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
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 18:08
Historiography is a science and not the baseless musings of individuals...  as a science it has established theory based on facts and thus conventional wisdom on issues, such as "Medes were Iranic; there was a Persian Empire".   In your case, you are questioning whether the Persian empire existed at all and in your amateurish excitement you have neglected some glaring historical facts such as Darius' proclamation at Naghshe Rostam and others which Cyrus has so kindly brought to your attention (yet with no apparent effect which justifies the reallocation of this thread to the loony bin of AE).

Quote 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.


Well, duh.  Nomadic Persian tribes came to Western Iran from CA (not South Afghanistan) encroached on the existing civlisations (Elamite, etc) and over the course of a couple of centuries supplanted them adopting and amalgamating the sedentary culture with their own nomadic culture, as was the case with the Iranic Mada further to the North of Iran.  

PS: I moved it, as is my prerogative, because you are questioning whether the Persian empire existed. 




Edited by Zagros - 01-Aug-2008 at 18:10
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 18:21
Originally posted by Zagros Zagros wrote:

Historiography is a science and not the baseless musings of individuals...  as a science it has established theory based on facts and thus conventional wisdom on issues, such as "Medes were Iranic; there was a Persian Empire".   In your case, you are questioning whether the Persian empire existed at all and in your amateurish excitement you have neglected some glaring historical facts such as Darius' proclamation at Naghshe Rostam and others which Cyrus has so kindly brought to your attention (yet with no apparent effect which justifies the reallocation of this thread to the loony bin of AE).

Quote 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.


Well, duh.  Nomadic Persian tribes came to Western Iran from CA (not South Afghanistan) encroached on the existing civlisations (Elamite, etc) and over the course of a couple of centuries supplanted them adopting and amalgamating the sedentary culture with their own nomadic culture, as was the case with the Iranic Mada further to the North of Iran.  

PS: I moved it, as is my prerogative, because you are questioning whether the Persian empire existed. 



Mr. Zagros: You do not even know the difference of Tajiks in Tajikstan with Sogdians. Also you do not read the posts. Persians are coming from an area from Caspian sea to Oxus. That is not southern Afghanistan. I  say Persian Empire is Afghan-Bactrian Empire.

Anymore of your comments, this thread should be moved to zoo section.

It is clear that this discussion contradicts your "Politically Correct" view of history. I suggest you correct  your PC than moving the thread.
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 18:23
Originally posted by norsken norsken wrote:


Yes. They claim that. But they do not show any evidence to support it. Can you show any sources that make these claims?

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


Yes, Strabo in his Geography (15.8), he said that Persian, Medean and Soghdian were practically the same language with simple accent or dialectal differences.  He lived around 1AD but I suppose you know better than him since you have a time machine that is why no one can question what you say.  Maybe you should climb back in and check your facts because your head's in the sand on this one.




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 19:28
Originally posted by Afghanan Afghanan wrote:

 
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"
 

This confirms that Medes were not central  asians.

Originally posted by Afghanan Afghanan wrote:

  
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. 
 

Pashtoon is only a language. It is not an ethnicity. Afghan can be Dari speaker or Pashtoon speaker.
Originally posted by Afghanan Afghanan wrote:


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.
 

Tochiarian and white huns and Kurshan: that is all long time after. At this time we are talking about 800 BC were only Bactrians and Sakas. Persians were not nomadic pashtoons but urban bactrians.
Originally posted by Afghanan Afghanan wrote:


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.
 

Can you explain what is Iranian and Iranic in this context. Who were those people?
Originally posted by Afghanan Afghanan wrote:

 
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.

I am not sure why you refer to Pashtoons. I am talking about afghans. Pashtoon is only a  language. Tajik is a wrong term. You mean Parsiwan that is Dari speaking Afghans. Tajiks are turks who speak Dari language.

Tajiks




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 21:37
Quote This confirms that Medes were not central  asians.


Even if you are to use the unreliable and flawed genetic line of argument, it does nothing of the sort since in NW Iran there is still a substantial % of M17 (R1a) which one can attribute to Medes.  And what proof is there that Indo Aryans predominantly bore R1a?  Why not R1b?  Well either way, your theory is debunked both by genetics and historical accounts. 

The red here is R1a and R1b, R1b is a third of R1a in NW Iran:
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2229/1547718128_6898ed0025.jpg?v=0

This proves that Medes were a ruling Iranic elite from CA. 


Edited by Zagros - 01-Aug-2008 at 21:44
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 21:41
Originally posted by Zagros Zagros wrote:


Quote 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.


Well, duh.  Nomadic Persian tribes came to Western Iran from CA (not South Afghanistan) encroached on the existing civlisations (Elamite, etc) and over the course of a couple of centuries supplanted them adopting and amalgamating the sedentary culture with their own nomadic culture, as was the case with the Iranic Mada further to the North of Iran.  

PS: I moved it, as is my prerogative, because you are questioning whether the Persian empire existed. 

