What's new

Scythians - The Greatest Warriors of World

Nope, Both Etruscan and Basque languages are ancient European language non-related to Indo-European languages. Indo-European languages became dominant under influence of Roman Empire and Catholic Church.

I see , cause I thought they were celtic languages , just like how Persians might have been related to scythians but speaking a different language.

We are different from them, since those Mongols are nomadic people who like to steal many wives of different race.

While most Chinese prefer to marry with the person of his/her own background.

And the Japanese also love light hair and light eyes because they have suffered some heavily inferiority complex against the West.

While we have 5000 years old of civilization, we are very proud of ourselves, we are not some rootless people without its own civilization, who will also start to worship other people's idea. :coffee:

Honestly I 've never bee to china or anywhere else in asia , but I looked at this Wikipedia map and I got the impression that the mongols are considered Chinese today ...
 
Honestly I 've never bee to china or anywhere else in asia , but I looked at this Wikipedia map and I got the impression that the mongols are considered Chinese today ...

We are both Mongoloids, but Mongols generally look more like primitive brutes.

And they have once conquered us, but their Khan claimed to be the Chinese Emperor, so we also accept this part of their Empire into our history, but it doesn't mean all history of the Mongol Empire is included into the Chinese history.
 
We are both Mongoloids, but Mongols generally look more like primitive brutes.

And they have once conquered us, but their Khan claimed to be the Chinese Emperor, so we also accept this part of their Empire into our history, but it doesn't mean all history of the Mongol Empire is included into the Chinese history.

What is the Chinese theory regarding to the appearance/birth of two different language families in Asia: 1) Altaic (TurkoMongol) and 2) Sino-Tibetan?
 
What is the Chinese theory regarding to the appearance/birth of two different language families in Asia: 1) Altaic (TurkoMongol) and 2) Sino-Tibetan?

The Altaic people carried more primitive aDNA like C, but later they used to absorb a good number of N and R1a, while we Sino-Tibetan people are relatively newcomers with primarily being the O3 carriers.
 
The scythians were a part of a tribe which we will call Iranic tribe. They were a nomadic Iranians people.
They did not speak Persian but what does that have to do with anything? If I could not speak Persian it does not mean I am not Persian by blood. DNA does not depend on your lingustics.

Here is a sycthian at behistoon inscripition in Iran from 2500 years ago.

Behistun.Inscript.Skunkha.jpg
 
3) connecting light skinned Scythians to dark skinned Iranians is a bit exaggeration. I mean No offence to cultural exchange, but making them one race is something like putting Apple and orange into same basket and calling fruit.

Why don't you understand that skin color means completely nothing? Morphologically is much more important. For instance, Iranids are morphologically classified under the Mediterranean race, while you can even find Nordic influences among Iranians.

The Irano-nordoid, or Irano-Afghan race occupies most of the Iranian plateau, areas of Afghanistan, Pakistan, and areas of northern Iraq and western Turkey (Kurd land). Obviously associated with the Aryan peoples of whom Iran derives its name. For the purpose of this article Irano-Afghan shall include all groups defined as Iranid, Nordindid, and those in such character.

Their point of origin is the subject of much debate. Some contend that these peoples migrated from central Asia. I personally tend to the thought that the Irano-nordoid stock was indigenous to Iran.

The race is categorized as part of the greater Mediterranid race according to Coon, but is differentiated by its taller stature, long-headed with deep occiput, long prominent nose, sloping forehead, bony face, greater beard and body hair growth, shorter trunk, wider upper body, and longer limbs. Most tend towards lighter or moderate pigmentation. The bone structure is much heavier than their Arab neighbors. Metrically they are very similar to the corded people who invaded Europe. These people were known as the battle axe peoples. They were a warrior race who invaded Europe in the early neolithic era. Many Nordics also retain a very similar head form, with maybe a little less exageration of features and less of a tendency towards nasal convexivity.

In europe the form is less prominent and often intermixed with alpine or other local variants. But nevertheless it does appear, occasionally in northern Europe, particularly among nordic nations.

It comprises the principle stock of Iran's people. Today Persians, Gilanis, Gilakis, Mazanderanis, Kurds, Lurs, most Baluchi (except those with negroid and/or Veddoid admixture), Dari, Pashto, some Azeris, and some Tajik tribes exhibit this form. In Azerbaijan this physical type may exhibit brachycephaly (rounded-headedness). To a much lesser extent such forms are present in northern India. In Iraq those who are descendants of the Mesopotamian Babylonian sometimes show a similar form. Bones from archaelogical sites show that they have been in Iran for quite a long time.

