History Community ~ All Empires Homepage


This is the Archive on WORLD Historia, the old original forum.

 You cannot post here - you can only read.

 

Here is the link to the new forum:

  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Forum LockedWas there a Persian Empire?

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  12>
Author
norsken View Drop Down
Housecarl
Housecarl
Avatar

Joined: 27-Jul-2008
Status: Offline
Points: 55
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote norsken Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: Was there a Persian Empire?
    Posted: 27-Jul-2008 at 03:00
Was there a "Persian Empire"?

Sounds strange but it is a valid question. Our view is there was no "Persian Empire" because there were no "Persians". So who were those people running the "Persian Empire"?.  We would like to investigate this question and find out who were realy those people who created the "Persian Empire".

According to Assyrian Records, some people who were called Persians moved into South West of today's Iran in 800 B.C. This is the first appearance of Persians recorded in Assyrian records. So Persians were a recent migrants to this region as opposed to Medes and other natives such as Elamites who assyrians knew about a long time before this period.

It is assumed that they were Proto-Aryans that had just moved from Central Asia to Persia. But many facts contradict this hypothesis.

Persian Empire
Firstly in a span of 200 to 300 these "Persians" created a  vast empire with a very  advance  level of civilization with Post Office and Highways. Persians had a very advance religion. It was called Zoarastrianism. Both Judaism and Christiniaty is based on Zoarastrianism. Even Budism is based on Zoarstrianism. And these "Persians" managed a very vast Empire with a complex organization and social relations. Persian Empire even adopted the "declaration of Human Rights" in 500 B.C.  Persian Empire had even its own CIA too. They were called the "Eyes of the King".

So these people could not have been Proto-Aryans or in other words early Aryan tribes migrating to warmer climates due to the climate change in Central Asia.

So "Persians" should have lived somewhere else for thousands of years before they moved into Persia. In this other location they had developed a high level of culture and civilization and then they had moved into Persia.

So where was this other place that Persians lived previously before moving into Persia? The only place the Persians could have lived is Afghanistan. Afghanistan is an older Aryan civilization than Persia.

We can ask  two questions: If Persians came from Afghanistan, then why Pesians did not speak Pashtoon language? Secondly why did Persians move to South West Iran?

OLD PERSIAN
Persians spoke Old Persian language. Old Persian was contemporary to Avestan, another Old Iranian language. Old Persian is preserved through cuneiform tablets found in the remains after the Achaemenid dynasty (550- 330 BCE). The oldest traces of Old Persian date to the 6th century BCE, but it was spoken until the 3rd century BCE.

Old Persian was spoken in southwestern Iran, while Avestan was spoken in northeastern Iran.
It is believed that there must have been a fair level of mutual intelligibility between the Iranian languages of this period, and more than there would be in later periods. Old Persian and Avestan are closely related to Pashtoon language. The question is why Avestan and Pashtoon language which are eastern Iranian languages was transformed into Old Persian which is south Western Iranian language? Some anthropologist and linguist assume that Median language had some influence on Old Persian and that is the reason for a change of language structure.

"Old Persian" language indicates that the Afghan Society had developed a high level of civilization. There had been a process of stratification in Afghan society. There was a differentiation in Urban and Rural areas. There had developted an elite within Afghan society related to Zoarastrian religion with its own lanague separate from tribal afghans. There was high level of trade with neighboring areas  such as Mesopothemia and Persia's native civilization.

The Question of Trade
We think the expansion of trade required access to the sea. Persians or Parsua or Parsis were the elite of Afghan society. This elite decided to move its headquarters or its main center of civilization from Afghanistan to Persia. So the objective of this migration was to  reach Persian Gulf. That is the reason Persians moved to Pars Province which is adjacent to Persian Gulf and main centers of Babylon in Mesopothemian and Susa in Elam civilizations enabling it to trade with these urban advance civilizations.

We can see the same pattern later with Sakas or Scythians establishing settlements in Lursitan next to Pars province 100 years later and Parthians establish settlements in Pars and Lursitan province 1000 years later. Again access to the Persian Gulf was the main reason for these settlements.

Persians as Afghans
This theory that Persians were actually Afghans is also confirmed by the way "Persian Empire" developed. We have a lot of information about how "Persian Empire" expanded in  the West toward Egypt, Greece, Lydia and the Black sea. There were many wars specially with Greeks involving millions of soldiers and 1000's of ships in those battles. But there is very little information about the Persian Empire expanding to the East. The reason is very simple. Persian Empire was only an extension of Afghan Civilization and Persians were the elite of  Afghan society. So there was no need to expand and conquer the eastern countries or regions.

