders evidently made their way to the east and south-cast of tlie Baltic Sea during the late Bronze Age, and it is not impossible tbat Scandinavian and Caucasian merchants sometimes met in eastern Europé. A bit into per. 1 of the Iron Age tlie Central Swedish and Gotland connections with the east come to an end.

Where does Birger Nerman claim that the Goths are descended from the Gutians?  All he says is that the connections to the East are commercial not that there was any wholesale migration.  From everything that I've read you have misrepresented what sources say, specifically the one by Birger Nerman from which I have quoted.  This brings me back to one of my previous points and that is when a person is known to misrepresent source the examiner must be extra critical of what that claimer says.


Please show were Nerman and Arne state that

Originally posted by Cyrus Shahmiri Cyrus Shahmiri wrote:

there was a migration from Luristan (western Iran) where ancient Gutians lived to Gotland and other parts of Scandinavia.
 You state that there is almost no doubt among the great Swedish archaeologists regarding migration from Luristan to Gotland, you say that this can be found in the work of Nerman and Arne that you provided on page one.  I have not seen this, all I have seen is you misrepresenting what Nerman says and apparently taking arguments for trade to be arguments for migration.  This is not the first thread in which you have done this, I speak of other threads in which you provide a map or other information that you clearly don't understand or you do understand and choose not to accurately represent said map and other information.  Don't say I didn't read your posts; from the lack of addressing my points I would assume that you haven't read my posts.  I know you have, though, just as I have read your posts.    


Finally, don't take my lack of posting on the first page to mean lack of reading.  




Posted By: Cyrus Shahmiri
Date Posted: 18-May-2009 at 14:05
King John, maybe you are right and I really don't understand the texts, would you please answer my questions about this text that you posted:
 
Quote These types probably originated in the Caucasus and Persia, whence they spread both to the north-west and to the east.
Commcrcial intercourse with the east brought riches to the motherland areas.
 
I think by the east he means "Siberia and North China" here, am I wrong? What do the words "originate" and "spread" mean in this text? What is the motherland, the original land of a people? Doesn't the text talk about an Indo-European people who migrated to Scnadinavia and also a region in the north China and communicated with the Chinese?


Posted By: Styrbiorn
Date Posted: 18-May-2009 at 14:42
I have no intention of getting into the discussion, but I went through the Swedish articles to provide you guys a summary.

The first one is a part of a discussion of classification of a few pieces of Scandinavian animal sculptures. It is merely arguing whether influences on the Scandinavian art pieces came from the east,continental Europe or both.

The second article concerns a finding of three types of objects from Gotland. The first object is identified as a wheel-shaped disc imported from Hungary. Then follows a few needles, of which some are identified as imports from Denmark and the others domestic copies of the former. The third type of objects, are some peculiar connected rings, speculated to be either used as "rope-dividers" or decorative pendants. According to the article, similar objects have been found in Germany, France, Bosnia, Mongolia, Persia and especially Caucasus. The author offered the explanation that they were originally invented in Luristan and from there spread eastward to Mongolia and over the Caucasus to Europe.

In short, neither article have anything to do with migrations; only types of objects and their spread. The two are not to be confused. It's usually quite easy to follow migrations, while cultural or technological diffusion is an entirely different matter. An example of the difference between migration and influence is for example: widespread use of jeans in Iran. The jeans were invented in America, but jeans being used in Iran or China doesn't mean, imply or even suggest that any form of large-scale migration took place. Communications might be faster now than when those rings spread from Persia, but the phenomenon is identical.
 


Posted By: Cyrus Shahmiri
Date Posted: 18-May-2009 at 17:03
Styrbiorn, thanks for the summary but we are talking about the bronze age not the satellite and the internet age, I mean the period that the most educated people were Babylonians who didn't know people who lived some kilometers east of Babylon, beyond the Zagros mountains, this is their world map:
 


Posted By: Styrbiorn
Date Posted: 18-May-2009 at 17:08
Originally posted by Cyrus Shahmiri Cyrus Shahmiri wrote:

Styrbiorn, thanks for the summary but we are talking about the bronze age not the satellite and the internet age, I mean the period that the most educated people were Babylonians who didn't know people who lived some kilometers east of Babylon, beyond the Zagros mountains, this is their world map:
 

That's exactly what I said. It might take hundreds of years instead of a few decades, but the process is still the same.


Posted By: King John
Date Posted: 18-May-2009 at 17:23
Originally posted by Cyrus Shahmiri Cyrus Shahmiri wrote:

King John, maybe you are right and I really don't understand the texts, would you please answer my questions about this text that you posted:
 
Quote These types probably originated in the Caucasus and Persia, whence they spread both to the north-west and to the east.
Commcrcial intercourse with the east brought riches to the motherland areas.
 
I think by the east he means "Siberia and North China" here, am I wrong?
Actually I think he means anything east of the Mälar valley as he explains in the next few sentences.
Quote What do the words "originate" and "spread" mean in this text?
The words originated and spread mean:
Originally posted by Merriam-Webster's Merriam-Webster's wrote:

orig·i·nate  http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20/cgi-bin/audio.pl?origin05.wav=originate">            Listen to the pronunciation of originate
Pronunciation:
\ə-ˈri-jə-ˌnāt\
Function:
verb
Inflected Form(s):
orig·i·nat·edorig·i·nat·ing
Date:
1667
transitive verb: to give rise to http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/initiate - initiate intransitive verb
: to take or have  http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/origin - origin  http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/begin - begin
And now "spread":
Originally posted by Merriam-Webster's Merriam-Webster's wrote:

1spread  http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20/cgi-bin/audio.pl?spread01.wav=spread">            Listen to the pronunciation of 1spread
Pronunciation:
\ˈspred\
Function:
verb
Inflected Form(s):
spreadspread·ing
Etymology:
Middle English spreden, from Old English -sprǣdan; akin to Old High German spreiten to spread
Date:
13th century
transitive verb1 a: to open or expand over a larger area <spread out the map> b: to stretch out http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/extend - extend  <spread its wings for flight>2 a: to distribute over an area <spread fertilizer> b: to distribute over a period or among a group <spread the work over a few weeks> c: to apply on a surface <spread butter on bread> (1): to cover or overlay something with <spread the cloth on the table> (2)archaic : to cover completely (1): to prepare or furnish for dining http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/set - set  <spread the table> (2)http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/serve - serve <spread the afternoon tea>3 a: to make widely known <spread the news> b: to extend the range or incidence of <spread a disease> chttp://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/diffuse - diffuse ,  http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/emit - emit <flowers spreading their fragrance>4: to push apart by weight or forceintransitive verb1 a: to become dispersed, distributed, or scattered b: to become known or disseminated <panic spread rapidly>2: to grow in length or breadth http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/expand - expand 3: to move apart (as from pressure or weight) http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/separate - separate
— spread·abil·i·ty  http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20/cgi-bin/audio.pl?spread02.wav=spreadability">            Listen to the pronunciation of spreadability  \ˌspre-də-ˈbi-lə-tē\ noun
— spread·able  http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20/cgi-bin/audio.pl?spread03.wav=spreadable">            Listen to the pronunciation of spreadable  \ˈspre-də-bəl\ adjective
Do these definitions work for you?  In the quote above from the article there is no talk about the words "originate" and "spread" referring to people, rather the two words refer to goods.  
Quote What is the motherland, the original land of a people?
The motherland is a homeland in this case the term refers to Gotland and the Mälar valley.
Quote Doesn't the text talk about an Indo-European people who migrated to Scnadinavia and also a region in the north China and communicated with the Chinese?
Not as far as I can tell, the text talks about goods that made their way from different areas to Scandinavia.  Trade is what's being discussed in the article not migration, Nerman explicitly states this when he says
Originally posted by Birger Nerman Birger Nerman wrote:

Commcrcial intercourse with the east brought ricbes to the motherland areas. The expansion may perhaps best be explained by assuming a fairly large Central Sweden-Gotland realm with its centre in that case in the Mälar valley. It was from bere that the conquests were made, trading activities being mainly left to the people of Gotland. Gotland and presumably even other Scandinavian traders evidently made their way to the east and south-cast of tlie Baltic Sea during the late Bronze Age, and it is not impossible tbat Scandinavian and Caucasian merchants sometimes met in eastern Europé. A bit into per. 1 of the Iron Age tlie Central Swedish and Gotland connections with the east come to an end.
I have put all references to trade in bold for you, as you can see trade is what's being discussed not migrations.

Would you please answer my points from my previous two posts–both found on page two?  I have been responding to your questions, why do you refuse to answer my points and questions?


Posted By: Cyrus Shahmiri
Date Posted: 19-May-2009 at 14:46
Originally posted by Styrbiorn Styrbiorn wrote:

Originally posted by Cyrus Shahmiri Cyrus Shahmiri wrote:

Styrbiorn, thanks for the summary but we are talking about the bronze age not the satellite and the internet age, I mean the period that the most educated people were Babylonians who didn't know people who lived some kilometers east of Babylon, beyond the Zagros mountains, this is their world map:
 

That's exactly what I said. It might take hundreds of years instead of a few decades, but the process is still the same.
What is this process? Even in the modern era it is somehow impossible that something is invented in a country and then is easily produced in another country without any connection between the peoples of these two countries, archaeologists have never found any Luristan type bronze objects in other regions of Iran, even the northern provinces, but these types have been found in Gotland, do you know why other peoples of Iran couldn't produce these things but Gotlanders could?
Other than it there are several other evidences which show there was a migration from Loristan to Lori province of Armenia (the Caucasus) and then Scandinavia, as I said anthropologists consider these peoples as belonging to a common Nordic-Iranian race, furthermore geneticists also say almost the same thing, in fact people of western Iran and Scandinavia are the most similar peoples genetically, you can read here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_I_%28Y-DNA - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_I_(Y-DNA ) Haplogroup I has the greatest density in Scandinvaia and however is says "The haplogroup is almost non-existent outside of Europe" but in the Highest frequencies section you can see Iran after Norway.
 
More about Human Y-chromosome DNA haplogroup: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_Y-chromosome_DNA_haplogroup - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_Y-chromosome_DNA_haplogroup
 


Posted By: Slayertplsko
Date Posted: 19-May-2009 at 15:01

I think we'd better look at what the Highest Frequency section really says:

Time of origin 25,000-30,000 years BP
Place of origin Europe or Asia Minor

Bosnian Croats 73%,

Herzegovinians 70.9%,

Croats ~48.0%,

Sardinians 42.3%,

Bosniaks 42.0%,

Norwegians 40.3%,

Iran 10%-34%

Now how does this support you? What's wrong, I don't understand. Is it that difficult for you to correctly interprete a wiki article??



-------------
A mind is like a parachute. It doesn't work if it's not open.


Posted By: Styrbiorn
Date Posted: 19-May-2009 at 15:43
Originally posted by Cyrus Shahmiri Cyrus Shahmiri wrote:

What is this process? Even in the modern era it is somehow impossible that something is invented in a country and then is easily produced in another country without any connection between the peoples of these two countries, archaeologists have never found any Luristan type bronze objects in other regions of Iran, even the northern provinces, but these types have been found in Gotland, do you know why other peoples of Iran couldn't produce these things but Gotlanders could?

The process is called trade. Again, the article noted numerous places where similar things have been found. The most common foreign objects found on Gotland are Arab. Maybe the Gotlanders are actually Arabs then?

You completely misinterpreted the genealogical data. Stop looking for evidence of an invented theory and start working as a scientist, if you want to be one.


Posted By: King John
Date Posted: 19-May-2009 at 17:10
Originally posted by Cyrus Shahmiri Cyrus Shahmiri wrote:

Originally posted by Styrbiorn Styrbiorn wrote:

Originally posted by Cyrus Shahmiri Cyrus Shahmiri wrote:

Styrbiorn, thanks for the summary but we are talking about the bronze age not the satellite and the internet age, I mean the period that the most educated people were Babylonians who didn't know people who lived some kilometers east of Babylon, beyond the Zagros mountains, this is their world map:
 

That's exactly what I said. It might take hundreds of years instead of a few decades, but the process is still the same.
What is this process? Even in the modern era it is somehow impossible that something is invented in a country and then is easily produced in another country without any connection between the peoples of these two countries, archaeologists have never found any Luristan type bronze objects in other regions of Iran, even the northern provinces, but these types have been found in Gotland, do you know why other peoples of Iran couldn't produce these things but Gotlanders could?
You keep confusing trade with migration.  Since the Romans valued amber from the Baltic and Northern Europe are we to believe that the Romans were actually Northern Europeans?  Under your logic this claim would be true, however it's false we find high frequency of Northern Amber in Roman areas not because of migration but rather trade.  Being able to reproduce an object, again, is not the same as migration; all that is needed to reproduce an object is one person to share the method/idea.  This is the same concept behind the spread of religions like Islam; one person talks to another and another, and so on until you have a religion that reaches thousands of miles from its point of origin to areas that are very remote.  Trade does not equal migration.  The article you posted talk about trade not migration, how does this help you? 
Quote Other than it there are several other evidences which show there was a migration from Loristan to Lori province of Armenia (the Caucasus) and then Scandinavia, as I said anthropologists consider these peoples as belonging to a common Nordic-Iranian race, furthermore geneticists also say almost the same thing, in fact people of western Iran and Scandinavia are the most similar peoples genetically, you can read here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_I_%28Y-DNA - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_I_(Y-DNA ) Haplogroup I has the greatest density in Scandinvaia and however is says "The haplogroup is almost non-existent outside of Europe" but in the Highest frequencies section you can see Iran after Norway.
From what I have seen Haplogroup I has a higher density in Eastern Europe than Northern Europe for instance it has a higher density in Bosnian Croats, Herzogovinians, Croats, Sardinians, and Bosniaks than it does in Norwegians or any other Northern European group.
 
Quote More about Human Y-chromosome DNA haplogroup: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_Y-chromosome_DNA_haplogroup - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_Y-chromosome_DNA_haplogroup
 
Where is this map from?  What is the time period for these migrations?  If these migrations happened in the last 2000 years maybe this map supports you if the time scale is closer to 10,000 years this map does nothing for you.  


Posted By: Cyrus Shahmiri
Date Posted: 19-May-2009 at 17:16

Originally posted by King John King John wrote:

Actually I think he means anything east of the Mälar valley as he explains in the next few sentences.

You can see "the east" in two continuous sentences, it is clear both of them point to the same location.

Quote Do these definitions work for you?  In the quote above from the article there is no talk about the words "originate" and "spread" referring to people, rather the two words refer to goods.

Not goods but types, I should ask about these words too, their difference is similar to that between words and languages, words/goods are imported but types/languages originated from a source.
 
Quote The motherland is a homeland in this case the term refers to Gotland and the Mälar valley.
But I think motherland means the original land here.
 
Quote Not as far as I can tell, the text talks about goods that made their way from different areas to Scandinavia.  Trade is what's being discussed in the article not migration, Nerman explicitly states this when he says ... I have put all references to trade in bold for you, as you can see trade is what's being discussed not migrations.
However it is clear that he talks about later periods in that paragraph and there is absolutely no mention of Persia or Luristan but we see he first mentions "conquests" and then "trading".
 
Quote Would you please answer my points from my previous two posts–both found on page two?  I have been responding to your questions, why do you refuse to answer my points and questions?
Which ones do you mean? My first post in this page was in response to you, about the book "A History of art", as Slayertplsko said, the author was just an artist, he found some important likeness between the animal figures of knife-handles in the ancient bronzes of Luristan and Sweden, of course as a professional artist, but he was not a historian, so it sounded impossible for him to be any direct connection between them.


Posted By: Cyrus Shahmiri
Date Posted: 19-May-2009 at 17:37
Originally posted by Slayertplsko Slayertplsko wrote:

I think we'd better look at what the Highest Frequency section really says:

Time of origin 25,000-30,000 years BP
Place of origin Europe or Asia Minor

Bosnian Croats 73%,

Herzegovinians 70.9%,

Croats ~48.0%,

Sardinians 42.3%,

Bosniaks 42.0%,

Norwegians 40.3%,

Iran 10%-34%

Now how does this support you? What's wrong, I don't understand. Is it that difficult for you to correctly interprete a wiki article??

I don't talk about the time of origin but the current situation, as you repeated it again, we see after modern Norway is modern Iran, the interesting is that as Dr. Nerman says about the archaeological findings that these types originated in Iran and then spread both to Scandinavia and the North China, we see about Haplogroup Q: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_Q_%28Y-DNA - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_Q_(Y-DNA ) that Q lineage is found in http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norway - Norway in the west, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran - Iran in the south, and northern http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/China - China in the east.


Posted By: King John
Date Posted: 19-May-2009 at 17:58
Originally posted by Cyrus Shahmiri Cyrus Shahmiri wrote:

Originally posted by King John King John wrote:

Actually I think he means anything east of the Mälar valley as he explains in the next few sentences.

You can see "the east" in two continuous sentences, it is clear both of them point to the same location.
Not true, while the sentences would seem to be two continuous sentences they are broken by a big gap, they are in two different paragraphs and therefore two different thoughts.  The first paragraph deals with goods/types like knives, bestial carvings, et al., which are said to have originated in the Caucasus and Persia and spread to the northwest and to the east; whereas the second sentence clearly talks about east in relation to the Mälar Valley as noted by the second sentence.  These two uses of the word east are not pointing to the same location. 

Quote
Quote Do these definitions work for you?  In the quote above from the article there is no talk about the words "originate" and "spread" referring to people, rather the two words refer to goods.

Not goods but types, I should ask about these words too, their difference is similar to that between words and languages, words/goods are imported but types/languages originated from a source.
What are knives and bestial carvings?  When Nerman talks about affinities these goods have to goods in places like Annam, he is noting that the good that is being shared is a stylistic idea.  Can't a stylistic idea be a good to be traded?  
 
Quote
Quote The motherland is a homeland in this case the term refers to Gotland and the Mälar valley.
But I think motherland means the original land here.
Exactly, and that original homeland is Gotland and the Mälar Valley as the article summary implies.
 
