.comment-link {margin-left:.6em;}

Caspianous اهل کاسپین

A Personal Weblog From a South Caspian Young Man

Monday, May 22, 2006

prejudiced History and Fairly History

Dear Amigos (Mohammadreza and Gilemard), HOLA, I should appreciate your English, linguistic and history knowledge. In most of your comments I am agree with you in comments such:” The pre-Aryan people of Iran (like Cassites or elamites) are indeed not studied racially” but you wrote: I mixed linguistic with racology badly. You are wrong cos I had written that” unfortunately racological classifications are replaced by linguistic classifications are infected by politic in Middle East and caucus areas. As Gile mard said in his last comment, history is prejudiced strongly. Nima youshij (FATHER OF MODERN PERSIAN POETRY) has claimed Ferdowsi (One of the most famous Persian poet) in his Tabari poems because he believed that Ferdowsi is exaggerated and had not a fairly opinion about his ancestors at the case Gilemard mentioned: “lie-worshipers and devil-worshipers”! Such this words about earlier northern Iranians in Avesta are Shahnameh still exists in the areas like Middle East. Concerning to terrible jokes and insults to later local people of north of Iran, at the case most of performances, glory and attributes are belong to them, are unfairly and boring. 2- There is no doubt about later migration of yellow races toward western parts of Asia. But Dear Mohammadreza you didn’t illustrate: Which kind of racial group were living in the area before Aryans and subsequent Turks? Did they were belong to a subdivided group of Turks or Aryans or Arabs etc? There is obvious reasons that show most of languages in the area between India and Europe have the same basic grammar and structure. For example: Is (english), ist (Germal), ast, hast (Farsi), he (Hindi), his6, is6, isn6 (Gilaki). Dokhtar (Farsi), daughter (English), d6tar (Gilaki), dotir (Norwagian and Icelandic). BUT in Gilaki also terms: Lakoo and Kor are using for Daughter in east and west Gilan respectively. What is the difference and Origin of these terms? We should open our eyes carefully. You wrote: “So, Iranians moved to Iran and mixed with the original inhabitants” You mean strange and you should change the first “Iranians” with something else like: Ukrainians, slaves, sakas etc. I agree with “Northern Indians (who are also Aryan) do not show European features”. These theories come from the first English men who came to India and found semi relativity of some natives with Europeans. Dear Mohammadreza I’m not that kind of people who denied last founded historical theories completely as Mr. Naser Pourpirar. I believe that there are also political reasons for this kind of deny to destruct ancient Iranian civilization BUT I believe that this destruction has happened in the past also for some nations like Northern Iranians by historical records such Avesta and so on that we should review them. Also I am agree with “Turkic languages entered the area between 4th and 10th centuries AD. So, it seems that Indo-European languages are "older", what ever that means.” But I refer you to my ex posts that I asked about a possible sequence in this events. You claims Turks about existence of an earlier language in Azerbayjan, Causcas and Anatoly area before their incoming but you didn’t reply about what’s happened after incoming of the race that you named Aryan that I believe there is also political effects in this term as well? I remember once upon a time I asked one of my colleagues, high educated young man about his family name that was SIBONI (SIBON is a village around Rodbar in Northern Iran) and he replied: “It means under shadow because Si comes from Sayeh (Shadow) and Bone mean : Under”. He actually explained yourself and his culture with present language and culture but now people who know Gilaki know that “SI” in old Gilaki means Mountaion and stone. There are a lot of locations just in highlands with this term like SI’POORD (SI+POORD= stone bridge. Thus for realizing and figuring out what is happened in the past, we should know customs, histories, linguistic, Geology, Geography, behaviors, Archeology and sociology of the case study. You wrote:” You should know the methodology of the discipline you are talking about, and you should know something about the theories and literature.” Which methodology do you believe? Methodology that has effected a lot of names in villages and cities? Ramsar instead of SAXT6SAR and Polroud instead of POOLOROOD , banaksar instead of BINIKSAR, roudsar instead of KOTAM or HOSAM,javaherdasht instead of JORDASHT and so on. If you ask a part of new generation about appellation of the second largest river of Gilan (polroud on the maps), they will explain:”POLROUD is a river with a bridge. Local people name this river POOLOROOD.We know in Eshkevari Gilaki, bridge is equal to POORD not POL(farsi word for bridge)and POOLO? I will say: I DON”T KNOW but I suppose, I think etc (This is the most scientific reply) because there are different ideas about POOLO otherwise it will be dogmatic. The same judgment will be fair for ARYA, ARYAN, IRANVIJAK, GIL,CASPIAN,TURK, etc. You wrote:” What I find disturbing in your two posts is that you really do not know history, linguistics, and archeology”But I say: I enjoyed your comments. GRACIAS ! ADIOS.