Furthermore when Greeks called these people for "Persians", they were refering to a specific region or location. Persians were not a specific ethnic group separate from the main Afghan-Bactrian civilization. Therefore we conclude that Persians were actually Afghans who had migrated to Persia and the real "Persian Empire" was actually an Afghan Empire.

Those people who might have a knowledge in this area is welcome to contribute to the elaboration of this theory.


Edited by norsken - 27-Jul-2008 at 03:01
Back to Top
Conservative View Drop Down
Samurai
Samurai
Avatar

Joined: 02-Aug-2007
Location: Iran Inshalla
Status: Offline
Points: 110
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Conservative Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27-Jul-2008 at 12:20
There's no question that the Achaemenids (it is their empire presumably you're talking about) were a dynasty and "elite" that belonged to Iran and what is now Fars province of Iran. Afghanistan as it exists today is merely a few hundred years old. The Afghans are natives of what is south and south-eastern Afghanistan. The rest of that country was incorporated into Afghanistan through conquest and later what the Russians and British empire's decided the boundaries of Afghanistan would be. So there is no question of Persians being an extension of "Afghans" - Afghans-Pashtuns werent even around when the Achaemenids were ruling Pars as regional Kings, sometime before Cyrus the Great began to build the first Persian empire.
 
Zoroastrianism no doubt is older than the first Persian empire but what's your point about that? The Achaemenid empire did not have an official state-religion even though the Achaemenid's themselves may have been Zoroastrians. It was only sometime during the Sassanid empire that Zoroastrianism become something that was institutionalized.
 
Anyway, Persians were living in Iran for generation's before the Achaemenid empire was founded.
 
In Afghanistan, name me and show me some proof of where this "high level of civilization" existed? And by Afghanistan im talking about the real Afghan homeland, ie Helmand, Qandahar etc Where is the proof in archeology of what you claim? All of the Achaemenid's traced their roots and origins to Pars and that is why the region was the centre of the empire and places such as Persepolis, Pasargadae etc were built there.
 
And there is nothing about Afghans-Pashtuns that resembls Persian culture or civilization. Their society, traditions and way of life are totally different to that of Persians and what was known about ancient Persians.
ایران‌ زمین
Back to Top
Slayertplsko View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar

Joined: 13-May-2008
Location: Slovakia
Status: Offline
Points: 1064
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Slayertplsko Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27-Jul-2008 at 12:49
Originally posted by norsken norsken wrote:

We can ask  two questions: If Persians came from Afghanistan, then why Pesians did not speak Pashtoon language?


If Slavic peoples come from modern-day Ukraine, why didn't they speak Ukrainian?
If Germanic peoples come from modern-day Sweden, why didn't they speak Swedish?
If English language has its Germanic origin around modern-day Denmark, why don't they speak Danish?
If Celts come from modern-day Germany, why don't they all speak High German dialects??

You're from Afghanistan, right??Cheers

Back to Top
Zagros View Drop Down
Emperor
Emperor
Avatar
retired AE Moderator

Joined: 11-Aug-2004
Location: London
Status: Offline
Points: 8795
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Zagros Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 28-Jul-2008 at 22:48
Persepolis is actually Pashtunopolis. Simple historical misunderstanding.

Is this alternative history or historical amusement?  I can't decide.
Back to Top
Carpathian Wolf View Drop Down
General
General

BANNED

Joined: 06-Jun-2008
Status: Offline
Points: 884
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Carpathian Wolf Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 28-Jul-2008 at 23:18

Christianity didn't come from Zorastrianism. One is dualistic the other is not.

Back to Top
norsken View Drop Down
Housecarl
Housecarl
Avatar

Joined: 27-Jul-2008
Status: Offline
Points: 55
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote norsken Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 29-Jul-2008 at 00:02
Originally posted by Zagros Zagros wrote:

Persepolis is actually Pashtunopolis. Simple historical misunderstanding.

Is this alternative history or historical amusement?  I can't decide.


Mr. Zagros: you have to address the issues raised in the article. Does Old Persian originate from Pashtoon language and are they related? Where was Zoarastra born? Where did Persians come from? We welcome people who might have information about these events to comment the article.