First Persians were Medes. Now Persians are Elamite. Are these the same dravidian elamites from southern India as some claim? So how come Persians look similar to Afghans? Are there elamites in Afghanistan too???
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 21:47
Originally posted by Zagros Zagros wrote:

Quote This confirms that Medes were not central  asians.


Even if you are to use the unreliable and flawed genetic line of argument, it does nothing of the sort since in NW Iran there is still a substantial % of M17 (R1a) which one can attribute to Medes.  And what proof is there that Indo Aryans predominantly bore R1a?  Why not R1b?  Well either way, your theory is debunked both by genetics and historical accounts. 

The red here is R1a and R1b, R1b is a third of R1a in NW Iran:
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2229/1547718128_6898ed0025.jpg?v=0

This proves that Medes were Iranics from CA.  How do you like that?

So Azeri Turks have become Medes too!!!!!SmileClap

This is similar to Azeri Turks claim they have the same genes as Persians. Sorry there is no Persian Genes because there is no Persian race.Big%20smile
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 21:56
Persians weren't Medes and they were not Elamites either, nor were they Pashtuns!   You initially disputed the very existence of Persians!  Persians at that time consisted of various closely related tribes such as that of Cyrus the Great, the Pasargadae - these tribes knew themselves as Persians but the difference between them and Medes would have been as prominent as that between south Germans and Austrians or Czechs and Slovakians, to draw some analogies for you.  

Medes, Persians, Scythians, Parthians, Bactrians, Soghdians and others were all Iranic, with a common tribal root, so it is natural that their languages would be similar at this time since it was only a few centuries since they broke away from CA.

There is no doubt that the Persians adopted aspects of the Elamite culture INCLUDING the cunieform script as well as formal garb as can be witnessed at Persepolis. 

Now if you want to keep twisting words and talkning shit because your silly theory like all of the ones before it has been debunked then feel free, but I will entertain you no longer.

[EDIT:] Oh god! he's started on Azeri Turks again!!!  No those HG can be attributed to the Kurds of NW Iran.  You do know there are Kurds in the NW of Iran don't you? 

Quite funny how when I engage you in seriously debunking your claims you resort to ridicule because you CANNOT substantiate any of your claims... at all. 

Goodbye Chosloner.



Edited by Zagros - 01-Aug-2008 at 22:06
Back to Top
IamJoseph View Drop Down
Earl
Earl


Joined: 20-Sep-2008
Location: AUSTRALIA
Status: Offline
Points: 296
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote IamJoseph Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 30-Sep-2008 at 04:39
Of course there was a Persian Empire, one of it's first descriptive history being in the Book of Esther - written before the Greeks landed in Arabia, in the Hebrew language. The Persian King Darius gave favour to the Jews after the Babylon destruction of King Solomon's temple, and allowed them to re-build it. It was later again destroyed by Rome in 70 CE. The Persians followed Zoroashtra as their diety, and was later Islamized after a series of wars. The Persian race is not Arab, but Islamic today.
Back to Top
IamJoseph View Drop Down
Earl
Earl


Joined: 20-Sep-2008
Location: AUSTRALIA
Status: Offline
Points: 296
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote IamJoseph Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 30-Sep-2008 at 04:49
Quote Are these the same dravidian elamites from southern India as some claim? 
 
The book of Esther states the Persian empire extended to 127 countires, and culminated in India. The Israelites were drafted in the Persian army 2600 years ago, and many did get transported to the Indian continent.
 
What is amazing here is, the Indian alphabetical writings of today is 99% the same as the Hebrew - in alphabet design, sounds and ancient word meanings: Adam [Man/Heb] = Adami [Indian]; etc. While there is no question the Hebrew existed before this time, there is no hard evidence of any alphabetical indian writings before 2600 years. Sanscrit, often claimed as a precussor of today's Hindhi, is really not that old - it is less than 2400 years. The Urdu language, often said to be a prototype of Hindhi or an admixture of Arabic, cannot be correct: the Arabic writings emerged only after 350 CE. And there is no Persian alphabeticals before 2600 years.


Edited by IamJoseph - 30-Sep-2008 at 04:51
Back to Top
Aeolus View Drop Down
Janissary
Janissary
Avatar
suspended

Joined: 29-Sep-2008
Location: Atlantis.
Status: Offline
Points: 0
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Aeolus Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 30-Sep-2008 at 05:19
[edit]

Edited by Aeolus - 30-Sep-2008 at 08:52
Back to Top
Aeolus View Drop Down
Janissary
Janissary
Avatar
suspended

Joined: 29-Sep-2008
Location: Atlantis.
Status: Offline
Points: 0
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Aeolus Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 30-Sep-2008 at 08:50
Originally posted by Aeolus Aeolus wrote:

i haven't read all this (i skipped to the end), but why was norsken banned?


alright. i see it now.

perchance a section could be established for punished members? it would provide entertainment for the rest of us and keep real threads free of spam and passion.

forget it. nevermind, i need sleep. 8 ^ P


Edited by Aeolus - 30-Sep-2008 at 08:51
Back to Top
IamJoseph View Drop Down
Earl
Earl


Joined: 20-Sep-2008
Location: AUSTRALIA
Status: Offline
Points: 296
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote IamJoseph Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02-Oct-2008 at 09:53
Quote It seems like you are mixing up the notion of the Iranic world (Indo-Iranians) with the Persian Empire.  
 