Quote
Quote Not as far as I can tell, the text talks about goods that made their way from different areas to Scandinavia.  Trade is what's being discussed in the article not migration, Nerman explicitly states this when he says ... I have put all references to trade in bold for you, as you can see trade is what's being discussed not migrations.
However it is clear that he talks about later periods in that paragraph and there is absolutely no mention of Persia or Luristan but we see he first mentions "conquests" and then "trading".
As a point of fact the reference to conquests has nothing to do with Persia or Luristan, it has to do with an early period.  Nerman notes the expansion from Gotland and the Mälar Valley in a post that you made on page one.  How does this help you?  He mentions conquests then trading because that is how the article is laid out and it's the final paragraph of the text and by definition should be strong and lay out all that was argued; in the first section of the summary we see that he talks about the increase of population and its need for and subsequent expansion into areas east such as the Volga region, areas of modern Russia, Finland, and areas of the Baltic.  Notice that all these places are to the East of Gotland and the Mälar Valley?  He then goes on to discuss trade.
 
Quote
Quote Would you please answer my points from my previous two posts–both found on page two?  I have been responding to your questions, why do you refuse to answer my points and questions?
Which ones do you mean? My first post in this page was in response to you, about the book "A History of art", as Slayertplsko said, the author was just an artist, he found some important likeness between the animal figures of knife-handles in the ancient bronzes of Luristan and Sweden, of course as a professional artist, but he was not a historian, so it sounded impossible for him to be any direct connection between them.
Yes it was but not really to any point I made.  Do you really want me to repost all the questions I asked you that have gone unanswered?  Let's go back to my last two posts on page two, you haven't responded to a number of questions and points in those posts, while I have been responding to your points and questions in every post you have directed at me.  I will place my second to last post from page two here and your response to it below:
Originally posted by King John King John wrote:

Originally posted by Cyrus Shahmiri Cyrus Shahmiri wrote:

Originally posted by King John King John wrote:

]That's what they claim it is.  However that doesn't negate my criticism of the site.  Whether these people provide a map or not has nothing to do with their ideology.
Are you an ideological inquisitor?! People have right to have their own ideology and it doesn't relate to you or me at all!
People do have a right to their own ideology, however, when you cite something the ideology of the author comes into play.  By this I mean, ideology whether academic or political is important when examining a source.  Asking things like "what is the author's intent, agenda, objective, ideology, method?" are all valid questions when evaluating a source; this is basic source criticism, Cyrus.  Furthermore, ideology relates to you and me because it helps establish the veracity of a claim and the author's propensity for falsification for instance, when you provide theories about other cultures being Iranic in origin one can easily see your ideology is Iranian Nationalist.  I'm not saying there is anything wrong with that; I'm just saying that that is your ideology, as well as I can gather.  Now if somebody wants to read your argument and counter knowing your ideology helps.  When evaluating claims from known nationalists the evaluator has to note the high propensity for falsification or misrepresentation by the claimer.  You have already shown, in other topics and this one, that you cherry-pick your evidence; you have also shown that you come up with a theory and then find evidence that supports it and not the other way around (the academically right way).  It is wrong to take a claim from known nationalists with a grain of salt?  Let me ask the question another way: is it wrong to be cynical of the claims of nationalists?
 
Quote
Quote it's nice that you posted the article since it actually states:
Quote when he announced in 1911 his discovery of the Guti Dynasty in Mesopotamia, and at the same time remarked that "nothing yet proves that they were the ancestors of the Goths. (Academie des Inscript. et Belles Lettres, Comptes Rendus, Paris, , 1911, p.327)" (Waddell 1929, p.358)
Yes nothing was yet proved in 1911, what do you mean?
What I mean is that nothing has proven that the Guti were ancestor of the Goths, just as the quote says.  The quote was from a source that you provided, so I'm assuming it was satisfactory to you.  I read the page and found no proof there, especially in the section titled something like "Guti and Goth."  Would you care to tell me when after 1911 this connection was proven and could you do it from the source you provided from which I took the above quote?
 
Quote
Quote I'm failing to see how the map helps your cause.  I have criticized your evidences before anybody who wants to see them can go to your other threads re: Iranians and Germans (language, people, and others).
One important thing has been changed in this thread, now by Iranians I mean people of Iran, not Iranian speaking people, it seems Germanic peoples were among the native people of Iran and they were forced to migrate to north by Iranian-speaking people.
Do you have any real proof that goes beyond the name of a ethnic group?
Quote This can be the reason that there is a large number of Germanic words even in the Old Iranian languages and vice versa.
Or, and hear me out on this, the reason for similar words is a common Indo-European Origin for both language families.  
 And your response:
Originally posted by Cyrus Shahmiri Cyrus Shahmiri wrote:

King John, your above post shows that you have never read my previous posts, for example if you read those archaeological evidences in the first page of this thread, you will see that there is almost no doubt among the great Swedish archaeologistse, like Dr. Birger Nerman and Dr. T. J. Arne, that there was a migration from Luristan (western Iran) where ancient Gutians lived to Gotland and other parts of Scandinavia.
 As you can see you haven't responded to any of the points in the above post, you just start talking about archaeologists talking about migration when they are actually talking about trade.  How is this a response to my points and questions?


Posted By: Slayertplsko
Date Posted: 19-May-2009 at 18:49
Originally posted by Cyrus Shahmiri Cyrus Shahmiri wrote:

I don't talk about the time of origin but the current situation, as you repeated it again, we see after modern Norway is modern Iran, the interesting is that as Dr. Nerman says about the archaeological findings that these types originated in Iran and then spread both to Scandinavia and the North China, we see about Haplogroup Q: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_Q_%28Y-DNA - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_Q_(Y-DNA ) that Q lineage is found in http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norway - - Iran in the south, and northern http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/China -


Posted By: Cyrus Shahmiri
Date Posted: 19-May-2009 at 19:04
Originally posted by Styrbiorn Styrbiorn wrote:

The process is called trade.
Science and skills are not tradable, you yourself said that the Swedish text says they were originally invented in Luristan, not imported from Luristan, didn't you? Gotlanders couldn't read Gutians' mind by looking at their inventions.
 
Quote Again, the article noted numerous places where similar things have been found.
and also explains why these similar things have been found there, would please translate it for us:
 
 
Quote The most common foreign objects found on Gotland are Arab. Maybe the Gotlanders are actually Arabs then?
No, Gutians probably carried those objects to Gotland, isn't it a better explaination?


Posted By: King John
Date Posted: 19-May-2009 at 19:24
Originally posted by Cyrus Shahmiri Cyrus Shahmiri wrote:

Originally posted by Styrbiorn Styrbiorn wrote:

The process is called trade.
Science and skills are not tradable, you yourself said that the Swedish text says they were originally invented in Luristan, not imported from Luristan, didn't you? Gotlanders couldn't read Gutians' mind by looking at their inventions.
Ideas, skills, and science are most certainly tradable.  The tradable nature of ideas, skills, and science is shown by the spread of algebra, religion(s), metallurgy and other sciences.  How do you think bronze working got from the Middle East to Northern Europe?  It had to be through trade of ideas, this is the product of being taught, it is the same idea behind the spread of moveable type, gunpowder, the internet, and other technologies.  In short ideas, skills, and science are in fact tradable goods.
 
Quote
Quote Again, the article noted numerous places where similar things have been found.
and also explains why these similar things have been found there, would please translate it for us:
 
 
Do you actually read or speak Swedish, Cyrus?
Quote
Quote The most common foreign objects found on Gotland are Arab. Maybe the Gotlanders are actually Arabs then?
No, Gutians probably carried those objects to Gotland, isn't it a better explaination?
For that to be a "better explanation" you first have to prove that Gutians are the ancestors of Goths.  You haven't done this yet.


Posted By: Slayertplsko
Date Posted: 19-May-2009 at 19:31

Originally posted by Cyrus Shahmiri Cyrus Shahmiri wrote:

Science and skills are not tradable,

Since when??

Originally posted by Cyrus Shahmiri Cyrus Shahmiri wrote:

you yourself said that the Swedish text says they were originally invented in Luristan, not imported from Luristan, didn't you? Gotlanders couldn't read Gutians' mind by looking at their inventions.
Telephone was originally invented in the U.S.A. and later exported from the U.S.A. The buyers could not read the vendors' minds and the vendors could not read Bell's mind, correct. But Bell revealed his mind to the buyers/vendors and this is called trade with science.


-------------
A mind is like a parachute. It doesn't work if it's not open.


Posted By: King John
Date Posted: 19-May-2009 at 20:09
Originally posted by Cyrus Shahmiri Cyrus Shahmiri wrote:

 
 
What it says is this:

"With respect to the type's spread both in Europe and Asia it appears to me probable, that it arose in the Caucasus, possibly Luristan, and from there it spread partly to the east to Mongolia, partly to west to central Europe. From the Hallstatt-culture it has come to northern Germany and Scandinavia; in every case we may own no testimony about that, it would have reached the latter areas via south Russia and the pole [Poland?]."  

This is a very rough translation, but I think it gets the point across; if anybody who speaks Swedish would like to comment on the translation that would be greatly appreciated. How does this help you, Cyrus? As far as I can tell it is not talking about migrating populations but rather about the spread and diffusion of culture and goods. If you think that it is talking about people maybe you should provide more than just one paragraph that starts with: "with respect to the type's spread" that is a fairly ambiguous statement. What is the type that Nerman talking about? The quote is out of context and I don't think it exemplifies what you would like it to.