I am personally not from AFghanistan.
Back to Top
Cyrus Shahmiri View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar
Avatar
King of Kings

Joined: 07-Aug-2004
Location: Iran
Status: Offline
Points: 3963
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Cyrus Shahmiri Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 29-Jul-2008 at 05:51

The better theory which is based on historical facts is that Persians alongside Scythians, Cimmerians and some other Iranian peoples migrated from "Caucasus" first to the northwest of Iran, according to Assyrian sources ancient Persia was just a region around the lake Urmia (northwest of Media, modern Azerbaijan).

http://www.heritageinstitute.com/zoroastrianism/achaemenian/index.htm :

From about 800 to 700 BCE, Parsua or Parsumash, ancient Persia, extended from the southern regions of Lake Urmia to what is Kermanshah (central western Iran) today. Over the period of another century, the concentration of Persians would gradually and peacefully move to the south of this territory - towards the northern boundaries of Elam and the city of Susa (today called Shush, south of Dezful and north of Ahwaz), (see map below) and along the western slopes of the Zagros and Bakhtiyari mountains (see photo of a valley in the Bakhtiyari mountains at the left).
Archaeological evidence indicates that the early Persians lived in established, permanent and peaceful settlements. The gradual move south likely happened for political reasons, because of raids from invading armies such as the Scythians and the Assyrians, and because of a desire to live in security and peace.

Back to Top
norsken View Drop Down
Housecarl
Housecarl
Avatar

Joined: 27-Jul-2008
Status: Offline
Points: 55
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote norsken Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 29-Jul-2008 at 23:20
Originally posted by Cyrus Shahmiri Cyrus Shahmiri wrote:

The better theory which is based on historical facts is that Persians alongside Scythians, Cimmerians and some other Iranian peoples migrated from "Caucasus" first to the northwest of Iran, according to Assyrian sources ancient Persia was just a region around the lake Urmia (northwest of Media, modern Azerbaijan).

http://www.heritageinstitute.com/zoroastrianism/achaemenian/index.htm :

From about 800 to 700 BCE, Parsua or Parsumash, ancient Persia, extended from the southern regions of Lake Urmia to what is Kermanshah (central western Iran) today. Over the period of another century, the concentration of Persians would gradually and peacefully move to the south of this territory - towards the northern boundaries of Elam and the city of Susa (today called Shush, south of Dezful and north of Ahwaz), (see map below) and along the western slopes of the Zagros and Bakhtiyari mountains (see photo of a valley in the Bakhtiyari mountains at the left).
Archaeological evidence indicates that the early Persians lived in established, permanent and peaceful settlements. The gradual move south likely happened for political reasons, because of raids from invading armies such as the Scythians and the Assyrians, and because of a desire to live in security and peace.



Thanks. There are several problems with this theory about Caucasus as the migration path. Persians came from an area between Oxus and Caspian sea.  So they probably came through Khorasan and not Caucasus.

Secondly the text treats Medes and Persians as the same people. Persians and Medes are entirely different people. Medes were natives of Iran. Kurds have 8000 years of civilization in Iran. Medes did not speak an Iranian language and they were not part of aryan tribes.

Also western Iran was occupied already by Medes and others. There was no reason to go to Western Iran. Also Persians were looking for Persian Gulf. There was no reason to go to a landlocked area. Persians had a high level of civilization and culture before coming to Iran.
Back to Top
norsken View Drop Down
Housecarl
Housecarl
Avatar

Joined: 27-Jul-2008
Status: Offline
Points: 55
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote norsken Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 29-Jul-2008 at 23:28
Originally posted by Conservative Conservative wrote:

There's no question that the Achaemenids (it is their empire presumably you're talking about) were a dynasty and "elite" that belonged to Iran and what is now Fars province of Iran. Afghanistan as it exists today is merely a few hundred years old. The Afghans are natives of what is south and south-eastern Afghanistan. The rest of that country was incorporated into Afghanistan through conquest and later what the Russians and British empire's decided the boundaries of Afghanistan would be. So there is no question of Persians being an extension of "Afghans" - Afghans-Pashtuns werent even around when the Achaemenids were ruling Pars as regional Kings, sometime before Cyrus the Great began to build the first Persian empire.
 