Peoples Compared Cranial Similarity
Iran & Sub-Saharan Africa 12%
Iran & Australo-Melanesian 25%
Iran & Eskimo 25%
Iran & East Asia 34%
Iran & Pacific Island 40%
Iran & Nubia 43%
Iran & India 55%
Iran & Greece 59%
Iran & Somalia 64%
Iran & South Egypt 65%
Iran & Switzerland 67%
Iran & Ameridian 69%
Iran & North Egypt 77%
Iran & Portugal 77%
Iran & North Africa 80%
Iran & England 82%
Iran & France 84%
Iran & Russia 84%
Iran & Germany 86%
Iran & Central Europe 88%
Iran & Jericho 88%
Iran & Denmark 91%
 
I came across this text of Herodotus:

The achievement of Deioces [...] was to unite under his rules the peoples of Media - Busae, Parataceni, Struchates, Arizanti, Budii, Magi.

The Persian nation contains a number of tribes [...]: the Pasargadae, Maraphii, and Maspii, upon which all the other tribes are dependent. Of these, the Pasargadae are the most distinguished; they contain the clan of the Achaemenids from which spring the Perseid kings. Other tribes are the Panthialaei, Derusiaei, Germanii, all of which are attached to the soil, the remainder -the Dai, Mardi, Dropici, Sagarti, being nomadic.

Cyrus

We still have a city called Kerman (German) and a provence called Sistan (Sakastan) which is named after the Scythians/Sakas. The name 'Alan' found in France still goes back to Iranian (Alans) migration to Europe, especially to France and Spain.
 
The Altaic people carried more primitive aDNA like C, but later they used to absorb a good number of N and R1a, while we Sino-Tibetan people are relatively newcomers with primarily being the O3 carriers.

Personally i think the people stretching from Japan to Ural Mountains (or perhaps to Europe) developed a isolated proto-language structure in primitive ages of human history without being influenced by Indo-European language and Sino-Tibetan languages.

Ancient European languages similar in structure to Ural-Altai languages disappeared in favor of Indo-European language expansion by 2000 BC to 1000 BC. Cause of it can be culturally advanced Mesopotamian writing system and traders.
 
Personally i think the people stretching from Japan to Ural Mountains (or perhaps to Europe) developed a isolated proto-language structure in primitive ages of human history without being influenced by Indo-European language and Sino-Tibetan languages.

Ancient European languages similar in structure to Ural-Altai languages disappeared in favor of Indo-European language expansion by 2000 BC to 1000 BC. Cause of it can be culturally advanced Mesopotamian writing system and traders.

The Japanese even carries more archaic marker like D, they are closely related to the Negritos in Southeast Asia.

Those Japanese who carries O3 are most descended of the ancient Chinese sailors.

Also, the R1b folks in Central Asia are primarily Turkic marker, it has nothing to do with the R1b in West Europe.

Yeah, i've also heard the theory about Uralids being the true descendant of the first Cro-Magnons in Europe.
 
The Japanese even carries more archaic marker like D, they are closely related to the Negritos in Southeast Asia.

Those Japanese who carries O3 are most descended of the ancient Chinese sailors.

Also, the R1b folks in Central Asia are primarily Turkic marker, it has nothing to do with the R1b in West Europe.

Yeah, i've also heard the theory about Uralids being the true descendant of the first Cro-Magnons in Europe.

I was Talking about languages, not about genetics. But because you started it, read this:

http://erectuswalksamongst.us/Chap24.html

What interesting might be this, either: similarity between The languages of japanese Ainus and Spanish Basques.

The Ainu language is strangely similar to the Basque language (Ainu & Basque Language Correlation)
 
I was Talking about languages, not about genetics. But because you started it, read this:

http://erectuswalksamongst.us/Chap24.html

What interesting might be this, either: similarity between The languages of japanese Ainus and Spanish Basques.

The myth about the Ainu people being the Basques of Asia has been debunked, the Ainu people are pro-Mongoloid who shares many common features with the Caucasoid, thus this indicates a common Eurasian ancestry.
 
I think the fascination with ancient scythians mainly stems from the fact that they are now extinct , like everyone can go to Italy and see for themselves how Romans weren't anything special , but Scythian are imo , romanticized by most scholars because of their traits.

they are not extinct their decedents live in western Europe mostly in England , Scotland, Germany, Holland and some Nordic countries. The earliest English historians claimed Scythian heritage for the Anglo Saxon race.