7 Comments:

At May 23, 2006 at 12:13 AM, Anonymous GIL Amard said...

Dear Mas'ud,
My name isn't Gile-mard, which is seemingly a Tajik(so-called Farsi)combination,that means"Gilish-man" the same as "aaqele-mard".
"Gil Amard" or Marlik refers to the name of a famous ethnic group
of the Gilish Nation.
However, "Gilemard" may be a deformation of "Gil Amard".
In addition, as u agreed,the words; "VARANA" and "MAZANA" or "MAZAN-DARAN" as mentioned in "Arian" references ei Avesa and Shahname are obviously solid evidences of their harsh attitude towards our proud nation, still going on by their followers.

 
At May 23, 2006 at 10:01 AM, Anonymous Mohammad Reza said...

Dear Masud,

The ethnic groups of the near east are not limited to Arab, Turk, or Persian. Georgians are not related to any of them, and their language is also non-Indo European, non-Turkish, and certainly not Semitic. What you mean by race, is more precisely called ethnicity. Racially, people of the near east are mainly what is called mediterranian branch of the Caucasian (or white) race. But there are many ethnicities.

Languages change, but the racial features are rather persistant. Thus, while people from Turkey and Uzbakistan both speak a turkic language and are ethnically turkic, they are not racially related. One is classified as mediterrenean white, the other is mongoloid.

You said: "Which methodology do you believe? Methodology that has effected a lot of names in villages and cities?" I meant the methodology of linguistics, genetics, archeology, and history. What you mention is your political grievences. And no, what you say is not scientific.

You wrote: "You claims Turks about existence of an earlier language in Azerbayjan, Causcas and Anatoly area before their incoming but you didn’t reply about what’s happened after incoming of the race that you named Aryan that I believe there is also political effects in this term as well?"

In Anatolia up to 15th century AD, the dominant languages were Greek and Armenian, with Kurdish and Syriac mixed in in the south. Up to the Armenian genocide of 1915, Armenian was the dominant language in eastern Anatolia. Before the dominance of Greek (which started during period between Alexander's conquest and emergence of the Roman empire), Cilician, Isorian, Lydian, Scythian and Paphlagonian languages were spoken in what is now Turkey.

In Causcasus, you always (and still have) Georgian languages (there are several of them, all non-Indo European), Armenian, Ossetian (an Iranian language), Talishi and several others besides Turkish and Azari.

In Azarbaijan (and it depends which part you are talking about) prior to 15th century, a variety of languages were spoken, including Tati, Kurdish, and Talishi, as well as what is termed by Kasravi as Azari language (of Iranian version, and not turkish). You should also remember that Gilaki used to have a much larger domain than today. It was definitely spoken In what is now Tehran and Rayy, Qazvin, Ardabil, and parts of Republic of Azarbaijan (Mosaferid Amirs were Gilaki speaking and they ruled the eastern part of Azarbaijan).

What I can not get is the gist of your argument. Are you trying to say that Gilaki is not Indo-European? Please let me know.

You wrote: "You mean strange and you should change the first “Iranians” with something else like: Ukrainians, slaves, sakas etc." No Sir, Iran is called Iran because those Iranians migrated from what is now Russia. Slavs and Russians did not live there then. For example, Bulgaria today is called Bulgaria because a turkic tribe called bulgars moved there in the 4th century AD from Ural mountains, before that Bulgaria was called Thracia and Dacia. Similarly, Khuzestan was Elam, and Lorestan was the land of Cassites. But these people lost their distinct identity (Cassites were replaced by Kurds and Lors and Elamites were destroyed by Arabs). So the whole country has the name Iran. What it was called before? It was probably a collection of fragmented kingdoms. Notice that thanks to wide scale detruction of Iran's archeological sites by looters and suspicion and distrust of the government, few studies have been conducted in Iran since 1970s.

About that clown Poupirar, I never, ever dream about disrespecting you by comparing an intelligent man like you to an illiterate and stupid loudmouth. That guy has some mental problems. No one would make himself the butt of the jokes willingly.

 
At May 23, 2006 at 10:04 AM, Anonymous Mohammad Reza said...

I enjoy these comments and this discussion. I live in the US, and except when I talk to my brother, do not have the opportunity to speak Gilaki or talk to another Gilak. You know, it is good to know someone from your own people.

You may want to read my posts on Gilan's history at:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gilan

 
At May 23, 2006 at 11:07 AM, Blogger Masoud said...