Posted By: King John
Date Posted: 19-May-2009 at 21:18
Originally posted by Cyrus Shahmiri Cyrus Shahmiri wrote:

Which ones do you mean? My first post in this page was in response to you, about the book "A History of art", as Slayertplsko said, the author was just an artist, he found some important likeness between the animal figures of knife-handles in the ancient bronzes of Luristan and Sweden, of course as a professional artist, but he was not a historian, so it sounded impossible for him to be any direct connection between them.
He's not good enough to make a statement about connections between Scandinavian and Luristanian figures but he is good enough to note likenesses?  How does that make sense?  Either he's qualified to make both statements or he's not, you can't say he's qualified to note the similarities and then say he's not qualified to say there is no connection between them.  The man, Lawrence Gowing, was a respected Professor of Fine Art and was also a self taught Art Historian; I think this more than qualifies him to make statements about connections between Scandinavian and Luristanian figures.  Again, if he's good enough to be used as evidence for your claim then statements he made in the same quote you provide are good enough to be used against your claims.


Posted By: Suren
Date Posted: 19-May-2009 at 21:31
We are not white European, Cyrus. Leave them alone and live in peace. Angel (edited for good)


-------------
Anfører


Posted By: King John
Date Posted: 19-May-2009 at 21:39
Originally posted by Suren Suren wrote:

We are not white European, Cyrus. Leave this master race alone and live in peace. It doesn't matter how hard you try (not to support all of your theories or the evidence which you use but to give you the hint about their attitude) they deny with any means. If you live in west then you know what I mean. Except some fair intellectual and smart people you can not change their way of thinking. Many of friendly religious people who live here does not care about those issues as well which makes life better for us (immigrants). Rest of population look at you differently, no matter how hard you try they are still dreaming about Ancient Roman empire or Alexander the great .... the rest of the world were all barbarian. It really pisses me off, but that's the way it is. 
What does this have to do with the topic at hand?


Posted By: Suren
Date Posted: 20-May-2009 at 00:04
That is a hint for this topic and other related topic (Specifically for Cyrus, so plz do not get offended) 

-------------
Anfører


Posted By: King John
Date Posted: 20-May-2009 at 00:28
No one got offended, your post just didn't seem very pertinent to the conversation–advice or not.


Posted By: Styrbiorn
Date Posted: 20-May-2009 at 07:33
Originally posted by Cyrus Shahmiri Cyrus Shahmiri wrote:

Science and skills are not tradable, you yourself said that the Swedish text says they were originally invented in Luristan, not imported from Luristan, didn't you? Gotlanders couldn't read Gutians' mind by looking at their inventions.


You can't believe this even yourself. Of course science and skills are tradeable. I'm not commenting it further, you cannot possibly have thought this through before you wrote it.
 
Quote
and also explains why these similar things have been found there, would please translate it for us:
Yes. Trade. King John's translation is good (Polen= Poland).

 
Quote
No, Gutians probably carried those objects to Gotland, isn't it a better explaination?

No, the objects got there with Gotlandic traders starting in the 9th century. They're coins, and how and when they came there is rather well-known. I was just testing if you would check it up or invent something out of the blue that would support your theory.

Quote
We are not white European, Cyrus. Leave this master race alone and live in peace. It doesn't matter how hard you try (not to support all of your theories or the evidence which you use but to give you the hint about their attitude) they deny with any means. If you live in west then you know what I mean. Except some fair intellectual and smart people you can not change their way of thinking. Many of friendly religious people who live here does not care about those issues as well which makes life better for us (immigrants). Rest of population look at you differently, no matter how hard you try they are still dreaming about Ancient Roman empire or Alexander the great .... the rest of the world were all barbarian. It really pisses me off, but that's the way it is.


So if I don't accept the splendid theory that science and skills are not tradeable I must believe I belong to some master race? Calling people "master race" because they don't agree with some pseudo-science is offensive. Or hopefully I misinterpreted what you wrote?
It's quite obvious and accepted among historians that Scandinavians descend partly from those coming with the retreat of the great ice, and partly from some IE immigrants coming from the east, ultimately related to Persians, Slavs etc. Cyrus's ideas are taken out of the blue though, and most of the "evidence" he's bringing up is unrelated, often misinterpreted or simply not good (or, written by those very Master Race people you are refering to, who DID support many of Cyrus's ideas).
 


Posted By: Cyrus Shahmiri
Date Posted: 20-May-2009 at 15:19
I think Suren gave the best reply to all posts in this thread, as I have found the most important thing is that you never say Gutians put their feet on the holy land of Gotland (white Europeans), ok, I don't say it because no one is offended but if our European friends don't change their sayings, according to what King John said:
 
Originally posted by King John King John wrote:

As far as I can tell it is not talking about migrating populations but rather about the spread and diffusion of culture and goods.
 
It can be concluded that the Gutian culture spread from the land of Gutians (Luristan) to Gotland and Gutians themselves didn't migrate to Gotland, we all know that language is a cultural identity.


Posted By: King John
Date Posted: 20-May-2009 at 15:46
Originally posted by Cyrus Shahmiri Cyrus Shahmiri wrote:

I think Suren gave the best reply to all posts in this thread, as I have found the most important thing is that you never say Gutians put their feet on the holy land of Gotland (white Europeans), ok, I don't say it because no one is offended but if our European friends don't change their sayings, according to what King John said:
 
Originally posted by King John King John wrote:

As far as I can tell it is not talking about migrating populations but rather about the spread and diffusion of culture and goods.
 
It can be concluded that the Gutian culture spread from the land of Gutians (Luristan) to Gotland and Gutians themselves didn't migrate to Gotland, we all know that language is a cultural identity.
It can also be concluded from the Swedish excerpt you posted and I translated that the goods made their way to Gotland and the Mälar Valley via the Hallstatt Culture.  What language are you talking about?  Can we please not go through another one of your Germanic Languages are a branch of the Iranic Languages discussions?  You have already been proven wrong in that thread and it was something like 70 or so pages; let's not rehash that here.  Your argument is predicated on the idea that the Gutians are the ancestors of the Goths via human migration, are you admitting that that idea is wrong?

According to your theory when did the Gutians get to Gotland?


Posted By: Styrbiorn
Date Posted: 20-May-2009 at 15:54
Originally posted by Cyrus Shahmiri Cyrus Shahmiri wrote:

It can be concluded that the Gutian culture spread from the land of Gutians (Luristan) to Gotland and Gutians themselves didn't migrate to Gotland, we all know that language is a cultural identity.

No. It can't. The article is talking about one single type of object. Similar to following the spread of jeans from California to the rest of the world via New York and London eastward and Japan and China westward. Anything else you made up from nothing without any evidence whatsoever.
Quote
I think Suren gave the best reply to all posts in this thread, as I have found the most important thing is that you never say Gutians put their feet on the holy land of Gotland (white Europeans), ok, I don't say it because no one is offended but if our European friends don't change their sayings, according to what King John said:

How many times does it have to be told: the Gotlanders and the rest of the Scandinavians are partly descendants of an IE people from the east. Your ideas about Scyths or Gutians, however, are based solely on name-similarities and other nonsense. Quit your trolling with racism/nazism accusations. Everyone else have the decency not to accuse you of Irano-supremacism.



Posted By: King John
Date Posted: 20-May-2009 at 15:55
P.S. Cyrus, are you going to respond to my points starting at the end of page 2?  You have replied to a couple of my posts but your replies have not been (for the most part) to any point I made or question I asked.

Would you care to tell us what the type is that Nerman is talking about since there is absolutely no context for it in the excerpt you have given us?


Posted By: Cyrus Shahmiri
Date Posted: 20-May-2009 at 18:34
Would you please ignore what I myself said and read the books that I suggested? For example you can find several proves of the identity of the Guti with the Goths in  http://books.google.com/books?id=wqaH5kj2gCAC&pg=PA358&lr=&as_brr=3&as_pt=ALLTYPES&source=gbs_search_s&cad=0 - this book  that I mentioned, this 736 page book (Published by Kessinger Publishing, 2004) just almost talks about this thing, another interesting proof in this book:
 


Posted By: King John
Date Posted: 20-May-2009 at 19:08
Originally posted by Cyrus Shahmiri Cyrus Shahmiri wrote:

Would you please ignore what I myself said and read the books that I suggested? For example you can find several proves of the identity of the Guti with the Goths in  http://books.google.com/books?id=wqaH5kj2gCAC&pg=PA358&lr=&as_brr=3&as_pt=ALLTYPES&source=gbs_search_s&cad=0 - this book  that I mentioned, this 736 page book (Published by Kessinger Publishing, 2004) just almost talks about this thing, another interesting proof in this book:
 
You have posted this once already and I believe I responded then.  I've read the book and it seems to me that the only real proof that the book relies on is something from 1911.  Should we also ignore that the supposed homeland of the Goths (Gotland) was already inhabited by 3100 BC?  Maybe the Gutians came south from Gotland and not north to Gotland.

Are we to ignore the other "evidence" you posted, like that of Nerman?  How come you haven't responded to the responses to said evidence.  I translated one of the excerpts from Nerman for you, as you asked, and you haven't commented. 