Zoroastrianism no doubt is older than the first Persian empire but what's your point about that? The Achaemenid empire did not have an official state-religion even though the Achaemenid's themselves may have been Zoroastrians. It was only sometime during the Sassanid empire that Zoroastrianism become something that was institutionalized.
 
Anyway, Persians were living in Iran for generation's before the Achaemenid empire was founded.
 
In Afghanistan, name me and show me some proof of where this "high level of civilization" existed? And by Afghanistan im talking about the real Afghan homeland, ie Helmand, Qandahar etc Where is the proof in archeology of what you claim? All of the Achaemenid's traced their roots and origins to Pars and that is why the region was the centre of the empire and places such as Persepolis, Pasargadae etc were built there.
 
And there is nothing about Afghans-Pashtuns that resembls Persian culture or civilization. Their society, traditions and way of life are totally different to that of Persians and what was known about ancient Persians.


I hope our afghan friend  Mr. Afghanan can respond to your points. But  I think you misunderstand Afghanistan. You think there is a "Persian race" in Afghanistan who speaks Dari lanaguage and there is another Race called Pashtoon who do not really belong to the "Iranian Race".

Well, that is not correct. The people who speak Dari are the same people who speak Pashtoon and they are from the same tribes. Dari and Middle Persian are languages that came  later to Afghanistan. Before that they all spoke Pashtoon or Avesta which are both Eastern Iranian languages and closely related to each other.
Back to Top
Cyrus Shahmiri View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar
Avatar
King of Kings

Joined: 07-Aug-2004
Location: Iran
Status: Offline
Points: 3963
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Cyrus Shahmiri Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 31-Jul-2008 at 17:28
Originally posted by norsken norsken wrote:

Thanks. There are several problems with this theory about Caucasus as the migration path. Persians came from an area between Oxus and Caspian sea.  So they probably came through Khorasan and not Caucasus.

Secondly the text treats Medes and Persians as the same people. Persians and Medes are entirely different people. Medes were natives of Iran. Kurds have 8000 years of civilization in Iran. Medes did not speak an Iranian language and they were not part of aryan tribes.

Also western Iran was occupied already by Medes and others. There was no reason to go to Western Iran. Also Persians were looking for Persian Gulf. There was no reason to go to a landlocked area. Persians had a high level of civilization and culture before coming to Iran.
Please show your sources about these ones:
 
"Persians came from an area between Oxus and Caspian sea."
"Persians and Medes are entirely different people."
"Kurds have 8000 years of civilization in Iran."
"Medes did not speak an Iranian language and they were not part of aryan tribes."
 
As far as I know, there is absolutely no mention of a Persian presence in the eastern Iran before the Achaemenid period, Persians and Medes were very similar peoples, and about Kurds, if you considered them as the same Sumerain "Karda" (north of Iraq) or Akkadian "Kurtei" (Zagros mountains), they were certainly a non-Iranian people who adopted Iranian culture and language, probably after the Median conquest of these regions in the seventh century BC.


Edited by Cyrus Shahmiri - 31-Jul-2008 at 17:31
Back to Top
Zagros View Drop Down
Emperor
Emperor
Avatar
retired AE Moderator

Joined: 11-Aug-2004
Location: London
Status: Offline
Points: 8795
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Zagros Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01-Aug-2008 at 00:34
There is no doubt in academia that Medes were Iranic.  If you are going to go against conventional wisdom like this you need to present facts.   If the Medes were the primary ancestors of Kurds as you seem to indicate and they didn't speak an iranic language, then why do modern Kurds speak quintessentially iranian languages?

How do you explain the Iranian names of the Medean royalty and clergy? 

If Persians came from Afghanistan and brought everything they had therefrom why did they use the same Cunieform as Elam? 


Edited by Zagros - 01-Aug-2008 at 00:35
Back to Top
norsken View Drop Down
Housecarl
Housecarl
Avatar

Joined: 27-Jul-2008
Status: Offline
Points: 55
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote norsken Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01-Aug-2008 at 01:35
Originally posted by Cyrus Shahmiri Cyrus Shahmiri wrote:


Please show your sources about these ones:
 
"Persians came from an area between Oxus and Caspian sea."

According to Avesta Iran was actually an area between Oxus and Caspian Sea. Persians were Zoarastrians. They should have come from this area. There is no Zoarastrian centers in Caucasus at this time.

Originally posted by Cyrus Shahmiri Cyrus Shahmiri wrote:


"Persians and Medes are entirely different people."