The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle
Annals to A.D. 381


The island Britain1 is 800 miles long, and 200 miles broad. And there are in the island five nations; English, Welsh (or British),2 Scottish, Pictish, and Latin. The first inhabitants were the Britons, who came from Armenia,3 and first peopled Britain southward. Then happened it, that the Picts came south from Scythia, with long ships, not many; and, landing first in the northern part of Ireland, they told the Scots that they must dwell there. But they would not give them leave; for the Scots told them that they could not all dwell there together; "But," said the Scots, "we can nevertheless give you advice. We know another island here to the east. There you may dwell, if you will; and whosoever withstandeth you, we will assist you, that you may gain it." Then went the Picts and entered this land northward. Southward the Britons possessed it, as we before said. And the Picts obtained wives of the Scots, on condition that they chose their kings always on the female side;4 which they have continued to do, so long since. And it happened, in the run of years, that some party of Scots went from Ireland into Britain, and acquired some portion of this land. Their leader was called Reoda,5 from whom they are named Dalreodi (or Dalreathians).


The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle is a collection of annals in Old English chronicling the history of the Anglo-Saxons. The original manuscript of the Chronicle was created late in the 9th century, probably in Wessex, during the reign of Alfred the Great. Multiple copies were made of that original which were distributed to monasteries across England, where they were independently updated. In one case, the Chronicle was still being actively updated in 1154.
Nine manuscripts survive in whole or in part, though not all are of equal historical value and none of them is the original version. The oldest seems to have been started towards the end of Alfred's reign, while the most recent was written at Peterborough Abbey after a fire at that monastery in 1116. Almost all of the material in the Chronicle is in the form of annals, by year; the earliest are dated at 60 BC (the annals' date for Caesar's invasions of Britain), and historical material follows up to the year in which the chronicle was written, at which point contemporary records begin. These manuscripts collectively are known as the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle.
The Chronicle is not unbiased: there are occasions when comparison with other medieval sources makes it clear that the scribes who wrote it omitted events or told one-sided versions of stories; there are also places where the different versions contradict each other. Taken as a whole, however, the Chronicle is the single most important historical source for the period in England between the departure of the Romans and the decades following the Norman Conquest. Much of the information given in the Chronicle is not recorded elsewhere. In addition, the manuscripts are important sources for the history of the English language; in particular, the later Peterborough text is one of the earliest examples of Middle English in existence.
 
OK, to which race belong Pakistanis? Balouch? Pashtun? Sindi? Punjabi? Neither. Scythians were nomadic tribes who were not homogenous. Pre-Jesus era was same as today where ethnic groups live side by side; but borders were not clear. Therefore you cant bring any evidence on how much Iranic or how much Nordic or how much Uralic or how much Caucasian the Scythians were.

Considering Scythians an Iranic group makes them non-indigenous to Desht-i Qypchak or Eurasian Steppes, native peoples existed before Scythians. Languages dont appear all sudden one day.

Pakistanis belong to the Indo-Iranic race mixed with some possible Elamite and Dravidian populations. Indo-Iranic peopls are divided into Iranic and Indo-Aryan peoples. Baloch and Pakhtuns are Iranic while Punjabis, Sindhis and Kashmirs are Indo-Aryan.

Scythians might have spoken different languages, but probably related. Scythians did mix with other races and that is fact.

Also you wonder how did Scythians disappear so fast. Well the book I read on them states exactly that. The Scythians dissapeared from the pages of history (about 300BC) as fast as they appeared (about 700-800 BC).

Can I ask what race do the people of Turkey belong to? Anatolian, Iranic, Semitic, Turko-Mongol, or Greek or maybe Caucasian or maybe all of those but speaking the same language?
 
they are not extinct their decedents live in western Europe mostly in England , Scotland, Germany, Holland and some Nordic countries. The earliest English historians claimed Scythian heritage for the Anglo Saxon race.

The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle
Annals to A.D. 381


The island Britain1 is 800 miles long, and 200 miles broad. And there are in the island five nations; English, Welsh (or British),2 Scottish, Pictish, and Latin. The first inhabitants were the Britons, who came from Armenia,3 and first peopled Britain southward. Then happened it, that the Picts came south from Scythia, with long ships, not many; and, landing first in the northern part of Ireland, they told the Scots that they must dwell there. But they would not give them leave; for the Scots told them that they could not all dwell there together; "But," said the Scots, "we can nevertheless give you advice. We know another island here to the east. There you may dwell, if you will; and whosoever withstandeth you, we will assist you, that you may gain it." Then went the Picts and entered this land northward. Southward the Britons possessed it, as we before said. And the Picts obtained wives of the Scots, on condition that they chose their kings always on the female side;4 which they have continued to do, so long since. And it happened, in the run of years, that some party of Scots went from Ireland into Britain, and acquired some portion of this land. Their leader was called Reoda,5 from whom they are named Dalreodi (or Dalreathians).