Posted By: Cyrus Shahmiri
Date Posted: 20-May-2009 at 20:18
King John, I think Suren gave me a good advice: "It doesn't matter how hard you try, they deny with any means.", as you usual you read another proof and denied it without even saying anything about the main thing (Iarla, Earl, ...)
As you can read in the first page, Dr. Birger Nerman's article is about the Bronze Age and just talks about the bronze objects of this period, it is clear by "types" he means "types of any bronze objects of the Bronze Age", there can be different types, like Chinese type, Egyptian type, ... but what does it mean when he says about the Scandinavian type, this type originated in Luristan (Persia)?


Posted By: Styrbiorn
Date Posted: 20-May-2009 at 20:28
Originally posted by Cyrus Shahmiri Cyrus Shahmiri wrote:

King John, I think Suren gave me a good advice: "It doesn't matter how hard you try, they deny with any means.", as you usual you read another proof and denied it without even saying anything about the main thing (Iarla, Earl, ...)
As you can read in the first page, Dr. Birger Nerman's article is about the Bronze Age and just talks about the bronze objects of this period, it is clear by "types" he means "types of any bronze objects of the Bronze Age", there can be different types, like Chinese type, Egyptian type, ... but what does it mean when he says about the Scandinavian type, this type originated in Luristan (Persia)?

He speculates that one type of objects (the connected rings) might have appeared in Luristan. He do not say these are Scandinavian. It simply means that these things were first created in Persia, then spread (usually by merchants). Just like, for example, how the rudder went from China to Europe (certainly no Chinese migration there).


Posted By: Styrbiorn
Date Posted: 20-May-2009 at 20:58
Originally posted by Cyrus Shahmiri Cyrus Shahmiri wrote:

Would you please ignore what I myself said and read the books that I suggested? For example you can find several proves of the identity of the Guti with the Goths in  http://books.google.com/books?id=wqaH5kj2gCAC&pg=PA358&lr=&as_brr=3&as_pt=ALLTYPES&source=gbs_search_s&cad=0 - this book  that I mentioned, this 736 page book (Published by Kessinger Publishing, 2004) just almost talks about this thing, another interesting proof in this book:
 

Hehe, it might have been published in 2004; it was written in 1929 by Laurence Wadell, also the writer of "The great epic poem of the ancient Britons of the exploits of King Thor, Arthur, or Adam and his knights in establishing civilization reforming Eden & capturing the Holy Grail about 3380-3350 B.C.", where  he claimed - among other interesting things - that the Icelandic Edda was actually British. He also claimed the alphabeth was not Phoenician at all: it was created by the Aryan über-menschen, along with the First City or Ur, Babylon and whatnot. Since you seem to like this book (which incidently is named Makers of Civilization in Race and History, referring to the "Aryan race") so much, do you agree with the conclusions?: I'm quoting:
Originally posted by Cyrus's source Cyrus's source wrote:

In the foregoing pages the Sumerians are proved to be the Early Aryans or the primitive Goths, and of that race which is now generally called "The Nordic" or North European, who as the most advanced people of their time entered Asia Minor about 3380 B.C. from the North or West, and established there the first great state, and built there the first city, with Civilization, in the dictionary meaning of that word. The immemorial homeland of the Goths is the mighty fertile and richly metalliferous Danube Valley,...

He goes on how they were the Civilized Overlords of the "short pit-dwelling Mediterranean race" and then invaded Mesopotamia where they created civilization. Yet another Aryan supremacist on Cyrus's list of sources, that is. Is this what you were refering to, Suren?


Posted By: Suren
Date Posted: 20-May-2009 at 21:40
Styrbiorn I do not support any sort of Aryan supremacy or racism theories. I simply said what I have experienced especially in central Europe. Many common people look at us differently whenever it happen to be middle eastern be my guest to experience the attitude. Fortunately, I have many smart European and American friends (which admit the existence of that attitude within society and a need for more education and endurance). Smile
Plz forget about master race which I said; it was out of frustration, but still the bossy attitude exists in many white Europeans. If you don't have it then good for you and your friends.

Cyrus, you need to use more reliable sources, if you want to have a better discussion.Geek

I will leave you guys alone... have a nice discussion.


-------------
Anfører


Posted By: Styrbiorn
Date Posted: 20-May-2009 at 21:52
No problem, I understand your point. I've experienced that attitude myself (from French and Chinese individuals, in this case) and it's admitedly quite annoying. It's certainly existing, but not only here in Europe but in all over the globe... excepting more relaxed places presumably. Military, economical or any other sort of dominance gives birth to this attitude and is difficult to get rid of. Human nature can be a bitch. Smile


Posted By: King John
Date Posted: 20-May-2009 at 23:12
Originally posted by Cyrus Shahmiri Cyrus Shahmiri wrote:

King John, I think Suren gave me a good advice: "It doesn't matter how hard you try, they deny with any means.", as you usual you read another proof and denied it without even saying anything about the main thing (Iarla, Earl, ...)
I didn't say anything because you have posted this book before, as a website article written by Samir Abbas.  I spoke to it's claims then and don't feel the need to repeat myself, however I will.  The book was written in 1929 so the fact that it was published as a reissue in 2004 is irrelevant.  What is relevant is that it's argument hasn't been proven correct in the 80 years since it was first written; and one would assume that we today have more tools with which to prove this thesis correct than were available to the author in 1929.  Let's also do a little criticism of the book, I believe I pointed out that Waddell notes that since 1911 nothing has proven the descent of Goths from Gutians.  You replied with essentially "so what, that was 1911."  Well in 1929 that was very recent scholarship, now however that scholarship is antiquated so you might want to find a more recent source.  The reissue in 2004 doesn't take away the fact that all the footnotes and bibliography are references to scholarship written in the late 19th and early 20th Centuries.  If you came to a professor with a theory and paper for which the sourcing dated almost entirely to the early 20th and late 19th Centuries, they would tell you to find more reliable and more recent sources.  They would also probably tell you to rethink your idea.  

In 1929 let's see what other scholars had to say about this book:
Originally posted by H.L. Shapiro <em><u>Pacific Affair</u></em> 12 (December 1930): 1168-1169 H.L. Shapiro Pacific Affair 12 (December 1930): 1168-1169 wrote:

The reader does not need to peruse this work very far to become aware of its distinct bias and unscientific method.  Fortunately the "Nordic race-mongers" have become so discredited that there is little to fear from the effect of this opus on the intelligent lay public.  Succinctly, Mr. Waddel believes that the beginning of all civilization dates from the Sumerians who were blond Nordics with blue eyes–he knows they were blond because they wore dark jewlery, and blue-eyed because lapis lazuli is found to represent the eye.  From Mesopotamia, carried by these Nordic Sumerians, civilization spread to Egypt, Crete, Greece, Europe and India and China.  Mr Waddell indiscriminately mixes the plausible with the incredible.
That's a pretty tough review.  Shapiro calls the book biased and says it lacks scientific method, he also calls the author a "Nordic race-monger" and notes how he mixes the plausible with the incredible.  But, hey that's just one reviewer maybe others think differently.  Shapiro seems to be a well published scholar writing books such as Migration and Environment and Man, Culture, and Society among other numerous articles.  I think he is a fair judge of the scholarship of Waddell's work presently in question.  I'm not going to deal with Waddell any more since he has clearly been discredited.  I hope that is a sufficient comment on the work of Waddell.

Quote As you can read in the first page, Dr. Birger Nerman's article is about the Bronze Age and just talks about the bronze objects of this period,
Oh, it's only just the Bronze Age, well that makes a world of difference (that's sarcasm).  Well, when did your theorized migration happen then?  We know, via archaeological records, that Gotland was inhabited as early as 3100 BC so did this migration happen before, during, or after the Bronze Age?  If it happened after or in the later Bronze Age, where is the evidence for it?  Furthermore why is it so difficult to accept the simpler explanation for the arrival of objects of Luristanian origin through trade as opposed to a mass migration. 

Quote it is clear by "types" he means "types of any bronze objects of the Bronze Age", there can be different types, like Chinese type, Egyptian type, ... but what does it mean when he says about the Scandinavian type, this type originated in Luristan (Persia)?
He never uses the term "Scandinavian type" all he hypothesizes is that the bronze objects found in Scandinavia are similar to those found in Luristan and probably originated in Luristan.  He does not support your thesis that the Goths were descended from the Gutians as you would have us believe.  If you don't believe me go read my translation of the excerpt which you posted.  He makes no mention of a migration he simply implies that these objects got to Gotland and the Mälar Valley via trade, as is explicitly stated in the summary to the article, the first part of which you posted and the remainder of which I posted.


*Edit: If you really want to be taken seriously, why not come to the table with more reputable sources and an actual understanding of what they say?  Also you probably shouldn't try to make the source(s) say things that they don't say.  If you come with strong evidence I will gladly change my mind, the problem is you don't bring strong evidence to the table.


Posted By: Cyrus Shahmiri
Date Posted: 21-May-2009 at 07:44
Originally posted by Styrbiorn Styrbiorn wrote:

Originally posted by Cyrus Shahmiri Cyrus Shahmiri wrote:

King John, I think Suren gave me a good advice: "It doesn't matter how hard you try, they deny with any means.", as you usual you read another proof and denied it without even saying anything about the main thing (Iarla, Earl, ...)
As you can read in the first page, Dr. Birger Nerman's article is about the Bronze Age and just talks about the bronze objects of this period, it is clear by "types" he means "types of any bronze objects of the Bronze Age", there can be different types, like Chinese type, Egyptian type, ... but what does it mean when he says about the Scandinavian type, this type originated in Luristan (Persia)?

He speculates that one type of objects (the connected rings) might have appeared in Luristan. He do not say these are Scandinavian. It simply means that these things were first created in Persia, then spread (usually by merchants). Just like, for example, how the rudder went from China to Europe (certainly no Chinese migration there).
 
Do you think you can fool us because we don't know Swedish language? It is enough that someone just reads the short summary in English:
 
Quote Caucasian influence can be detected in several objects: from per. 4 of the Bronze Age a tutulus with bird figure from Blekinge (see Fig. 13, cf. Fig. 14), from per. 5 a loop from Småland for instance (see Fig. 15, cf. Fig. 16), from per. 6 a pin from Halland for instance (see Fig. 19, cf. Fig. 20), from per. 1 of the Iron Age a pin from Gotland (see Fig. 17, cf. Fig. 18).
Influenccs are also observable from Luristan in west Persia, e. g. the bronze bowl in Fig. 21 from Västmanland from per. 5 (cf. Fig. 22).
 
What does "influence" mean? A merchant? according to my Oxford dictionary this word means "the capacity to have an effect on the character or behaviour of someone", do you think it happened by telepathy?!!
 
And is bowl a type of connected rings?!!!!


Posted By: Cyrus Shahmiri
Date Posted: 21-May-2009 at 08:42
Originally posted by Styrbiorn Styrbiorn wrote:

Originally posted by Cyrus Shahmiri Cyrus Shahmiri wrote:

Would you please ignore what I myself said and read the books that I suggested? For example you can find several proves of the identity of the Guti with the Goths in  http://books.google.com/books?id=wqaH5kj2gCAC&pg=PA358&lr=&as_brr=3&as_pt=ALLTYPES&source=gbs_search_s&cad=0 - this book  that I mentioned, this 736 page book (Published by Kessinger Publishing, 2004) just almost talks about this thing, another interesting proof in this book:
 

Hehe, it might have been published in 2004; it was written in 1929 by Laurence Wadell, also the writer of "The great epic poem of the ancient Britons of the exploits of King Thor, Arthur, or Adam and his knights in establishing civilization reforming Eden & capturing the Holy Grail about 3380-3350 B.C.", where  he claimed - among other interesting things - that the Icelandic Edda was actually British. He also claimed the alphabeth was not Phoenician at all: it was created by the Aryan über-menschen, along with the First City or Ur, Babylon and whatnot. Since you seem to like this book (which incidently is named Makers of Civilization in Race and History, referring to the "Aryan race") so much, do you agree with the conclusions?: I'm quoting:
Originally posted by Cyrus's source Cyrus's source wrote:

In the foregoing pages the Sumerians are proved to be the Early Aryans or the primitive Goths, and of that race which is now generally called "The Nordic" or North European, who as the most advanced people of their time entered Asia Minor about 3380 B.C. from the North or West, and established there the first great state, and built there the first city, with Civilization, in the dictionary meaning of that word. The immemorial homeland of the Goths is the mighty fertile and richly metalliferous Danube Valley,...

He goes on how they were the Civilized Overlords of the "short pit-dwelling Mediterranean race" and then invaded Mesopotamia where they created civilization. Yet another Aryan supremacist on Cyrus's list of sources, that is. Is this what you were refering to, Suren?
You can't hide your ultra-nationalism by accusing others of being Aryan supremacist, Sumer was just some kilometers west of the western Iran where Gutians lived, we know Gutians have been mentioned in the earliest Sumerian texts, so they could be even an older nation in compare of Sumerians, if it is proved that Gutians were an Aryan/Indo-European people then it won't be difficult to prove Sumerians were the Early Aryans or the primitive Goths, as Sharruking said about "Sumerian civilization" in this thread: http://www.allempires.net/forum_posts.asp?TID=487&PID=7980#7980 - http://www.allempires.net/forum_posts.asp?TID=487&PID=7980#7980  it is traced back to the Kermanshah Culture (c. 7500-5600 BC) of western Iran.  The descendant culture appeared in central Mesopotamia, known as the Samarra Culture (c. 5700-4900 BC).  Later still, elements of this culture migrated south into southern Mesopotamia where the Ubaid Culture (c. 5300-3900 BC) took root.  It developed into the Uruk Culture (c. 3900-3100 BC).  It was during this time that the earliest pictographic writing developed (by c. 3500 BC), which developed into a proto-cuneiform script by the Jembat Nasr period (c. 3100-2900 BC), which became a fully developed cuneiform script in the Sumerian Early Dynastic Period (c. 2900-2300 BC) by about 2500 BC.  There was apparently no interruptions in the development of Sumerian civilization from its Neolithic past.


Posted By: Cyrus Shahmiri
Date Posted: 21-May-2009 at 08:59
Originally posted by Suren Suren wrote:

Cyrus, you need to use more reliable sources, if you want to have a better discussion.Geek
These are reliable sources, don't let them to fool you by their Aryan supremacy accusations, you will be an Aryan supremacist, if you just say I am an Aryan, I need to use no source, if I want to have a better discussion with them, because they believe in no source, you can read what they say about those archaeological sources.


Posted By: Styrbiorn
Date Posted: 21-May-2009 at 09:06
Originally posted by Cyrus Shahmiri Cyrus Shahmiri wrote:

You can't hide your ultra-nationalism by accusing others of being Aryan supremacist, Sumer was just some kilometers west of the western Iran where Gutians lived, we know Gutians have been mentioned in the earliest Sumerian texts, so they could be even an older nation in compare of Sumerians, if it is proved that Gutians were an Aryan/Indo-European people then it won't be difficult to prove Sumerians were the Early Aryans or the primitive Goths, as Sharruking said about "Sumerian civilization" in this thread: http://www.allempires.net/forum_posts.asp?TID=487&PID=7980#7980 - http://www.allempires.net/forum_posts.asp?TID=487&PID=7980#7980  it is traced back to the Kermanshah Culture (c. 7500-5600 BC) of western Iran.  The descendant culture appeared in central Mesopotamia, known as the Samarra Culture (c. 5700-4900 BC).  Later still, elements of this culture migrated south into southern Mesopotamia where the Ubaid Culture (c. 5300-3900 BC) took root.  It developed into the Uruk Culture (c. 3900-3100 BC).  It was during this time that the earliest pictographic writing developed (by c. 3500 BC), which developed into a proto-cuneiform script by the Jembat Nasr period (c. 3100-2900 BC), which became a fully developed cuneiform script in the Sumerian Early Dynastic Period (c. 2900-2300 BC) by about 2500 BC.  There was apparently no interruptions in the development of Sumerian civilization from its Neolithic past.

You are using Nazi sources but I'm the nationalist?
Why don't you ask Sharukkin what he thinks about a superior Aryan race descending from their home on the plains of Danube in 3380BC from where they invaded Mesopotamia and created Civilization?
Originally posted by Cyrus Shahmiri Cyrus Shahmiri wrote:

 
Do you think you can fool us because we don't know Swedish language? It is enough that someone just reads the short summary in English:


Yes, let's read it:
Originally posted by Cyrus's source Cyrus's source wrote:


But Scandinavia, primarily Gotland, also had connections further east.
This applies particularly to the Caucasus. The pin in Fig. 11 from Gotland
is Imported from there (cf. Fig. 12). Caucasian influence can be detected in
several objects: from per. 4 of the Bronze Age a tutulus with bird figure
from Blekinge (see Fig. 13, cf. Fig. 14), from per. 5 a loop from Småland for
instance (see Fig. 15, cf. Fig. 16), from per. 6 a pin from Halland for
instance (see Fig. 19, cf. Fig. 20), from per. 1 of the Iron Age a pin from
Gotland (see Fig. 17, cf. Fig. 18).
Influenccs are also obscrvablc from Luristan in west Persia, e. g. the bronze
bowl in Fig. 21 from Västmanland from per. 5 (cf. Fig. 22).
What is most surprising, however, is that parallels can be found between
Seandinavia on the one hand and Siberia, North China and perhaps even
Indo-China
on tlie other. Thus the animal beads on processional requisites
(Fig. 24) from the neighbourhood of Falköping belonging to per. 5 and the
animal heads on stern and stern of the rock-carved ship (Fig. 23) from
»Brandskogen» forest near Enköping have counterparts in Siberia and North
China (Fig. 25). Indeed, a knife from Holstein (Fig. 26) and a similar one
from Jutland may have affinitles with knives in Annam
(Fig. 27). These
types probably originated in the Caucasus and Persia, whence they spread
both to the north-west and to the east.
Commcrcial intercoursewith the east brought riches to the motherland
areas. The expansion may perhaps best be explained by assuming a fairly
large Central Sweden-Gotland realm with its centre in that case in the
Mälar valley. It was from bere that the conquests were made, trading
activities being mainly left to the people of Gotland. Gotland and presumably
even other Scandinavian traders evidently made their way to the east and
south-cast of tlie Baltic Sea during the late Bronze Age, and it is not 1mpossible
tbat Scandinavian and Caucasian merchants sometimes met in
eastern Europé
. A bit into per. 1 of the Iron Age tlie Central Swedish and
Gotland connections with t lic east come to an end.


The whole section is about trade.

Originally posted by Cyrus Shahmiri Cyrus Shahmiri wrote:

What does "influence" mean? A merchant? according to my Oxford dictionary this word means "the capacity to have an effect on the character or behaviour of someone", do you think it happened by telepathy?!!
 

Someone claiming to have a PhD degree in history ought to know what influence means, so I'm not sure if you're kidding with me. But I'll bite. Swede buys funny-looking thing from  Merchant who in turn bought it from a Persian. The Swede likes some of its looks and incorporates it in his own works. Influence occured. Happens every day, since time immemorial.



Posted By: King John
Date Posted: 21-May-2009 at 13:27
Originally posted by Cyrus Shahmiri Cyrus Shahmiri wrote:

Originally posted by Suren Suren wrote:

Cyrus, you need to use more reliable sources, if you want to have a better discussion.Geek
These are reliable sources, don't let them to fool you by their Aryan supremacy accusations, you will be an Aryan supremacist, if you just say I am an Aryan, I need to use no source, if I want to have a better discussion with them, because they believe in no source, you can read what they say about those archaeological sources.
You mix reliable with unreliable sources, for instance you mix Nerman with Waddell; that is not our fault.  You really do need to use better sources, you also tend to misrepresent the sources and when you are called on it you either don't respond, make something up, or imply somebody is a racist.  If you say I am an Aryan, you will be nothing more than an Aryan.  Saying you are something doesn't make you a supremacist for that group.  I am Jewish and by saying so I am not saying I am a Jewish Supremacist.  We believe is sources, but the archaeological sources don't support your theory of a migration, the sources show the effects of trade as is explicitly mentioned in the excerpts from the articles and summaries that you provided.


*Edit:  I have said on multiple occasions to you and once in this thread that if you bring strong, solid evidence to the table I will change my mind, but as of right now you haven't convinced me of the veracity of your theory.  Your argument as noted above is based on misinterpretation and weak sources, this is no way to make a convincing argument.  I will be unavailable for a few days but I will pick up this conversation on Sunday when I come back.


Posted By: Cyrus Shahmiri
Date Posted: 22-May-2009 at 12:07
Styrbiorn, if the Chinese wear the jeans, it will certainly show the influence of American culture in China, this influence will be stronger if you find other things such as American foods (like McDonald's), movies (like Hollywood), ... in China too, what if you find a people in China who exactly look like Americans (unlike yellow-skinned Chinese) and call themselves American too? This question can be also asked about America and red-skinned native Americans, and why not Norway, Sweden and other Scandinavian countries?
 
http://polardiscovery.whoi.edu/poles/impact.html - http://polardiscovery.whoi.edu/poles/impact.html
 
The Arctic: Native people
 
Arctic nations include: Canada, Greenland (a territory of Denmark), Russia, United States (Alaska), Iceland, Norway, Sweden, and Finland.


Posted By: Slayertplsko
Date Posted: 22-May-2009 at 12:24

Originally posted by Cyrus Shahmiri Cyrus Shahmiri wrote:

Styrbiorn, if the Chinese wear the jeans, it will certainly show the influence of American culture in China, this influence will be stronger if you find other things like American foods (like McDonald's), movies (like Hollywood), ... in China too, what if you find a people in China who exactly look like Americans (unlike yellow-skinned Chinese) and call themselves Americans too? This question can be asked about America and red skinned native Americans too.

We Slovaks wear jeans, eat in McDonnalds, do shopping in Tesco, Carrefour, drink Coke and so on, watch American movies, listen to American rap, pop, rock, r&b or anything that comes to your mind. However, we are still Slovaks, speaking Slovak, living in Slovakia, keeping Slovak traditions and our music, even though genres like rock or pop or even rap are populat over here, is strongly marked by Central Slovak musical roots as well as other musical traditions like Hungarian and Gypsy. Moreover, THERE IS NO MASS MIGRATION FROM AMERICA!! Americans aren't our ancestors because of the aforesaid (moreover, not everything mentioned was American). Please, get it finally and stop ridiculing yourself.



-------------
A mind is like a parachute. It doesn't work if it's not open.


Posted By: Cyrus Shahmiri
Date Posted: 22-May-2009 at 12:50
Originally posted by Slayertplsko Slayertplsko wrote:

We Slovaks wear jeans, eat in McDonnalds, do shopping in Tesco, Carrefour, drink Coke and so on, watch American movies, listen to American rap, pop, rock, r&b or anything that comes to your mind. However, we are still Slovaks, speaking Slovak, living in Slovakia, keeping Slovak traditions and our music, even though genres like rock or pop or even rap are populat over here, is strongly marked by Central Slovak musical roots as well as other musical traditions like Hungarian and Gypsy. Moreover, THERE IS NO MASS MIGRATION FROM AMERICA!! Americans aren't our ancestors because of the aforesaid (moreover, not everything mentioned was American). Please, get it finally and stop ridiculing yourself.
 
There is no need to be any mass migration from America to see the influence of American culture in Slovakia, just 300 years ago in Zanjan province of Iran, people just spoke Persian and all things were almost exatcly similar to other Persians, but without any mass migration, Azeri Turkish influence increased gradually in this region, so that now Zanjanis proudly call themselves Turks and speak Azeri Turkish.


Posted By: King John
Date Posted: 22-May-2009 at 19:12
Originally posted by Cyrus Shahmiri Cyrus Shahmiri wrote:

Originally posted by Slayertplsko Slayertplsko wrote:

We Slovaks wear jeans, eat in McDonnalds, do shopping in Tesco, Carrefour, drink Coke and so on, watch American movies, listen to American rap, pop, rock, r&b or anything that comes to your mind. However, we are still Slovaks, speaking Slovak, living in Slovakia, keeping Slovak traditions and our music, even though genres like rock or pop or even rap are populat over here, is strongly marked by Central Slovak musical roots as well as other musical traditions like Hungarian and Gypsy. Moreover, THERE IS NO MASS MIGRATION FROM AMERICA!! Americans aren't our ancestors because of the aforesaid (moreover, not everything mentioned was American). Please, get it finally and stop ridiculing yourself.
 
There is no need to be any mass migration from America to see the influence of American culture in Slovakia, just 300 years ago in Zanjan province of Iran, people just spoke Persian and all things were almost exatcly similar to other Persians, but without any mass migration, Azeri Turkish influence increased gradually in this region, so that now Zanjanis proudly call themselves Turks and speak Azeri Turkish.
But, your theory as I understand it is based on the fact that a mass migration occurred from Iranian lands to scandinavia.  So how does this help you?


Posted By: Cyrus Shahmiri
Date Posted: 22-May-2009 at 19:43
Quote But, your theory as I understand it is based on the fact that a mass migration occurred from Iranian lands to scandinavia.  So how does this help you?
I believe that there were also some migrations, however it was not a necessity of Gutian influence in Gotland, in fact I think in the ancient times, the cultural influence could occur mostly through migrations, one of the reasons is that there were no modern communication medias like TV, radio, newspapers, internet or etc, am I wrong?


Posted By: Slayertplsko
Date Posted: 22-May-2009 at 20:37
Originally posted by Cyrus Shahmiri Cyrus Shahmiri wrote:

Quote But, your theory as I understand it is based on the fact that a mass migration occurred from Iranian lands to scandinavia.  So how does this help you?
I believe that there were also some migrations, however it was not a necessity of Gutian influence in Gotland, in fact I think in the ancient times, the cultural influence could occur mostly through migrations, one of the reasons is that there were no modern communication medias like TV, radio, newspapers, internet or etc, am I wrong?

Now, explain us this:

I believe that there were also some migrations, however it was not a necessity of Gutian influence in Gotland, in fact I think in the ancient times, the cultural influence could occur mostly through migrations,...

So now what's correct?? Was there a migration according to your theory or not??

The Azeri influence in North-West Iran presupposes no necessary migration or occupation, because the Oghuz Turks neighboured the area. But according to my modest geographic knowledge, Luristan and Gotland are several thousands of kms apart. So you want to claim that the pre-Goths (whose origin in Gotland is disputed by the way) one day decided to become Goths, under the influence of a people that dwelled several thousands of kms far away and never migrated to the area?? Or did they migrate?? If so, what's the evidence for it?



-------------
A mind is like a parachute. It doesn't work if it's not open.


Posted By: Cyrus Shahmiri
Date Posted: 23-May-2009 at 16:57

I have always said that there were some migrations but you compare the ancient influences with modern ones and say some influences could occur without any migration, like about the jeans, but was it possible in the ancient times?

I think after bronzes, Luristan is famous for rock carvings in the world, there are numerous rock carvings in this region and some of them are really similar to the ones in Sweden and other Scandinavian countries.
 


Posted By: Cyrus Shahmiri
Date Posted: 23-May-2009 at 17:43
Just search for Maps of Lur: http://mapsof.net/Lur/ - http://mapsof.net/Lur/  as you see there are just three places in Iran and two places in Sweden with the exact name of Lur in the world, do you know why?


Posted By: King John
Date Posted: 25-May-2009 at 03:16
Originally posted by Cyrus Shahmiri Cyrus Shahmiri wrote:

Just search for Maps of Lur: http://mapsof.net/Lur/ - http://mapsof.net/Lur/  as you see there are just three places in Iran and two places in Sweden with the exact name of Lur in the world, do you know why?
Because there is a finite combination of letters in the Indo-European languages.


Posted By: King John
Date Posted: 25-May-2009 at 03:20
Originally posted by Cyrus Shahmiri Cyrus Shahmiri wrote:

I have always said that there were some migrations but you compare the ancient influences with modern ones and say some influences could occur without any migration, like about the jeans, but was it possible in the ancient times?

I think after bronzes, Luristan is famous for rock carvings in the world, there are numerous rock carvings in this region and some of them are really similar to the ones in Sweden and other Scandinavian countries.
 
I bet if you compared these same cave painting to those found in the Americas, other areas of Europe, and Asia, you would find that they are very similar.  By the way what does a similarity in cave painting do to help your thesis?  When were these paintings/carvings made?  Can you prove that one is influenced by the other or that there is any connection between the two?


Posted By: King John
Date Posted: 25-May-2009 at 03:23
Originally posted by Cyrus Shahmiri Cyrus Shahmiri wrote:

Quote But, your theory as I understand it is based on the fact that a mass migration occurred from Iranian lands to scandinavia.  So how does this help you?
I believe that there were also some migrations, however it was not a necessity of Gutian influence in Gotland, in fact I think in the ancient times, the cultural influence could occur mostly through migrations, one of the reasons is that there were no modern communication medias like TV, radio, newspapers, internet or etc, am I wrong?
You're going to have to explain this comment to me because I just don't follow the logic; maybe it's because I have been traveling all day and am really tired.  You also don't answer the question I asked at the end of my post; another question you neglect to answer just like most of the others I have asked in the course of this thread.


Posted By: Styrbiorn
Date Posted: 25-May-2009 at 09:18
Originally posted by Cyrus Shahmiri Cyrus Shahmiri wrote:

Quote But, your theory as I understand it is based on the fact that a mass migration occurred from Iranian lands to scandinavia.  So how does this help you?
I believe that there were also some migrations, however it was not a necessity of Gutian influence in Gotland, in fact I think in the ancient times, the cultural influence could occur mostly through migrations, one of the reasons is that there were no modern communication medias like TV, radio, newspapers, internet or etc, am I wrong?

Think about it a little and you'll see that you are wrong. Do you think bronze, iron casting was spread only through migration? That agriculture, the wheel, stirrups, compass, rudder, mathematics, etc etc mostly spread via migration? In that case the whole world is either entirely Chinese or Hittite. The only difference is the rate of the spread, which is enhanced by the modern communication.


Posted By: Cyrus Shahmiri
Date Posted: 25-May-2009 at 15:56
Originally posted by King John King John wrote:

Originally posted by Cyrus Shahmiri Cyrus Shahmiri wrote:

Just search for Maps of Lur: http://mapsof.net/Lur/ - http://mapsof.net/Lur/  as you see there are just three places in Iran and two places in Sweden with the exact name of Lur in the world, do you know why?
Because there is a finite combination of letters in the Indo-European languages.
Not all Indo-European languages, but some of them, as I said in the first page of this thread (about Middle Persian Lap "lip"), there was no "L" sound neither in Avestan nor in Old Persian language.


Posted By: Styrbiorn
Date Posted: 25-May-2009 at 16:22
Originally posted by Cyrus Shahmiri Cyrus Shahmiri wrote:

Just search for Maps of Lur: http://mapsof.net/Lur/ - http://mapsof.net/Lur/  as you see there are just three places in Iran and two places in Sweden with the exact name of Lur in the world, do you know why?

Coincidence. The Swedish Lur (which is actually originally Norwegian) comes from lúðer, and a Scandinavian 'u' is not the same as a Persian (a Persian 'u' would be 'o' in Swedish). These searches are ridiculous. There are four Mora:s in the world, one is Sweden, one in Minnesota (founded by people from the Swedish one), one in Spain, one in Cameroon. There are two Tibro, one in Sweden, one in Pakistan, Lule exists only in Sweden and neighbouring African countries, etc etc.


Posted By: Slayertplsko
Date Posted: 25-May-2009 at 16:47
Originally posted by Cyrus Shahmiri Cyrus Shahmiri wrote:

Originally posted by King John King John wrote:

Originally posted by Cyrus Shahmiri Cyrus Shahmiri wrote:

Just search for Maps of Lur: http://mapsof.net/Lur/ - http://mapsof.net/Lur/  as you see there are just three places in Iran and two places in Sweden with the exact name of Lur in the world, do you know why?
Because there is a finite combination of letters in the Indo-European languages.
Not all Indo-European languages, but some of them, as I said in the first page of this thread (about Middle Persian Lap "lip"), there was no "L" sound neither in Avestan nor in Old Persian language.

Which IE language has an infinite combinations of letters in the alphabet?? And how is your lecture about Iranian phonology relevant here?? If the two languages lacked the sound, it can mean only two things:

1, it's of Iranian origin but a recent one, ie. New Persian

2, it's of foreign origin, perhaps Arabic or Turkic



-------------
A mind is like a parachute. It doesn't work if it's not open.


Posted By: Cyrus Shahmiri
Date Posted: 25-May-2009 at 17:43
Originally posted by Styrbiorn Styrbiorn wrote:


Think about it a little and you'll see that you are wrong. Do you think bronze, iron casting was spread only through migration? That agriculture, the wheel, stirrups, compass, rudder, mathematics, etc etc mostly spread via migration? In that case the whole world is either entirely Chinese or Hittite. The only difference is the rate of the spread, which is enhanced by the modern communication.
However I believe there were certainly some immigrant peoples (you can call them merchants) who spread these things, but the important point is that the Swedish articles talk about "Types", not just "Inventions", it doesn't matter who invented the bronze metal, the Chinese have had their own types of bronze objects, this is an ancient Chinese type:
 
 
And this one is an ancient Egyptian type:
 
 
 
And this one, however has been found in Iran, but is certainly a Greek type:
 
 
The interesting about the last one is that it has been found in Luristan, but is it a Luristan Bronze?
 
This is a Luristan type:
 
 
As I said in the first page, Dr. T.J.Arne has comapred it with the one which has been found in Gotland:
 
 
Several other bronze objects of Luristan and Gotland have been compared by other archaeologists and as Dr. Berman said these types have originated in Luristan, it can just show there was a connection between the people of Luristan and Gotland.


Posted By: Styrbiorn
Date Posted: 25-May-2009 at 18:46
Originally posted by Cyrus Shahmiri Cyrus Shahmiri wrote:

 
Several other bronze objects of Luristan and Gotland have been compared by other archaeologists and as Dr. Berman said these types have originated in Luristan, it can just show there was a connection between the people of Luristan and Gotland.

He also said they were a result of trade. And Cyrus, iron working, compass etc, were just examples, same goes for designs as well. You're reallly clutching at slippery straws now.


Posted By: Slayertplsko
Date Posted: 25-May-2009 at 19:34

Originally posted by Cyrus Shahmiri Cyrus Shahmiri wrote:

And this one, however has been found in Iran, but is certainly a Greek type:

Well, according to you way of thinking, this one would show some connection between Greeks and Persians, right?? So Greeks migrated to Persia and were responsible for the emergence of Persian culture??

And since this is a Greek type, then it should follow that the one found in Gotland is a Luristani type.



-------------
A mind is like a parachute. It doesn't work if it's not open.


Posted By: Cyrus Shahmiri
Date Posted: 25-May-2009 at 20:12
Originally posted by Styrbiorn Styrbiorn wrote:

Originally posted by Cyrus Shahmiri Cyrus Shahmiri wrote:

Just search for Maps of Lur: http://mapsof.net/Lur/ - http://mapsof.net/Lur/  as you see there are just three places in Iran and two places in Sweden with the exact name of Lur in the world, do you know why?

Coincidence. The Swedish Lur (which is actually originally Norwegian) comes from lúðer, and a Scandinavian 'u' is not the same as a Persian (a Persian 'u' would be 'o' in Swedish).
It doesn't matter how Persians pronounce it, Luri "u" is neither similar to English "u", nor "o", Lurs pronounce it somehow that you think they want to kiss you! Wink


Posted By: Cyrus Shahmiri
Date Posted: 25-May-2009 at 20:18
Originally posted by Slayertplsko Slayertplsko wrote:

Originally posted by Cyrus Shahmiri Cyrus Shahmiri wrote:

And this one, however has been found in Iran, but is certainly a Greek type:

Well, according to you way of thinking, this one would show some connection between Greeks and Persians, right?? So Greeks migrated to Persia and were responsible for the emergence of Persian culture??

Is there any doubt about this fact?!



Print Page | Close Window

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 11.10 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Copyright ©2001-2017 Web Wiz Ltd. - https://www.webwiz.net