According to Russian sources, Medes were natives of Iran. There are no traces of Medes in Central Asia. There was  a Media Empire long before Persians came to this area.

Originally posted by Cyrus Shahmiri Cyrus Shahmiri wrote:


"Kurds have 8000 years of civilization in Iran."
"Medes did not speak an Iranian language and they were not part of aryan tribes."


According to Wikepedia Kurds have 8000 years of civilization in Iran. Kurds have different origin. We think Kurds mainly originate from Medes specially in Iran and Iraq. Medes and Kurds are not two different people. They are the same people. %15-%20 of Kurds are actually Persians-Sakas. Very  little is left from Median language but if Medes were natives of Iran then they could not have been an Iranian tribe. The Kurdish language is an adopted language by Kurds.

Originally posted by Cyrus Shahmiri Cyrus Shahmiri wrote:


As far as I know, there is absolutely no mention of a Persian presence in the eastern Iran before the Achaemenid period, Persians and Medes were very similar peoplescentury BC.


Avesta was spoken in North Eastern Iran which is mutually intelligeble with Old Persian. We think Persians were Bactrians-Sakas. There may be 5% (Max %10) of these original Persians in Iran. The rest of Persians are actually Medes who have adopted the Persian language.


Edited by norsken - 01-Aug-2008 at 01:40
Back to Top
norsken View Drop Down
Housecarl
Housecarl
Avatar

Joined: 27-Jul-2008
Status: Offline
Points: 55
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote norsken Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01-Aug-2008 at 01:52
Originally posted by Zagros Zagros wrote:

There is no doubt in academia that Medes were Iranic.  If you are going to go against conventional wisdom like this you need to present facts.   If the Medes were the primary ancestors of Kurds as you seem to indicate and they didn't speak an iranic language, then why do modern Kurds speak quintessentially iranian languages?

How do you explain the Iranian names of the Medean royalty and clergy? 

If Persians came from Afghanistan and brought everything they had therefrom why did they use the same Cunieform as Elam? 

Yes. They claim that. But they do not show any evidence to support it. Can you show any sources that make these claims? Those who claim there is a connection between Medes and persians should prove their claims.

Persians were actually similar to Japanese. They adopted anything which was technologically advance from any other people. Armaic was their Empire language.


Edited by norsken - 01-Aug-2008 at 01:54
Back to Top
Kids View Drop Down
Shogun
Shogun
Avatar

Joined: 19-Nov-2004
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
Points: 236
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Kids Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01-Aug-2008 at 08:00
Has anyone checked the latest National Geographic? Anyone who is fan of Persian culture and history, you have to check the this issue (it even provide nicely made Persian map)!
Back to Top
Cyrus Shahmiri View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar
Avatar
King of Kings

Joined: 07-Aug-2004
Location: Iran
Status: Offline
Points: 3963
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Cyrus Shahmiri Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01-Aug-2008 at 08:38

Quote According to Avesta Iran was actually an area between Oxus and Caspian Sea.

This is a non-proved theory (hypothesis), according to Avesta the oiginal land of Iranians which is called "Airyana Vaeja" (Land of Aryans), was in the remote north and too cold.
 
http://www.avesta.org/vendidad/vd1sbe.htm : The first of the good lands and countries which I, Ahura Mazda, created, was the Airyana Vaeja, by the Vanguhi Daitya. There are ten winter months there, two summer months; and those are cold for the waters, cold for the earth, cold for the trees.

Therefore it couldn't certainly the region that you mentioned, furthermore Persians are not equal to Iranians or vice versa.

Quote Persians were Zoarastrians. They should have come from this area.

Do you think Indian Muslims are from Saudi Arabia or Norwegian Christians from Israel?

Quote There is no Zoarastrian centers in Caucasus at this time.

Sassanid source all mention Azerbaijan as the center of Zoroastrianism and the birth place of Zoroaster. (for example read "Zand Avesta")

Quote According to Russian sources, Medes were natives of Iran.

Who do you mean?" Diakonoff in his "History of Media" says there was no mention of Medes before 9th century BC. (first by Assyrians as "Amadai" then New Elamite "matape", Hebrew "madai", Old Persian "Mad", Old Greek "Medoi", Armenian "Mar-k", ...)

Quote There are no traces of Medes in Central Asia.

This is a exact quote from Diakonoff: "With due attention to the relations among Median and Central Asian languages, there is no doubt that the origin of Medes was from Central Asia." (of course some other scholars don't agree with him.)

Quote There was  a Media Empire long before Persians came to this area.

Not more than a century, What does it prove?

Back to Top
Afghanan View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar
Durr e Durran

Joined: 12-Jun-2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 1076
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Afghanan Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01-Aug-2008 at 10:12
Originally posted by norsken norsken wrote:

Was there a "Persian Empire"?

Sounds strange but it is a valid question. Our view is there was no "Persian Empire" because there were no "Persians". So who were those people running the "Persian Empire"?.  We would like to investigate this question and find out who were realy those people who created the "Persian Empire".

According to Assyrian Records, some people who were called Persians moved into South West of today's Iran in 800 B.C. This is the first appearance of Persians recorded in Assyrian records. So Persians were a recent migrants to this region as opposed to Medes and other natives such as Elamites who assyrians knew about a long time before this period.

It is assumed that they were Proto-Aryans that had just moved from Central Asia to Persia. But many facts contradict this hypothesis.

Persian Empire
Firstly in a span of 200 to 300 these "Persians" created a  vast empire with a very  advance  level of civilization with Post Office and Highways. Persians had a very advance religion. It was called Zoarastrianism. Both Judaism and Christiniaty is based on Zoarastrianism. Even Budism is based on Zoarstrianism. And these "Persians" managed a very vast Empire with a complex organization and social relations. Persian Empire even adopted the "declaration of Human Rights" in 500 B.C.  Persian Empire had even its own CIA too. They were called the "Eyes of the King".

So these people could not have been Proto-Aryans or in other words early Aryan tribes migrating to warmer climates due to the climate change in Central Asia.

So "Persians" should have lived somewhere else for thousands of years before they moved into Persia. In this other location they had developed a high level of culture and civilization and then they had moved into Persia.

So where was this other place that Persians lived previously before moving into Persia? The only place the Persians could have lived is Afghanistan. Afghanistan is an older Aryan civilization than Persia.

We can ask  two questions: If Persians came from Afghanistan, then why Pesians did not speak Pashtoon language? Secondly why did Persians move to South West Iran?

OLD PERSIAN
Persians spoke Old Persian language. Old Persian was contemporary to Avestan, another Old Iranian language. Old Persian is preserved through cuneiform tablets found in the remains after the Achaemenid dynasty (550- 330 BCE). The oldest traces of Old Persian date to the 6th century BCE, but it was spoken until the 3rd century BCE.

Old Persian was spoken in southwestern Iran, while Avestan was spoken in northeastern Iran.
It is believed that there must have been a fair level of mutual intelligibility between the Iranian languages of this period, and more than there would be in later periods. Old Persian and Avestan are closely related to Pashtoon language. The question is why Avestan and Pashtoon language which are eastern Iranian languages was transformed into Old Persian which is south Western Iranian language? Some anthropologist and linguist assume that Median language had some influence on Old Persian and that is the reason for a change of language structure.

"Old Persian" language indicates that the Afghan Society had developed a high level of civilization. There had been a process of stratification in Afghan society. There was a differentiation in Urban and Rural areas. There had developted an elite within Afghan society related to Zoarastrian religion with its own lanague separate from tribal afghans. There was high level of trade with neighboring areas  such as Mesopothemia and Persia's native civilization.

The Question of Trade
We think the expansion of trade required access to the sea. Persians or Parsua or Parsis were the elite of Afghan society. This elite decided to move its headquarters or its main center of civilization from Afghanistan to Persia. So the objective of this migration was to  reach Persian Gulf. That is the reason Persians moved to Pars Province which is adjacent to Persian Gulf and main centers of Babylon in Mesopothemian and Susa in Elam civilizations enabling it to trade with these urban advance civilizations.

We can see the same pattern later with Sakas or Scythians establishing settlements in Lursitan next to Pars province 100 years later and Parthians establish settlements in Pars and Lursitan province 1000 years later. Again access to the Persian Gulf was the main reason for these settlements.

Persians as Afghans
This theory that Persians were actually Afghans is also confirmed by the way "Persian Empire" developed. We have a lot of information about how "Persian Empire" expanded in  the West toward Egypt, Greece, Lydia and the Black sea. There were many wars specially with Greeks involving millions of soldiers and 1000's of ships in those battles. But there is very little information about the Persian Empire expanding to the East. The reason is very simple. Persian Empire was only an extension of Afghan Civilization and Persians were the elite of  Afghan society. So there was no need to expand and conquer the eastern countries or regions.

Furthermore when Greeks called these people for "Persians", they were refering to a specific region or location. Persians were not a specific ethnic group separate from the main Afghan-Bactrian civilization. Therefore we conclude that Persians were actually Afghans who had migrated to Persia and the real "Persian Empire" was actually an Afghan Empire.

Those people who might have a knowledge in this area is welcome to contribute to the elaboration of this theory.
 
It seems like you are mixing up the notion of the Iranic world (Indo-Iranians) with the Persian Empire.  As for Pashto being related to Old Persian and Avestan, that is plausible since it is an Iranian language, but the same goes with Dari/Modern Persian which both developed from Middle Iranian.  The Eastern portion of the Iranic world is inhabited by Persian speakers and Eastern Iranian speakers, and there is a very strong "Iranic" presence in the region even after the Turkic invasions.  Even in modern day Iran, the Eastern portion of Iran has been shown to have more Iranic haplogroups.
 
Spencer Wells mentioned the genetic studies show that Indo-Iranian haplogroups are more present in Eastern Iran than in Western Iran:
 
"Intriguingly, the population of present-day Iran, speaking a major Indo-European language (Farsi), appears to have had little genetic influence from the M17-carrying Indo-Iranians. It is possible that the pre-Indo-European population of Iran— effectively an eastern extension of the great civilizations of Mesopotamia—may have reached sufficient population densities to have swamped any genetic contribution from a small number of immigrating Indo-Iranians. If so, this may have been a case of language replacement through the ‘‘elite-dominance’’ model. Alternatively, an Indo-Iranian language may have been the lingua franca of the steppe nomads and the surrounding settled populations, facilitating communication between the two. Over time, this language could have become the predominant language in Persia, reinforced and standardized by rulers such as Cyrus the Great and Darius in the mid-first millennium B.C. Whichever model is correct, the Iranians sampled here (from the western part of the country) appear to be more similar genetically to Afro-Asiatic-speaking Middle Eastern populations than they are to Central Asians or Indians"
 
The problem with the notion of Afghans (Pashtuns) being the real Persians is that you are mixing a culture, a civilization, and ethnic groups into one being.  The Persians were an empire that drew from Eastern Iran, but they themselves were a settled and civilized culture and ruled of a mix array of people.  The Afghans for the most part, were nomadic, independent, and war-like and comprised of the ancient Saka, remnants of the Tocharians, White Huns, and earlier Indo-Aryan groups that they amalgamated with.
 
Bactria was inhabited by Scythian people before it became under the control of the elite Iranian noblemen, and they were always harassed by the Saka and the Confederation of Iranic/Tocharian nomads that the Pashtuns are said to be derived from.  Afghans did not make a strong unified presence until Ahmad Shah Durrani.
 
Other than in having a common ancestor, Pashtuns and Persians are culturally very different.  I think the people you are referring to are not the Afghans, but the Tajiks, who can be said are true Persians in culture, and ethnicity.


Edited by Afghanan - 01-Aug-2008 at 10:24
The perceptive man is he who knows about himself, for in self-knowledge and insight lays knowledge of the holiest.
~ Khushal Khan Khattak
Back to Top
Zagros View Drop Down
Emperor
Emperor
Avatar
retired AE Moderator

Joined: 11-Aug-2004
Location: London
Status: Offline
Points: 8795
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Zagros Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01-Aug-2008 at 10:46
Those Tajiks would surely be the descendants of of Soghdo-Bactrians.  True Persians are in Iran.

Norsken, Nick or whatever your name happens to be the burden of evidence is squarely on your shoulders if you are attacking conventional wisdom.  I don't have to prove conventional wisdom.  But if you simply look up the names of Medean royalty you will see that they are Iranic.   If you find a translation of the Naghshe Rostam inscriptions by Darius you will see that he unequivicollay pronounces himself an Aryan and a Persian.   Herodotus likewise states that Medes also knew themselves as Aryans and that Persian and Medean were mutually intelligible. 

Back to Top
norsken View Drop Down
Housecarl
Housecarl
Avatar

Joined: 27-Jul-2008
Status: Offline
Points: 55
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote norsken Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01-Aug-2008 at 17:19
Originally posted by Cyrus Shahmiri Cyrus Shahmiri wrote:

Quote According to Avesta Iran was actually an area between Oxus and Caspian Sea.

This is a non-proved theory (hypothesis), according to Avesta the oiginal land of Iranians which is called "Airyana Vaeja" (Land of Aryans), was in the remote north and too cold.
 
http://www.avesta.org/vendidad/vd1sbe.htm : The first of the good lands and countries which I, Ahura Mazda, created, was the Airyana Vaeja, by the Vanguhi Daitya. There are ten winter months there, two summer months; and those are cold for the waters, cold for the earth, cold for the trees.

Therefore it couldn't certainly the region that you mentioned, furthermore Persians are not equal to Iranians or vice versa.

Quote Persians were Zoarastrians. They should have come from this area.

Do you think Indian Muslims are from Saudi Arabia or Norwegian Christians from Israel?

Quote There is no Zoarastrian centers in Caucasus at this time.

Sassanid source all mention Azerbaijan as the center of Zoroastrianism and the birth place of Zoroaster. (for example read "Zand Avesta")

Quote According to Russian sources, Medes were natives of Iran.

Who do you mean?" Diakonoff in his "History of Media" says there was no mention of Medes before 9th century BC. (first by Assyrians as "Amadai" then New Elamite "matape", Hebrew "madai", Old Persian "Mad", Old Greek "Medoi", Armenian "Mar-k", ...)

Quote There are no traces of Medes in Central Asia.

This is a exact quote from Diakonoff: "With due attention to the relations among Median and Central Asian languages, there is no doubt that the origin of Medes was from Central Asia." (of course some other scholars don't agree with him.)

Quote There was  a Media Empire long before Persians came to this area.

Not more than a century, What does it prove?



Actually Mr. Afghanan has responded to the question of Medes which confirms my statements. Here is his response:

"Intriguingly, the population of present-day Iran, speaking a major Indo-European language (Farsi), appears to have had little genetic influence from the M17-carrying Indo-Iranians. It is possible that the pre-Indo-European population of Iran— effectively an eastern extension of the great civilizations of Mesopotamia—may have reached sufficient population densities to have swamped any genetic contribution from a small number of immigrating Indo-Iranians. If so, this may have been a case of language replacement through the ‘‘elite-dominance’’ model. Alternatively, an Indo-Iranian language may have been the lingua franca of the steppe nomads and the surrounding settled populations, facilitating communication between the two. Over time, this language could have become the predominant language in Persia, reinforced and standardized by rulers such as Cyrus the Great and Darius in the mid-first millennium B.C. Whichever model is correct, the Iranians sampled here (from the western part of the country) appear to be more similar genetically to Afro-Asiatic-speaking Middle Eastern populations than they are to Central Asians or Indians"

Back to Top
norsken View Drop Down
Housecarl
Housecarl
Avatar

Joined: 27-Jul-2008
Status: Offline
Points: 55
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote norsken Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01-Aug-2008 at 17:25
Originally posted by Zagros Zagros wrote:

Those Tajiks would surely be the descendants of of Soghdo-Bactrians.  True Persians are in Iran.

Norsken, Nick or whatever your name happens to be the burden of evidence is squarely on your shoulders if you are attacking conventional wisdom.  I don't have to prove conventional wisdom.  But if you simply look up the names of Medean royalty you will see that they are Iranic.   If you find a translation of the Naghshe Rostam inscriptions by Darius you will see that he unequivicollay pronounces himself an Aryan and a Persian.   Herodotus likewise states that Medes also knew themselves as Aryans and that Persian and Medean were mutually intelligible. 


Mr. Zagros or Ahmadinejad or Khatami or whatever your name is: There is no conventional wisdom in science and you have to prove everything you say. Darius was Persian. What is that to do with Medes. Also Sogdians have disappeared a long time ago. You must be sleeping. Few Yangoobis left only. Most Tajiks in Tajikstan are neither Bactrian or Sogdian.


May I ask what is a "True Persian"?


Edited by norsken - 01-Aug-2008 at 17:31
Back to Top
norsken View Drop Down
Housecarl
Housecarl
Avatar

Joined: 27-Jul-2008
Status: Offline
Points: 55
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote norsken Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01-Aug-2008 at 17:26
I wonder who has moved my thread to this section?????
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  12>
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 11.10
Copyright ©2001-2017 Web Wiz Ltd.

This page was generated in 0.063 seconds.