To Gil Amard:
excuse me Sir!for that mistake. I know about Amards as some believe appellation of Amol in Mazandaran province come back to this nation and they were living mostly in eastern Gilan and western province so called Mazandaran.I will be happy to share ur link.
To:Mohammadreza:
I enjoyed again reading ur comments really. I am so happy to see somebody from U.S is involved in our discussion (not argue). I believe that Gilaki (or Giliki) is familar with indo-europian longuages familiy obviously.but I am amazed of some kind of different words in Gilaki (like:Jir=down, Jira=downwards, ji=from)also the methode of speaking (changing all words to easiest form:xa=mixahad) maybe is coming from another group of longuages.I remember a lot of Gilaki words are extincted during my age time like:Burma(cry), Mash6l (aunt=xale, naa(no),haves6n(Appetite=eshteha dashtan) etc.I think this extinction is happened also before this era too.
What is ur course study in U.S and can I ask what do u do there? If u have a link I will be happy to share. But finally you didn't say about possible unfairly harsh to northern Iranian in books like: Shahnameh and Avesta.
Adios

 
At May 24, 2006 at 7:53 AM, Anonymous Mohammad Reza said...

Dear Masoud,

I am a university professor here (starting this summer). My line of work, :) is finance and statistics (so like you, I am not a historian). But I started my journey through economic history of Gilan. To be more precise, the role of silk trade and production between 15th century and great silkworm disease of 1860s.

About supposedly unfair treatment of northerners in Avesta and shahnameh:

Indo-European migrations to Iran started from the north east. eastern part of mazandaran was quickly settled by an Indo-European tribe, the Hyrcanians (that's the greek transliteration, the old name was a cognome of modern Gorgan). But the area that is now Gilan gave Indo-Europeans a stiff resistence. It was eventually settled by Indo_Europeans by sometime before the 2nd century BC. As a result, Avesta (a very old text written before 7th century BC) considers Varna (Gilan) as a land of enemies.

In Shahnameh, Mazandaran (but not Gilan) is initially considered a land dominated by Divs (remember that Div~Deava~Deva => Divine, is the old Indo-European name for Gods. It has a bad meaning in Persian due to the influence of Zoroastrianism which replaced the cult of Deavas by that of Ahura-Mazda, pretty much like Islam and the old Arab gods.) So, all that you can read to that is that people of Mazandaran worshipped the old Aryan gods, and not Ahura-Mazda like the rest of the Iranian tribes! Notice that later on, the capital of Iran is the city of Sari in Mazandaran (hence the story of Arash the archer).

Also, the fact that Deylamites were not subjects of the central government and just paid tribute and at times sacked cities and caravans south of the Alborz mountains, did not endear our grandfathers to the people in the central Iran.

For languages more similar to Gileki, look at Kurdish (Gormanji), Zaza language in Turkey, and Albanian languages.

 
At May 24, 2006 at 11:29 AM, Anonymous AmiN said...

Salaam barar,
Bə har jon kandani bu ti matlab o unə commentone buxondam. Aaxe mi ingilisi unqadə xob niye ki butonam i sangini matlabe raahat buxonam. ammaa xob, be zurə DİCTİONERY butonəsəm taa aaxarəsh bəshum.
Masud, qablanam ta butam ki qaziyeye muhemmi sar das banay. Che xob bune age ti matlabe be faarsi ni bənvisi taa hame bətonan bəxonan.
I gabon ki ere ze dari o i nazaraati ki refeqon da daran, ishone dar darajeye avval vaa Gələkon bəxonan o bədonan. Shəmi aslə muxaatab Gələkon issan. Pas age mumkene hi vaanivise o unə commentone bə faarsi vaagərdon bəkun taa vaxti inə linke nenam vərgə üebməji men, hamme bətonan unə bəxonan. Yaa Ali

 
At June 14, 2006 at 11:14 AM, Anonymous Gil Amard said...

Alaraqme nazare "Mahammad Reza", dar hichyek az manabe'e tarixi be:
qalabeye "Haxamaneshiyan" bar Gilaniyan va estilaye anan bar sarzamine ma, ke lazemeye sarazir shodane "Pars-ha" va digare be estelah "Aryaiyan" be Gilan mibashad,
esharei nashode ast.
Dar koliye manabe'e tarixi bar movaffaqiyate mardome Gilan dar aqab randane motajavezan, va dar natije:
hefze esteqlal va azadiye xod va sarzamineshan dar tamame advare tarixi,ta zamane "Hamleye torkane Qezelbash", ta'kid shode ast.

 

Post a Comment

<< Home