I doubt today's Iranian peoples would be much connected to the original inhabitants. We can take an example from Egypt: this country's ruling majority, Muslim Arabs, are not connected with that ancient land, religion, language or peoples.
 
Egypt was not Arab, a race which appeared 2500 years ago, while the now small Coptic Egyptians were the real Egyptians, who never spoke Arabic, and had their lands stolen by mafioso style groups, who later became called Arabs because the entire region became known as Arabia in Roman times.
 
Iran is not Arabian, and was not Islamic. The original Persians, like the Coptics, were enforced to convert, and its other religions [Parsis, Bahai] were brutully supressed. Given any opportunities, there would be a welcome demand for seperatist non-islamic Coptic Egyptian and Persian seperatist states in these lands. And why not!
 
The current situation, of dividing the Middle-east exclusively as Islamic is from a corruption by Briton, which created all these states and handed large chunks of lands to Regimes [family clans] as ther private and personal properties - for preferential oil contracts. The situation in Palestine, its corruption of the Balfour Mandate, and the on-going serial demand for more states in this miniscule land, is a symptom of a much larger doctrine: that no other religion can prevail in Arabia [Quran].
 
This is why we see no other religion holding states, Lebanon de-christianised, the Coptics, Drews, Kurds and others never catered to, and the same oppression seen in today's Iran. This threatening situation does not stop here - it encroaches all the way to India, Asia, China, and Europe. And India is a country which has been the most generous to Muslims - giving them two large states [Pakistan and Bangladesh], and merited only terrorist demands for Kashmir and other Indian territories. These firey issues loom much more important than the climate issue, and constitutes the real pollution for humanity. Nations and historical heritages are being targeted to be wiped off the map.
Back to Top
Asawar Hazaraspa View Drop Down
Samurai
Samurai
Avatar

Joined: 21-Apr-2008
Status: Offline
Points: 100
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Asawar Hazaraspa Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02-Oct-2008 at 10:51

"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."

Are you forgetting accounts of Herodotus - though sometimes inaccurate- he said that the Medes were formerly known as Airoi. Kurds speaking a definite Iranian language and culture just could have been accepted incorporations from foreign elements, So any other evidences of any inod-european presence in the region western Iran will enhance the chances of the theories of the earlier Ido-european presence all over Iranian plateau.  

Back to Top
capcartoonist View Drop Down
Housecarl
Housecarl
Avatar

Joined: 09-Dec-2004
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 50
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote capcartoonist Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 03-Oct-2008 at 07:55
Originally posted by Carpathian Wolf Carpathian Wolf wrote:

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

 
Ernt!  Wrong answer. You do not win the living room set and the hibachi.
 
Both religions are dualistic.  God and Satan, Ahura Mazda and Ahriman.  Light and Dark, Order and Chaos, Good and Evil.
 
Most Christian theologians never had an original idea.
 
 
Back to Top
IamJoseph View Drop Down
Earl
Earl


Joined: 20-Sep-2008
Location: AUSTRALIA
Status: Offline
Points: 296
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote IamJoseph Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 03-Oct-2008 at 10:49
Quote
Both religions are dualistic.  God and Satan, Ahura Mazda and Ahriman.  Light and Dark, Order and Chaos, Good and Evil.
 
 
This is a confusing of the positive/negative duality factor expressed in Genesis, with a Godhead premise. The duality is post-creation, and not part of the Creator.  I don't see christianity stemming from Zoroastrianism, but of Hellenism, and initiated by the Greeks embedded in Rome.
 
The Greeks became privy to the OT via the Septuagint, the first translation of the Hebrew bible. They were so impressed that it created disatisfaction with their priests, who became diminished by the OT's superiority. Thereafter there was a series of attempts of amalgamation of the Greek and Jewish beliefs, which failed because the Greeks also wanted their deities and could not accept the stringent OT laws of diet, gays, forbiddence of images, etc. This resulted in numerous wars and an enmity.  The Greeks got their revenge via Christianity, inserting a series of villifications and false stories in the Gospels.
Back to Top
Vorian View Drop Down
Colonel
Colonel
Avatar

Joined: 06-Dec-2007
Location: Greece/Hellas
Status: Offline
Points: 566
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Vorian Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 03-Oct-2008 at 13:09
Joseph stop that please. There was no Greek conspiracy against Jews. 
Back to Top
IamJoseph View Drop Down
Earl
Earl


Joined: 20-Sep-2008
Location: AUSTRALIA
Status: Offline
Points: 296
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote IamJoseph Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 03-Oct-2008 at 14:14
Quote Joseph stop that please. There was no Greek conspiracy against Jews.  
 
There was according to Roman & Greek writers, Josephus, and numerous wars between these two. So the Greeks placed their own conspiracy charge on their victim - and their story became a hit.
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 0.094 seconds.