The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle is a collection of annals in Old English chronicling the history of the Anglo-Saxons. The original manuscript of the Chronicle was created late in the 9th century, probably in Wessex, during the reign of Alfred the Great. Multiple copies were made of that original which were distributed to monasteries across England, where they were independently updated. In one case, the Chronicle was still being actively updated in 1154.
Nine manuscripts survive in whole or in part, though not all are of equal historical value and none of them is the original version. The oldest seems to have been started towards the end of Alfred's reign, while the most recent was written at Peterborough Abbey after a fire at that monastery in 1116. Almost all of the material in the Chronicle is in the form of annals, by year; the earliest are dated at 60 BC (the annals' date for Caesar's invasions of Britain), and historical material follows up to the year in which the chronicle was written, at which point contemporary records begin. These manuscripts collectively are known as the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle.
The Chronicle is not unbiased: there are occasions when comparison with other medieval sources makes it clear that the scribes who wrote it omitted events or told one-sided versions of stories; there are also places where the different versions contradict each other. Taken as a whole, however, the Chronicle is the single most important historical source for the period in England between the departure of the Romans and the decades following the Norman Conquest. Much of the information given in the Chronicle is not recorded elsewhere. In addition, the manuscripts are important sources for the history of the English language; in particular, the later Peterborough text is one of the earliest examples of Middle English in existence.

Anglo-Saxons carry very little R1a, thus they are not the descendants of Scythians. :coffee:
 
Reference to OMG, Does history of India start from M B Quasim in Canada??? Son Indian civilization is 10,000-20,000 year old, first read the history then open your mouth.
o Thank
forcetrip thanked this.
Reply Reply With Quote
3. 02-21-2013 02:36 PM#54
MST

FULL MEMBERS

Join Date
Oct 2010
Location
Answer:
Should that be the language of civilized people, with a civilization 10,000-20,000 year old??? This is their way. That means the man doesn’t even know any civilization or its start. Kindly just tell us was your civilization like Gandhiji’s or like Murarji Desai’s??

You say your civilization 10,000-20,000 year old
Is it in the darkness of some cave of the Pluto? Why is it hidden from the eyes of history?

History says for the whole earth:
20,000 years ago Paleolithic Age all over No civilization anywhere
10,000 years ago Neolithic Age only in Mesopotamia No civilization anywhere
7,000 BC Neolithic Age in Indus Valley also No civilization anywhere
6,000 BC Neolithic Age in Egypt also No civilization anywhere
3100 BC Civilization in only Mesopotamia and Egypt Nowhere else
2600 BC Civilization in Indus Valley also
2500 BC Sanskritic Aryas still in the Carpathians of Hungary, in Neolithic Age; till then no words in their language for lion, tiger, elephant, goat, sea, desert, palm tree, acacia; poised to leave due to indispensable circumstances.
2100-1900 BC Sanskritic race in Afghanistan, robs IVC caravans to and from Central Asia. Indus Civilization declines. Caravans stop. Sanskritic Aryan barbarians cross over to the Indus Valley and invade it; destroy it, massacre the natives (desyos); Moenjodaro Massacre 1700 BC
Farooq alvi

Your question: “Does history of India start from MB Quasim in Canada???”
Answer: No, it starts from the invasions of Sanskritic Aryan barbarians on the Indus Civilization 1900 BC, with Moenjodar msassacre 1700 BC accompanied by a Dark Millennium 1500-500, called Vedic Age.
Ample quotes available if needed
Farooq alvi 24/3/13

New Thread:
India is the ancient name of Pakistan

(1) Like Mesopotamia the ancient Greek name of Iraq, India is the ancient Greek name of Pakistan. All ancient literatures point towards this fact. For example, the Holy Avesta (c. 600 BC) of Zoroastrianism, Admiral Scylax’s account of India (517-509 BC), father of Geography Hecataeus’s Periodos Ges (505 BX), Historie of father of History Herodotus (c. 440 BC), Indica of Royal Physician Ctesias (415-398 BC), Syriac, Greek, Latin literatures of early Christianity, etc etc all confine India of their times to the territories of present-day Pakistan, not mentioning any other part of the Subcontinent. They even give its boundaries: Iran to it west, Erythraean (Arabian) Sea to its south, great desert to its east and Hindukush Range beyond (to its north).

(2) Etymologically also, India, a derivative from Indus, means Indus country or country around the Indus; it cannot mean a country of the Ganges. Sensibly, this name cannot be taken away from the Indus to the Ganges, to mean it Bharat.

(3) Also Pakistan, though a beautiful and sacred modern name; yet, being the acronym of the modern names of its constituents, and those constituents lying on both sides of the Indus, it also carries the meaning of India, the Indus country. Thus, the meaning of India is contained in the word Pakistan. This is a relationship between the words of India and Pakistan, which does not exist between the words India and Bharat.

(4) Moreover, India carries the sense of black and Bharat the sense of white. So, the two are antonyms of each other. No sane person would call the same cow some times white cow and at another time black cow.
Farooq alvi 24/3/13
 

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom