100
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Dec 7, 2016
- Messages
- 189
- Reaction score
- -2
- Country
- Location
Can you prove 2015 hajj stampede was done by the Iranians ?
Iran to Dispatch about 80,000 Hajj Pilgrims to Saudi Arabia This Year: Official
- Thread starter Saif al-Arab
- Start date
Can you prove 2015 hajj stampede was done by the Iranians ?
Shapur Zol Aktaf
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Feb 10, 2013
- Messages
- 3,711
- Reaction score
- -6
- Country
- Location
@Saif al-Arab
Please don't write in big letters, or bold letters, it doesnt give weight to your arguments. You're doing this in all the sections of this forum, like a child.
No, you don't like the huge footprint of Indo-europan nations in population, land mass, culture, technology, wealth and literally everything. Religiously, linguistics, cultural elements have proved their links, there are nowadays even genetic evidences coming out, but still more research is needed.
Also North Africans and middle eastern have genetic differences (E vs J hoplagroup).
Just like the afro-asiatic groups who spread from a certain region and were not native to all regions where they live now. Similair culture and language is mostly due to that one of the groups (arabs) spread their religion and language over the other groups. Not because of having the same root. One of the groups of semites (arabs) dominated all afro-asiatics.
Semitic culture and what they gave to world is a joke compared to Indo-european culture, land mass, population mass, technology.
The semitic thing is mostly indeed a story of past and nowadays only their religious footprint is left behind with sharply declining influence in west already, and east to come in future.
an influenced and young religion
The oldest form of Biblical Hebrew, Archaic Hebrew, is found in poetic sections of the Bible and inscriptions dating to around 1000 BCE, the early Monarchic Period. This stage is also known as Old Hebrew or Paleo-Hebrew, and is the oldest stratum of Biblical Hebrew. The oldest known artifacts of Archaic Biblical Hebrew are various sections of the Tanakh, including the Song of Moses (Exodus 15) and the Song of Deborah (Judges 5)
Many scholars like Mary Boyce (1700–1000 BCE) used linguistic and socio-cultural evidence to place Zoroaster between 1500 and 1000 BCE (or 1200 and 900 BCE).[5][19] The basis of this theory is primarily proposed on linguistic similarities between the Old Avestan language of the Zoroastrian Gathas and the Sanskrit of the Rigveda (c. 1700–1100 BCE), a collection of early Vedic hymns.
Even J1 being arab is doubted...
The first J1 men lived in the Late Upper Paleolithic, shortly before the end of the last Ice Age. The oldest identified J1 sample to date comes from Satsurblia cave (c. 13200 BCE) in Georgia (Jones et al. (2015)), placing the origins of haplogroup J1 in all likelihood in the region around the Caucasus, Zagros, Taurus and eastern Anatolia during the Upper Paleolithic.
Also read the following:
E-M215, also known as E1b1b and E3b: All major sub-branches of E-M35 are thought to have originated in the same general area as the parent clade: in North Africa, the Horn of Africa, or nearby areas of the Near East.
(al-firdaws) while the arabs claim quran is pure from non-arabic words.
Besides that, base-10 numeral system, (which is used in whole world, not almost or part of world like alphabet) and without which all the sciences would not be possible as we have them today, is invented by Indo-Iranians. It's great!
Old Persian texts were written from left to right in the syllabic Old Persian cuneiform script and had 36 phonetic characters and 8 logograms. The usage of such characters are not obligatory. The script was surprisingly not a result of evolution of the script used in the nearby civilisation of Mesopotamia. Despite the fact that Old Persian was written in cuneiform script, the script was not a direct continuation of Mesopotamian tradition and in fact, according to Schmitt, was a "deliberate creation of the sixth century BCE"
Please don't write in big letters, or bold letters, it doesnt give weight to your arguments. You're doing this in all the sections of this forum, like a child.
No, you don't like the huge footprint of Indo-europan nations in population, land mass, culture, technology, wealth and literally everything. Religiously, linguistics, cultural elements have proved their links, there are nowadays even genetic evidences coming out, but still more research is needed.
Also North Africans and middle eastern have genetic differences (E vs J hoplagroup).
Just like the afro-asiatic groups who spread from a certain region and were not native to all regions where they live now. Similair culture and language is mostly due to that one of the groups (arabs) spread their religion and language over the other groups. Not because of having the same root. One of the groups of semites (arabs) dominated all afro-asiatics.
No, (Indo-)Iranians first mostly encountered Gutians, Elamites, Kassites, Hurrians. Even after that the semitic were passers of Sumerian civilization to Iranians, logic since achaemenid, sassanid, parthian empire conquered the areas of former sumerians, who were invaded by semites later.
Semitic culture and what they gave to world is a joke compared to Indo-european culture, land mass, population mass, technology.
The semitic thing is mostly indeed a story of past and nowadays only their religious footprint is left behind with sharply declining influence in west already, and east to come in future.
As elamites were natives of Iran, however the afro-asiatics were not living in sumerian area originally, they came from somewhere else. Sumerian civilization belongs to Iraq, but has no connection to saudi arabia.
Lol, Yes there is!, even one of the most important words in Quran, namely Firdaws, which was by the way also copied by jews during achaemenid empire. You even mention the magians together with sabeans, christians to set them apart from polytheists, not that we didnt confirmation from
an influenced and young religion - Zoroastrianism and hinduism both predate Judaism.
The oldest form of Biblical Hebrew, Archaic Hebrew, is found in poetic sections of the Bible and inscriptions dating to around 1000 BCE, the early Monarchic Period. This stage is also known as Old Hebrew or Paleo-Hebrew, and is the oldest stratum of Biblical Hebrew. The oldest known artifacts of Archaic Biblical Hebrew are various sections of the Tanakh, including the Song of Moses (Exodus 15) and the Song of Deborah (Judges 5)
Many scholars like Mary Boyce (1700–1000 BCE) used linguistic and socio-cultural evidence to place Zoroaster between 1500 and 1000 BCE (or 1200 and 900 BCE).[5][19] The basis of this theory is primarily proposed on linguistic similarities between the Old Avestan language of the Zoroastrian Gathas and the Sanskrit of the Rigveda (c. 1700–1100 BCE), a collection of early Vedic hymns.
E was already in north africa before arabs, so it has nothing to do with arabs.
Even J1 being arab is doubted...
The first J1 men lived in the Late Upper Paleolithic, shortly before the end of the last Ice Age. The oldest identified J1 sample to date comes from Satsurblia cave (c. 13200 BCE) in Georgia (Jones et al. (2015)), placing the origins of haplogroup J1 in all likelihood in the region around the Caucasus, Zagros, Taurus and eastern Anatolia during the Upper Paleolithic.
Also read the following:
E-M215, also known as E1b1b and E3b: All major sub-branches of E-M35 are thought to have originated in the same general area as the parent clade: in North Africa, the Horn of Africa, or nearby areas of the Near East.
Impossible to have 1 million afro-iranians in Iran. What is your source. Even if it would be true they would form 1,25% of our population comparet to 10% of saudi population.
Empire is land mass is something else than empire ruling percentage of world population. It's like saying Assad has lesser control in Syria than all forces that fight against him. While looking what he controls.. the cities and mount of population, assad controls most of Syria. Also when counting amount of empires, how long they lasted not impressive, the umayads lasted only 89 years, the Rashidun caliphate only 29 years wich is laughable.
Mostly elamite and sumerian cultures, passed through by semite culture. However there was also Iranian influence on semites, as I said, the most holy concept of semites today.. their religious books has taken concept/word of Heaven for example from Iranians
(al-firdaws) while the arabs claim quran is pure from non-arabic words. Lool, "might as well have" is no evidence. Kitab al sitta (the six books).. you can search for their writers, as well the writers of shia hadiths... all were mostly Iranians. Histography is certainly a big achievement.
Ancestor/parent system of proto-sinaitic script is the Egyptian hieroglyphs, so it's not an independent invention by semites, while old persian alphabet was an independent invention by Iranians. It's not derived from X alphabet, it has no parent system! Even the semitic alphabet is in its perfect form the latin ones used by indo-europeans (named "comlpete alphabet"), not the abjad.
Besides that, base-10 numeral system, (which is used in whole world, not almost or part of world like alphabet) and without which all the sciences would not be possible as we have them today, is invented by Indo-Iranians. It's great!
About that read texts I wrote above, and about the persian script you dont have to lie:
Old Persian texts were written from left to right in the syllabic Old Persian cuneiform script and had 36 phonetic characters and 8 logograms. The usage of such characters are not obligatory. The script was surprisingly not a result of evolution of the script used in the nearby civilisation of Mesopotamia. Despite the fact that Old Persian was written in cuneiform script, the script was not a direct continuation of Mesopotamian tradition and in fact, according to Schmitt, was a "deliberate creation of the sixth century BCE"
Lol tiny minority of 600000 who possibly will go there.. a tiny number, your suggest it's an arab-centric faith... yeah I've seen your obsession and psyche.. calling even shias as majoosi (Iranians/zoroastrians)
Last edited:
Saif al-Arab
BANNED
- Joined
- Mar 26, 2015
- Messages
- 8,873
- Reaction score
- 5
- Country
- Location
@Shapur Zol Aktaf
Let's try to make it short this time around.
1) Civilizations native to the Arab world that only modern-day Arabs can claim are not only vastly more influential than anything native to modern-day Iran but also much older and more numerous. In fact they are home to the oldest civilizations and cultures (recorded) on the planet and the oldest cities to just name a few things.
2) The vast majority of the inventions of the ancient world and the most important ones were invented by Semites and other people native to the Arab world. You have absolutely nothing to do with the inventions of Europeans that you have nothing in common with and moreover even have a smaller genetic relationship to than Arabs. You are also geographically located further away.
3) Arabic langauge is vastly more influential than Persian on every front. Spoken by 5-6 times as many people and a language that has influenced almost all languages spoken in the Muslim world and world languages such as Spanish and Portuguese heavily. Persian itself has almost 1/2 of its vocabulary deriving from Arabic.
4) The Arab world is vastly richer, bigger, more populous, home to the most important civilizations in history, the oldest cities in the world, most famous artifacts and historical sites and is also vastly more influential and important historically and to this very day. There is no comparison at all.
5) There is nothing called an Indo-European people. It's solely a language family unlike Arabs and Semites who are native to the same geographic region, who speak closely related languages (that you can actually understand mutually) and who cluster genetically with each other closer than any other outsiders and who also share geography.
6) Arabs as I proved by actually showing genetic tests cluster more with neighboring Europeans than Iranians as do Turkic-speaking Turks. And I would not be surprised to see Sindhi people (inheritors of the IVC in Pakistan) to be more closely related to Eastern Arabians and Omanis across the Arabian Sea than the average Iranian.
7) Denying that pre-Islamic Iranian culture is heavily influenced by much older Semitic (and non-Semitic) civilizations and cultures native to the Arab world (in particular modern-day Iraq and neighboring Eastern Arabia) is the same as me claiming that China is a un-influnetial country. Every single historian will tell you that the Arab world influenced Iran more than the opposite way around both in pre-Islamic times and Islamic times.
8) Arabs ruled the Caliphate for almost 1000 years and controlled much of the Muslim world and created 3 of the 11 largest empires in human history more than any other ethnic group. All Iranian empires were mostly confined to modern-day Iran, parts of Afghanistan, parts of Central Asia, parts of Southern Caucasus, half of Iraq and that's about it aside from a very short rule of parts of Anatolia (happened under Greek rule - Parthians), Egypt etc.
9) Judaism predates the notion of Iran by 500 years so to claim that Judaism copied some "Iranian" customs that nobody knows about is hilarious at best. Non-Abrahamic (Semitic themselves) Semitic pagan religions are the oldest attested religions in the world.
10) There are no Persian words in the Qur'an. If they are it is because almost 50% of the Persian vocabulary derives from Arabic and before that other Semitic languages such as Aramaic (a former official language of Iran) and previously Akkadian.
11) There are what, 500 Persian words in Arabic, while you have 10.000's of Arabic words in Persian. Once again a moronic comparison.
12) Those haplogroups are native to the Arab world and more precisely Arabia where you have the greatest haplogroup diversity (both paternal and maternal) which is not strange as it is the second oldest inhabited area on the planet. In fact all modern-day Iranians lived in Arabia for millennia before their ancestors migrated to modern-day Iran which was a wasteland (in terms of humans) for 10.000's of years while Arabia was inhabited by some of the first humans on the planet.
13) I suggest reading the history of the alphabet. We invented writing and the first alphabets. It's as simple as that.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_alphabet
14) Before you get too much ahead of yourself, mathematics itself were invented in Mesopotamia by the ancestors of Arabs and the concept of 0 as well.
https://www.brainpickings.org/2017/02/02/zero-robert-kaplan/
As I wrote previously the most important ancient inventions that changed human history forever were invented by our ancestors. The wheel, writing, alphabets, mathematics, numbers, astronomy, science itself, the first cities, agriculture (invented by Neolithic farmers native to Southern Levant whose mummies have been proven to cluster with modern-day Arabs before anybody else and in particular modern-day Saudi Arabians), domestication, the first attempts of sophisticated architecture, music instruments etc. The list is very long.
That recent DNA study proved that modern-day Saudi Arabians (the highest sample - 60.38%!), Palestinians, Jordanians and Egyptians have the largest ancestral claim on the Neolithic civilizations that first appeared in Southern Levant.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natufian_culture
A culture that existed from 12.5000 BC to 9.500 BC whose people are known to have built the first Neolithic settlements on the planet as well as made the first attempts at agriculture, organized included. It was also arguably the first sedentary culture of this size in the world as well.
Here are the DNA results from this year (2016)
https://plot.ly/~PortalAntropologiczny9cfa/1.embed?share_key=za9Lb3y1UX6nJRG9v4EXOL
Here is the entire report:
http://biorxiv.org/content/biorxiv/early/2016/06/16/059311.full.pdf
15) This thread is about almost 100.000 of your compatriots (whom your likes deem to be religiously, culturally and probably ethnically conquered people by Arabs) who are about to go to KSA to visit Makkah and Madinah (the most revered religious cities/sites in the world) and the prayer direction for 1.7 billion Muslims. Your likes would like to see a dead religion (basically) like Zoroastrianism have even 1% of the exposure, influence and adherents that Islam has however that will never happen and never happened.
16) Arabs have nothing to cry about in regards to Iran or Persians. It's the other way around for historical reasons that most people with a little bit of historical knowledge know very well. You mentioning Safavids (wannabe Arabs who claimed Arab ancestry and imported 10.000's of Arabs to Iran in order to change it from a Sunni majority country to a Shia majority country) mostly mass-murdered Iranians. They only attacked a few Arabs in Iraq. That's it. In more recent history, one Arab ruler (Saddam) also did more harm to you than vice versa and so it will be again in the future due to simple logic, demographics, wealth, size etc. should a war erupt. I know it hurts.
17) We are not discussing the topic here which content clearly hurts you. I would find it embarrassing too if I were in your position. In fact I would have a hard time looking in the mirror judging from events in the past 1400 years and what my culture, people, country etc. had become if it was the other way around. Thankfully we Arabs don't have such a burden towards anyone. Feels good.
Yes, and according to that same link Iranians are 56% from Arabia. In every genetic tests Egyptians cluster heavily with fellow Arabs in particular Saudi Arabians so using that logic Saudi Arabians are not Arabs either.
As for the many numerous Arab empires, their legacy, influence, achievements are only comparable by very few empires. I can only think of the British Empire.
Today the most revered person and most influential one in history (arguably and considered as that by many people alongside people such as Isaac Newton, Einstein) is Prophet Muhammad (saws).
http://www.iupui.edu/~msaiupui/thetop100.html?id=61
The most popular given name in the world is Muhammad. That should tell you something.
@EgyptianAmerican check this out. Somebody has been schooled for all to see!
Most of the world does very much so including this forum and yourself. I don't blame you.
Let's try to make it short this time around.
1) Civilizations native to the Arab world that only modern-day Arabs can claim are not only vastly more influential than anything native to modern-day Iran but also much older and more numerous. In fact they are home to the oldest civilizations and cultures (recorded) on the planet and the oldest cities to just name a few things.
2) The vast majority of the inventions of the ancient world and the most important ones were invented by Semites and other people native to the Arab world. You have absolutely nothing to do with the inventions of Europeans that you have nothing in common with and moreover even have a smaller genetic relationship to than Arabs. You are also geographically located further away.
3) Arabic langauge is vastly more influential than Persian on every front. Spoken by 5-6 times as many people and a language that has influenced almost all languages spoken in the Muslim world and world languages such as Spanish and Portuguese heavily. Persian itself has almost 1/2 of its vocabulary deriving from Arabic.
4) The Arab world is vastly richer, bigger, more populous, home to the most important civilizations in history, the oldest cities in the world, most famous artifacts and historical sites and is also vastly more influential and important historically and to this very day. There is no comparison at all.
5) There is nothing called an Indo-European people. It's solely a language family unlike Arabs and Semites who are native to the same geographic region, who speak closely related languages (that you can actually understand mutually) and who cluster genetically with each other closer than any other outsiders and who also share geography.
6) Arabs as I proved by actually showing genetic tests cluster more with neighboring Europeans than Iranians as do Turkic-speaking Turks. And I would not be surprised to see Sindhi people (inheritors of the IVC in Pakistan) to be more closely related to Eastern Arabians and Omanis across the Arabian Sea than the average Iranian.
7) Denying that pre-Islamic Iranian culture is heavily influenced by much older Semitic (and non-Semitic) civilizations and cultures native to the Arab world (in particular modern-day Iraq and neighboring Eastern Arabia) is the same as me claiming that China is a un-influnetial country. Every single historian will tell you that the Arab world influenced Iran more than the opposite way around both in pre-Islamic times and Islamic times.
8) Arabs ruled the Caliphate for almost 1000 years and controlled much of the Muslim world and created 3 of the 11 largest empires in human history more than any other ethnic group. All Iranian empires were mostly confined to modern-day Iran, parts of Afghanistan, parts of Central Asia, parts of Southern Caucasus, half of Iraq and that's about it aside from a very short rule of parts of Anatolia (happened under Greek rule - Parthians), Egypt etc.
9) Judaism predates the notion of Iran by 500 years so to claim that Judaism copied some "Iranian" customs that nobody knows about is hilarious at best. Non-Abrahamic (Semitic themselves) Semitic pagan religions are the oldest attested religions in the world.
10) There are no Persian words in the Qur'an. If they are it is because almost 50% of the Persian vocabulary derives from Arabic and before that other Semitic languages such as Aramaic (a former official language of Iran) and previously Akkadian.
11) There are what, 500 Persian words in Arabic, while you have 10.000's of Arabic words in Persian. Once again a moronic comparison.
12) Those haplogroups are native to the Arab world and more precisely Arabia where you have the greatest haplogroup diversity (both paternal and maternal) which is not strange as it is the second oldest inhabited area on the planet. In fact all modern-day Iranians lived in Arabia for millennia before their ancestors migrated to modern-day Iran which was a wasteland (in terms of humans) for 10.000's of years while Arabia was inhabited by some of the first humans on the planet.
13) I suggest reading the history of the alphabet. We invented writing and the first alphabets. It's as simple as that.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_alphabet
14) Before you get too much ahead of yourself, mathematics itself were invented in Mesopotamia by the ancestors of Arabs and the concept of 0 as well.
https://www.brainpickings.org/2017/02/02/zero-robert-kaplan/
As I wrote previously the most important ancient inventions that changed human history forever were invented by our ancestors. The wheel, writing, alphabets, mathematics, numbers, astronomy, science itself, the first cities, agriculture (invented by Neolithic farmers native to Southern Levant whose mummies have been proven to cluster with modern-day Arabs before anybody else and in particular modern-day Saudi Arabians), domestication, the first attempts of sophisticated architecture, music instruments etc. The list is very long.
That recent DNA study proved that modern-day Saudi Arabians (the highest sample - 60.38%!), Palestinians, Jordanians and Egyptians have the largest ancestral claim on the Neolithic civilizations that first appeared in Southern Levant.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natufian_culture
A culture that existed from 12.5000 BC to 9.500 BC whose people are known to have built the first Neolithic settlements on the planet as well as made the first attempts at agriculture, organized included. It was also arguably the first sedentary culture of this size in the world as well.
Here are the DNA results from this year (2016)
https://plot.ly/~PortalAntropologiczny9cfa/1.embed?share_key=za9Lb3y1UX6nJRG9v4EXOL
Here is the entire report:
http://biorxiv.org/content/biorxiv/early/2016/06/16/059311.full.pdf
15) This thread is about almost 100.000 of your compatriots (whom your likes deem to be religiously, culturally and probably ethnically conquered people by Arabs) who are about to go to KSA to visit Makkah and Madinah (the most revered religious cities/sites in the world) and the prayer direction for 1.7 billion Muslims. Your likes would like to see a dead religion (basically) like Zoroastrianism have even 1% of the exposure, influence and adherents that Islam has however that will never happen and never happened.
16) Arabs have nothing to cry about in regards to Iran or Persians. It's the other way around for historical reasons that most people with a little bit of historical knowledge know very well. You mentioning Safavids (wannabe Arabs who claimed Arab ancestry and imported 10.000's of Arabs to Iran in order to change it from a Sunni majority country to a Shia majority country) mostly mass-murdered Iranians. They only attacked a few Arabs in Iraq. That's it. In more recent history, one Arab ruler (Saddam) also did more harm to you than vice versa and so it will be again in the future due to simple logic, demographics, wealth, size etc. should a war erupt. I know it hurts.
17) We are not discussing the topic here which content clearly hurts you. I would find it embarrassing too if I were in your position. In fact I would have a hard time looking in the mirror judging from events in the past 1400 years and what my culture, people, country etc. had become if it was the other way around. Thankfully we Arabs don't have such a burden towards anyone. Feels good.
Yes, and according to that same link Iranians are 56% from Arabia. In every genetic tests Egyptians cluster heavily with fellow Arabs in particular Saudi Arabians so using that logic Saudi Arabians are not Arabs either.
As for the many numerous Arab empires, their legacy, influence, achievements are only comparable by very few empires. I can only think of the British Empire.
Today the most revered person and most influential one in history (arguably and considered as that by many people alongside people such as Isaac Newton, Einstein) is Prophet Muhammad (saws).
http://www.iupui.edu/~msaiupui/thetop100.html?id=61
The most popular given name in the world is Muhammad. That should tell you something.
@EgyptianAmerican check this out. Somebody has been schooled for all to see!
Most of the world does very much so including this forum and yourself. I don't blame you.
Last edited:
azzo
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Mar 17, 2015
- Messages
- 1,171
- Reaction score
- 0
- Country
- Location
Why are you dragging my people into this Islamaphobe?
North Africans are Muslim first, Arab second, then their individual nationalities. Screw off with that bull.
Wrong
Iranian/Persian empire at the height of it's power.
VS One Arab empire at the height of its power.
There is a reason why your people were running over each other in a pathetic attempt to re-create the Arab glory that was this. Instead you made your terrible republic.
Call us North african Arabs when you find a empire even half as large as this in your Persian history.
Until then don't act so tough Persian.
I didn't think that the persian delusions would reach this degree of attempting to compare their empire to one of our own.
How can you compare an empire/culture with the one that totally devoured it and erased it from existence, both militarily and culturally.
If you don't agree, answer these questions:
- Are you a Muslim, reading the Arabic Quran, or a Zoroastrian reading the whatever their book was called.
- Are your names Ali, Hussein, Mohammed..etc or Cyrus, Zerxe..etc
- What letters do you use to write? Arabic alphabet or ancient persian alphabet?
Please stop comparing a WORLD empire with a regional one.
Shapur Zol Aktaf
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Feb 10, 2013
- Messages
- 3,711
- Reaction score
- -6
- Country
- Location
@Saif al-Arab
Arab world is not where ancient arabs lived, so you can't claim those civilizations, for example persian empire had part of greece, I don't claim their civilization based on that argument. The sumerians for example have 0 connection to arabs.
Your answer to this is that of genetic/cultural commonalities in the arab world, they my answer is that this is mostly based on arab dominating all groups who got arabized by language and culture. And about genetics, due to post-islam movements arab tribes spread to near neighbouring countries and mixed with them, It's not certainly due to ancient links that the "arab world" is closely related to each other (which even is not true as I showed you differences haplogroup E for north africa and J for middle east).
And you also have nothing to do with inventions of afro-asiatics, outside small genetic connection. J1c3, the supposed arab version (even that is doubted) of J1 is simply not seen in other peoples or very low. The inventions of Indo-europeans even up to modern age outnumber those of semites. Whole ancient greek contribution to science is maybe enought, let alone counting all inventions of indo-europeans.
There are arabic languages, not a single language, since a moroccal can't understand a saudi, expect using standardized arabic. So it's not that impressive compared to Indo-Iranian languages and their influence, spoken by 1,5 billion peoples and only growing!
Compare that to semitic languages. The Iranian vocabulary has arabic words mainly due to religion, but for all the words we have the Iranian alternatives. I guess the same for Spanish and Portugese,
Arabic as proven is actually more solely a language family dating to recent times (post year 1000). Those "arabs" of north africa are mostly berber people, ancient egyptians (who mixed with arabs later) and their dna is mostly E, not J and certainly not j1c3 (the supposed arab dna which is not proven yet)
There is simply more research needed before making conclusions, for example this is recent from 2009:
A study by the HUGO Pan-Asian SNP Consortium in 2009 using the similar principal components analysis found that East Asian and South-East Asian populations clustered together, and suggested a common origin for these populations. At the same time they observed a broad discontinuity between this cluster and South Asia, commenting "most of the Indian populations showed evidence of shared ancestry with European populations". It was noted that "genetic ancestry is strongly correlated with linguistic affiliations as well as geography".
The first coins were developed independently in Iron Age Anatolia and Archaic Greece, India and China around the 7th and 6th centuries BCE. Coins spread rapidly in the 6th and 5th centuries BCE, throughout Greece and Persia, and further to the Balkans.
For 250 years abbasids were puppets and symbols in the hands of foreign dynasties:
After nearly 250 years of subjection to foreign dynasties, he successfully defended Baghdad against the Seljuqs in the siege of Baghdad (1157), thus securing Iraq for the Abbasids. The reign of al-Nasir (d. 1225) brought the caliphate back into power throughout Iraq.
So when we look at history when arabs were powerfull it's as follows:
Here you're repeating yourself, without evidence/backing. So I'll paste my argument and source again. I'm talking about living religions, religions with books, clear description, else we can go back 50000 years and we'll still find forms of religions.
The oldest form of Biblical Hebrew, Archaic Hebrew, is found in poetic sections of the Bible and inscriptions dating to around 1000 BCE, the early Monarchic Period. This stage is also known as Old Hebrew or Paleo-Hebrew, and is the oldest stratum of Biblical Hebrew. The oldest known artifacts of Archaic Biblical Hebrew are various sections of the Tanakh, including the Song of Moses (Exodus 15) and the Song of Deborah (Judges 5)
Many scholars like Mary Boyce (1700–1000 BCE) used linguistic and socio-cultural evidence to place Zoroaster between 1500 and 1000 BCE (or 1200 and 900 BCE).[5][19] The basis of this theory is primarily proposed on linguistic similarities between the Old Avestan language of the Zoroastrian Gathas and the Sanskrit of the Rigveda (c. 1700–1100 BCE), a collection of early Vedic hymns.
ESCHATOLOGY
i. In Zoroastrianism and Zoroastrian Influence
General Observations.
Faith in the events beyond life on this earth is attested in the Zoroastrian scriptures from the very first, from the Gāθās. This faith developed and became central to later Zoroastrianism so that it colors almost all aspects of the religious life. It also seems to have had a deep impact on neighboring religions, notably on Judaism, and through it on Christianity and Islam, as well as on Manicheism.
The arguments for connecting the Jewish developments in the field of eschatology to an Iranian influence can be set forth as follows. There was no doctrine of Jewish eschatology up to the end of the Old Testament period—neither individual judgment nor universal judgment. There was no notion of heaven and hell, nor a description of a reconstitution of the world after its dissolution at the end of time. There seems also to have been no idea of a systematic and universal raising of the dead at the end of times to undergo judgment, reward, and punishment. All these appear rather abruptly in Jewish writings that were composed during the last two centuries B.C.E. and subsequently in Christian writings. Since this was a period that followed a long Persian dominion in Palestine and an even longer period during which a substantial Jewish Diaspora had lived continuously in Mesopotamia and Persia, the emergence of a fully developed eschatology in Jewish circles, and one that displays such great resemblance to the complex of Persian ideas, cannot be a coincidence and must be explained as a result of contact between the two cultures. It seems rather unlikely that these ideas were originally developed among Jews, and that they were borrowed by the Persians, who constituted the dominant culture. The many eschatological allusions in the Gāθās and in the Younger Avesta, although they are not always entirely unequivocal, seem to guarantee a certain measure of antiquity and continuity to these ideas in Persia, while we lack similar indices in Judaism. The strong dualistic character of Jewish eschatology seems also to suggest the likelihood of a borrowing from Iran. Zoroastrian eschatology seems to possess a certain coherence and structure, given the large role that the dichotomy between the notions of mēnōg and gētīg plays in it. This can explain many of the duplications in the narrative, while no similar mechanism is available in the complex of eschatological notions in Judaism. The influence of Persian ideas is particularly easy to show in many details where there is great similarity between some of the rabbinic writings and the Zoroastrian books; for example, it is possible to cite the discussions of the spirits accompanying the soul on its journey or of the fate of people whose virtues and sins are equal (cf. Böklen, pp. 40 ff.). One late Jewish midrash, called “The Ascension of Moses” is built very much like the Ardā Wirāz-nāmag. It exists in several different Hebrew versions and also in a Judaeo-Persian one (a study and edition of the Judaeo-Persian text is in Netzer; for a selection of scholarly discussions of this problem see Böklen; Winston; Shaked, 1971; Hultgård; and, against the assumption of Persian influence on Judaism, König).
The ideas of Islamic eschatology are generally a development of koranic notions. These continue Jewish and Christian themes, themselves, as noted above, developed at least partly under Persian influence. The Islamic ideas are thus removed by several intermediaries from the origin. The essential elements are there, and they were further developed within the context of Islam. Only occasionally is there room for assuming that there was direct influence on the expressions of Islamic eschatological ideas. This may be the case with the peculiar Islamic concept of the maidens of paradise, al-ḥūr, the houris. This idea could have been influenced by the Zoroastrian notion of the eschatological female counterpart of man, the daēnā (suggested by Bausani, pp. 138 ff.; Gray, pp. 154-58; Sundermann, 1992, pp. 169-73). It is particularly the case with the small composition falsely attributed to the great Abū Ḥāmed Ḡazālī (q.v.), al-Dorra al-fāḵera fī kašf ʿolūm al-āḵera (Cairo, n.d.), where a great many parallels to Iranian eschatological ideas are found (cf. Gray; Shaked, 1992). The development (chiefly by al-Ḡazālī) of the idea of a middle abode, called by the koranic term al-aʿrāf, which would be the place for the souls of those who do not deserve heaven or hell, could also show influences of the threefold division of the souls of the dead in Zoroastrianism. The koranic term barzaḵ, of Persian provenance (presumably from *burz-axw “high existence”), was also used in the Islamic tradition in a similar sense. The term has not survived in extant Persian sources (cf. also Bölken, pp. 57 ff.). The Islamic literature concerned with the ascension of Moḥammad, the meʿrāj, contains certain elements that bring it close to the genre of literature that is familiar from Ardā Wirāz-nāmag.
Again you repeat yourself and I know it's sensitive because Quran is the jewel on the crown of arabic works. I'll ad extra explanation:
Word of Heaven in Quran for example comes from Iranians (al-firdaws).
The word "paradise" entered English from the French paradis, inherited from the Latin paradisus, from Greek parádeisos (παράδεισος), from an Old Iranian *paridayda- "walled enclosure". By the 6th/5th century BCE, the Old Iranian word had been adopted as Assyrianpardesu "domain". It subsequently came to indicate the expansive walled gardens of the First Persian Empire. The term eventually appeared in Greek as parádeisos "park for animals" in the Anabasis of the early 4th century BCE Athenian Xenophon. Aramaic pardaysa similarly reflects "royal park".
Hebrew פרדס (pardes) appears thrice in the Tanakh; in the Song of Solomon 4:13, Ecclesiastes 2:5 and Nehemiah 2:8. In those contexts it could be interpreted as an "orchard" or a "fruit garden". In the Septuagint (3rd–1st centuries BCE), Greek παράδεισος parádeisos was used to translate both Hebrew pardes and Hebrew gan, "garden": it is from this usage that the use of "paradise" to refer to the Garden of Eden derives. The same usage also appears in Arabic and in the Quran as firdaws فردوس.
The word's etymology is ultimately derived from a PIE root *dheigʷ "to stick and set up".[citation needed] It is reflected in Avestan as pairi-daêza-.
Most ancient J dna is not from arabia, neither did the proto-afro-asiatics lived at the place of the J dna. And Arab world today doesnt mean that arabs for examples were living iin morocco 5000/6000 years ago. Based on this assumption you can't claim everything for arabs.
I can even give you information that 600000 Iranians go for haj and umra every year. These are indeed Iranian arabs and/or arabized Iranians who're ultra conservatives with stockholm-syndrome, as seen in many other countries. However for the non-arab countries I've hope, I'm positive and like in past Europe (who burned women and killed "enemies" of christianity in most savage way) there will be a kind of renaissance, and the only influence of saudi arabia, qatar, few others will decline. Even being normal non-practising muslim will decline their influence hugely.
In my opinion daesh-like groups should not be destroyed so fast so that youth and world nations wake up, already happening to a certain degree. This will only help the fastening of secularization of many countries. But I do feel sad for the victims of these animals, whatever their religion and ethnicity is.
I'll hope saudi benefits from muslims by birth, for example in their war against Yemen since they formed an Islamic army
Except religion and the alphabet, arab names which is connected to the religion there is nothing more arab in our life. I'm no muslim, don't have arab name (my name is Farhad), and i don't need Islam. I use latin alphabet. My wish is that Iran one day changes its alphabet. I've read the Gathas, but pure out of interest.
All these aspects can be personal and you wont get cancer by changing them.
And you know well that you're using Indic (Indo-Iranian branch) base-10 nummeral system which is in value more important than writing of alphabet, especially the backward abjad system which ataturk succesfully changed to latin alphabet. We've to follow the example of ataturk in that.
And you know you're a dwarf compared to 1,5 billion Indo-Iranians, with 2 nuclear armed countries and 1 possesing nuclear knowhow and technology. Heroic Abdul Ghadeer Khan,
Munir Ahmad Khan, who made the Pakistani nuclear bomb both were Pathans (Iranic nation).
The father of Indian nuclear program, was a Parsi zoroastrian (Persian Iranic), named Homi J. Bhabha. India's three-stage nuclear power programme was started by him and after sino-India war he was aggressively calling for production of nuclear weapons.
Continiu talking English Indo-european to me as I don't understand arabic neither do I anwer someone if he talks arabic to me.
Arab world is not where ancient arabs lived, so you can't claim those civilizations, for example persian empire had part of greece, I don't claim their civilization based on that argument. The sumerians for example have 0 connection to arabs.
Your answer to this is that of genetic/cultural commonalities in the arab world, they my answer is that this is mostly based on arab dominating all groups who got arabized by language and culture. And about genetics, due to post-islam movements arab tribes spread to near neighbouring countries and mixed with them, It's not certainly due to ancient links that the "arab world" is closely related to each other (which even is not true as I showed you differences haplogroup E for north africa and J for middle east).
2) The vast majority of the inventions of the ancient world and the most important ones were invented by Semites and other people native to the Arab world. You have absolutely nothing to do with the inventions of Europeans that you have nothing in common with and moreover even have a smaller genetic relationship to than Arabs. You are also geographically located further away.
And you also have nothing to do with inventions of afro-asiatics, outside small genetic connection. J1c3, the supposed arab version (even that is doubted) of J1 is simply not seen in other peoples or very low. The inventions of Indo-europeans even up to modern age outnumber those of semites. Whole ancient greek contribution to science is maybe enought, let alone counting all inventions of indo-europeans.
There are arabic languages, not a single language, since a moroccal can't understand a saudi, expect using standardized arabic. So it's not that impressive compared to Indo-Iranian languages and their influence, spoken by 1,5 billion peoples and only growing!
Compare that to semitic languages. The Iranian vocabulary has arabic words mainly due to religion, but for all the words we have the Iranian alternatives. I guess the same for Spanish and Portugese,
Comparing the beauty of Indo-european world, ancient sites, population, jungles, the mighty himalayas of Nepal and India, the mountains of Afghanistan, amount of fresh water, India and Pakistan becoming 3th and 6th biggest economies, I see so much potentials. Plenty of historical sites, achaemenid sites, indus valley civilization also and mostly based on Indo-Iranian peoples, not like semitics who now claims sites of all afro-asiatics, else indo-european historical sites dwarf that of afro-asiatics.
Based on history, culture, language, there is evidence that there was an Indo-european ethnicity who spread from a cenrtain region. It's their culture and language which made all these contributions to the world possible.
Arabic as proven is actually more solely a language family dating to recent times (post year 1000). Those "arabs" of north africa are mostly berber people, ancient egyptians (who mixed with arabs later) and their dna is mostly E, not J and certainly not j1c3 (the supposed arab dna which is not proven yet)
That is like saying some arab language is closer to spanish that persian to spanish because there are way more arab words in spanish language, while it's due to "sprachbund", not due to same source/root.
There is simply more research needed before making conclusions, for example this is recent from 2009:
A study by the HUGO Pan-Asian SNP Consortium in 2009 using the similar principal components analysis found that East Asian and South-East Asian populations clustered together, and suggested a common origin for these populations. At the same time they observed a broad discontinuity between this cluster and South Asia, commenting "most of the Indian populations showed evidence of shared ancestry with European populations". It was noted that "genetic ancestry is strongly correlated with linguistic affiliations as well as geography".
Cultures native to where arabs live now doesnt make them arabic, neither semitic in most cases, so that's not an argument. Main influence of arabs on Iran and wider Iranian world is islam and due to islam, religious influence and that is where the influence ends. It's not that we didnt have coins, administrative system, own writing, religion, poetry, music, dance, clothes, mythology to wait for arabs to reach us and give it to us. For example I can say that arabs and the wider semitic groups had no complex economy before islam, they had not a simple coin.
The first coins were developed independently in Iron Age Anatolia and Archaic Greece, India and China around the 7th and 6th centuries BCE. Coins spread rapidly in the 6th and 5th centuries BCE, throughout Greece and Persia, and further to the Balkans.
Symbolic rule, ruling as puppet (in name of other empires like when turkic and persians used the abbasids as puppets), ruling a small portion of a former empire is not considered as ruling an ampire, else we can say that sassanids ruled till 1600! in northern Iran through their relatives the Paduspanids!!
For 250 years abbasids were puppets and symbols in the hands of foreign dynasties:
After nearly 250 years of subjection to foreign dynasties, he successfully defended Baghdad against the Seljuqs in the siege of Baghdad (1157), thus securing Iraq for the Abbasids. The reign of al-Nasir (d. 1225) brought the caliphate back into power throughout Iraq.
So when we look at history when arabs were powerfull it's as follows:
- Rashidun caliphate: ruled only 29 years
- Umayyad caliphate (most nationalistic arab caliphate): ruled only 89 years
- Abbasid caliphate, the strongest and longest standing arab empire, who were multi-cultural unlike umayads and rashidun caliphate: 750–1258. That's in total 508 years, but 250 years they were subjucated to foreign dynasties. It means they had 258 years effective rule.
- Rashidun, umayyad, abbasid caliphate were not parallel ruling caliphates, but followed each other, so when one was destructed, it was followed by the other (Rashidun>>Umayad>>Abbasid). Together that's 367 years of rule.
- add Fatimid empire in north afria to it, you'll have 629 years of arabic empires
Here you're repeating yourself, without evidence/backing. So I'll paste my argument and source again. I'm talking about living religions, religions with books, clear description, else we can go back 50000 years and we'll still find forms of religions.
- Zoroastrianism and hinduism both predate Judaism.
The oldest form of Biblical Hebrew, Archaic Hebrew, is found in poetic sections of the Bible and inscriptions dating to around 1000 BCE, the early Monarchic Period. This stage is also known as Old Hebrew or Paleo-Hebrew, and is the oldest stratum of Biblical Hebrew. The oldest known artifacts of Archaic Biblical Hebrew are various sections of the Tanakh, including the Song of Moses (Exodus 15) and the Song of Deborah (Judges 5)
Many scholars like Mary Boyce (1700–1000 BCE) used linguistic and socio-cultural evidence to place Zoroaster between 1500 and 1000 BCE (or 1200 and 900 BCE).[5][19] The basis of this theory is primarily proposed on linguistic similarities between the Old Avestan language of the Zoroastrian Gathas and the Sanskrit of the Rigveda (c. 1700–1100 BCE), a collection of early Vedic hymns.
ESCHATOLOGY
i. In Zoroastrianism and Zoroastrian Influence
General Observations.
Faith in the events beyond life on this earth is attested in the Zoroastrian scriptures from the very first, from the Gāθās. This faith developed and became central to later Zoroastrianism so that it colors almost all aspects of the religious life. It also seems to have had a deep impact on neighboring religions, notably on Judaism, and through it on Christianity and Islam, as well as on Manicheism.
The arguments for connecting the Jewish developments in the field of eschatology to an Iranian influence can be set forth as follows. There was no doctrine of Jewish eschatology up to the end of the Old Testament period—neither individual judgment nor universal judgment. There was no notion of heaven and hell, nor a description of a reconstitution of the world after its dissolution at the end of time. There seems also to have been no idea of a systematic and universal raising of the dead at the end of times to undergo judgment, reward, and punishment. All these appear rather abruptly in Jewish writings that were composed during the last two centuries B.C.E. and subsequently in Christian writings. Since this was a period that followed a long Persian dominion in Palestine and an even longer period during which a substantial Jewish Diaspora had lived continuously in Mesopotamia and Persia, the emergence of a fully developed eschatology in Jewish circles, and one that displays such great resemblance to the complex of Persian ideas, cannot be a coincidence and must be explained as a result of contact between the two cultures. It seems rather unlikely that these ideas were originally developed among Jews, and that they were borrowed by the Persians, who constituted the dominant culture. The many eschatological allusions in the Gāθās and in the Younger Avesta, although they are not always entirely unequivocal, seem to guarantee a certain measure of antiquity and continuity to these ideas in Persia, while we lack similar indices in Judaism. The strong dualistic character of Jewish eschatology seems also to suggest the likelihood of a borrowing from Iran. Zoroastrian eschatology seems to possess a certain coherence and structure, given the large role that the dichotomy between the notions of mēnōg and gētīg plays in it. This can explain many of the duplications in the narrative, while no similar mechanism is available in the complex of eschatological notions in Judaism. The influence of Persian ideas is particularly easy to show in many details where there is great similarity between some of the rabbinic writings and the Zoroastrian books; for example, it is possible to cite the discussions of the spirits accompanying the soul on its journey or of the fate of people whose virtues and sins are equal (cf. Böklen, pp. 40 ff.). One late Jewish midrash, called “The Ascension of Moses” is built very much like the Ardā Wirāz-nāmag. It exists in several different Hebrew versions and also in a Judaeo-Persian one (a study and edition of the Judaeo-Persian text is in Netzer; for a selection of scholarly discussions of this problem see Böklen; Winston; Shaked, 1971; Hultgård; and, against the assumption of Persian influence on Judaism, König).
The ideas of Islamic eschatology are generally a development of koranic notions. These continue Jewish and Christian themes, themselves, as noted above, developed at least partly under Persian influence. The Islamic ideas are thus removed by several intermediaries from the origin. The essential elements are there, and they were further developed within the context of Islam. Only occasionally is there room for assuming that there was direct influence on the expressions of Islamic eschatological ideas. This may be the case with the peculiar Islamic concept of the maidens of paradise, al-ḥūr, the houris. This idea could have been influenced by the Zoroastrian notion of the eschatological female counterpart of man, the daēnā (suggested by Bausani, pp. 138 ff.; Gray, pp. 154-58; Sundermann, 1992, pp. 169-73). It is particularly the case with the small composition falsely attributed to the great Abū Ḥāmed Ḡazālī (q.v.), al-Dorra al-fāḵera fī kašf ʿolūm al-āḵera (Cairo, n.d.), where a great many parallels to Iranian eschatological ideas are found (cf. Gray; Shaked, 1992). The development (chiefly by al-Ḡazālī) of the idea of a middle abode, called by the koranic term al-aʿrāf, which would be the place for the souls of those who do not deserve heaven or hell, could also show influences of the threefold division of the souls of the dead in Zoroastrianism. The koranic term barzaḵ, of Persian provenance (presumably from *burz-axw “high existence”), was also used in the Islamic tradition in a similar sense. The term has not survived in extant Persian sources (cf. also Bölken, pp. 57 ff.). The Islamic literature concerned with the ascension of Moḥammad, the meʿrāj, contains certain elements that bring it close to the genre of literature that is familiar from Ardā Wirāz-nāmag.
Again you repeat yourself and I know it's sensitive because Quran is the jewel on the crown of arabic works. I'll ad extra explanation:
Word of Heaven in Quran for example comes from Iranians (al-firdaws).
The word "paradise" entered English from the French paradis, inherited from the Latin paradisus, from Greek parádeisos (παράδεισος), from an Old Iranian *paridayda- "walled enclosure". By the 6th/5th century BCE, the Old Iranian word had been adopted as Assyrianpardesu "domain". It subsequently came to indicate the expansive walled gardens of the First Persian Empire. The term eventually appeared in Greek as parádeisos "park for animals" in the Anabasis of the early 4th century BCE Athenian Xenophon. Aramaic pardaysa similarly reflects "royal park".
Hebrew פרדס (pardes) appears thrice in the Tanakh; in the Song of Solomon 4:13, Ecclesiastes 2:5 and Nehemiah 2:8. In those contexts it could be interpreted as an "orchard" or a "fruit garden". In the Septuagint (3rd–1st centuries BCE), Greek παράδεισος parádeisos was used to translate both Hebrew pardes and Hebrew gan, "garden": it is from this usage that the use of "paradise" to refer to the Garden of Eden derives. The same usage also appears in Arabic and in the Quran as firdaws فردوس.
The word's etymology is ultimately derived from a PIE root *dheigʷ "to stick and set up".[citation needed] It is reflected in Avestan as pairi-daêza-.
We never deny many arab words in our language due to Islam (else we would have the same amount of assyrian words in our language) and we don't even mind. However the Gathas (the quran of Iranians) has no arabic words. Neither are there claims in Gathas that god sent that work in Iranian words so that it would be understood by the Iranian nation.
Most ancient J dna is not from arabia, neither did the proto-afro-asiatics lived at the place of the J dna. And Arab world today doesnt mean that arabs for examples were living iin morocco 5000/6000 years ago. Based on this assumption you can't claim everything for arabs.
I can even give you information that 600000 Iranians go for haj and umra every year. These are indeed Iranian arabs and/or arabized Iranians who're ultra conservatives with stockholm-syndrome, as seen in many other countries. However for the non-arab countries I've hope, I'm positive and like in past Europe (who burned women and killed "enemies" of christianity in most savage way) there will be a kind of renaissance, and the only influence of saudi arabia, qatar, few others will decline. Even being normal non-practising muslim will decline their influence hugely.
In my opinion daesh-like groups should not be destroyed so fast so that youth and world nations wake up, already happening to a certain degree. This will only help the fastening of secularization of many countries. But I do feel sad for the victims of these animals, whatever their religion and ethnicity is.
I'll hope saudi benefits from muslims by birth, for example in their war against Yemen since they formed an Islamic army
Except religion and the alphabet, arab names which is connected to the religion there is nothing more arab in our life. I'm no muslim, don't have arab name (my name is Farhad), and i don't need Islam. I use latin alphabet. My wish is that Iran one day changes its alphabet. I've read the Gathas, but pure out of interest.
All these aspects can be personal and you wont get cancer by changing them.
And you know well that you're using Indic (Indo-Iranian branch) base-10 nummeral system which is in value more important than writing of alphabet, especially the backward abjad system which ataturk succesfully changed to latin alphabet. We've to follow the example of ataturk in that.
And you know you're a dwarf compared to 1,5 billion Indo-Iranians, with 2 nuclear armed countries and 1 possesing nuclear knowhow and technology. Heroic Abdul Ghadeer Khan,
Munir Ahmad Khan, who made the Pakistani nuclear bomb both were Pathans (Iranic nation).
The father of Indian nuclear program, was a Parsi zoroastrian (Persian Iranic), named Homi J. Bhabha. India's three-stage nuclear power programme was started by him and after sino-India war he was aggressively calling for production of nuclear weapons.
Continiu talking English Indo-european to me as I don't understand arabic neither do I anwer someone if he talks arabic to me.
Last edited:
azzo
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Mar 17, 2015
- Messages
- 1,171
- Reaction score
- 0
- Country
- Location
Don't make laugh, I have never heard of anyone appealing to their "indo-Iranian" heritage or some kind of unity. Unlike Arabs or even Sunni Muslims, which are real identities with established histories that connect them all on multiple levels. Unlike the delusions of an imaginary "Indo-Iranian" nation that only exists in the minds of emotional, reactionary neo-atheist Iranians who are trying to come up with an imaginary brotherhood to counter balance the real and vast Ummah of Arabs and Muslims.
"indo-iranian" pffft you persians are nothing but a spec in this word and soon enough when the many peoples in Iran get their freedom you will know your real size in this world, both as a race and as a sect.
xairhossi
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Mar 7, 2017
- Messages
- 326
- Reaction score
- 2
- Country
- Location
Nobody was speaking about "Afro-Asiatic" speakers anywhere in this thread other than you. It is evident that Afro-Asiatic speakers outside of the Arab world who happen to speak languages belonging to that language family (the oldest language family in the world) have no genetic affinity (other than what binds all humans together genetically since we are all related) similar to how 95% of all Indo-European speakers have no genetic affinity best exemplified by my previous examples that you are quoting. Or similar to how Indo-European speaking Persians have no genetic affinity to Indo-European speaking Spaniards or how Indo-European speaking Sri Lankans have no genetic affinity to English-speaking Brits.
I was talking about Semitic speakers specifically who are native to the same region (Arab world), have very similar languages, have had very similar ancient civilizations and cultures (the first recorded in the world in fact) and who cluster with each other genetically more than any other outsiders to this very day.
Your information is wrong btw.
Genetic Evidence for the Expansion of Arabian Tribes into the Southern Levant and North Africa
"In a recent publication, Bosch et al. (2001) reported on Y-chromosome variation in populations from northwestern (NW) Africa and the Iberian peninsula. They observed a high degree of genetic homogeneity among the NW African Y chromosomes of Moroccan Arabs, Moroccan Berbers, and Saharawis, leading the authors to hypothesize that “the Arabization and Islamization of NW Africa, starting during the 7th century ad, … [were] cultural phenomena without extensive genetic replacement” (p. 1023). H71 (Eu10) was found to be the second-most-frequent haplogroup in that area. Following the hypothesis of Semino et al. (2000), the authors suggested that this haplogroup had spread out from the Middle East with the Neolithic wave of advance. Our recent findings (Nebel et al. 2000, 2001), however, suggest that the majority of Eu10 chromosomes in NW Africa are due to recent gene flow caused by the migration of Arabian tribes in the first millennium of the Common Era (ce).
In the sample of NW Africans (Bosch et al. 2001), 16 (9.1%) of the 176 Y chromosomes studied were of Eu10 (H71 on a haplogroup 9 background). Of these 16 chromosomes, 14 formed a compact microsatellite network: 7 individuals shared a single haplotype, and the haplotypes of the other 7 were one or two mutational steps removed. This low diversity may be indicative of a recent founder effect. Where did these chromosomes come from?
The highest frequency of Eu10 (30%–62.5%) has been observed so far in various Moslem Arab populations in the Middle East (Semino et al. 2000; Nebel et al. 2001). The most frequent Eu10 microsatellite haplotype in NW Africans is identical to a modal haplotype (DYS19-14, DYS388-17, DYS390-23, DYS391-11, DYS392-11, DYS393-12) of Moslem Arabs who live in a small area in the north of Israel, the Galilee (Nebel et al. 2000). This haplotype, which is present in the Galilee at 18.5%, was termed the modal haplotype of the Galilee (MH Galilee) (Nebel et al. 2000). Notably, it is absent from two distinct non-Arab Middle Eastern populations, Jews and Muslim Kurds, both of whom have significant Eu10 frequencies—18% and 12%, respectively (Nebel et al. 2001). Interestingly, this modal haplotype is also the most frequent haplotype (11 [∼41%] of 27 individuals) in the population from the town of Sena, in Yemen (Thomas et al. 2000). Its single-step neighbor is the most common haplotype of the Yemeni Hadramaut sample (5 [∼10%] of 49 chromosomes; Thomas et al. 2000). The presence of this particular modal haplotype at a significant frequency in three separate geographic locales (NW Africa, the Southern Levant, and Yemen) makes independent genetic-drift events unlikely.
It should be noted that the Yemeni samples (Thomas et al. 2000) were not typed for the binary markers (p12f2 and M172) that define Eu10. However, both Yemeni modal haplotypes are present on a haplogroup background compatible with Eu10. These haplotypes carry a DYS388 allele with a high number of repeats (i.e., 17). High repeat numbers of DYS388, ⩾15, were found to occur almost exclusively on Hg9, which comprises Eu9 and Eu10. Furthermore, in a sample of a six Middle Eastern populations, chromosomes with 17 repeats are frequent (40%) in Eu10 and rare (7%) in Eu9 (Nebel et al. 2001).
The term “Arab,” as well as the presence of Arabs in the Syrian desert and the Fertile Crescent, is first seen in the Assyrian sources from the 9th century bce (Eph'al 1984). Originally referring to nomads of central and northern Arabia, the term “Arabs” later came to include the sedentary population of the south, which had its own language and culture. The term thus covers two different stocks that became linguistically and culturally unified yet retained consciousness of their discrete origins (Grohmann et al. 1960; Rentz 1960; Caskel 1966, pp. 19–47; Goldziher 1967, pp. 45–97, 164–190; Beeston 1995; also see Peters 1999). Migrations of southern Arabian tribes northwards have been recorded mainly since the 3d century ce. These tribes settled in various places in central and northern Arabia, as well as in the Fertile Crescent, including areas that are now part of Israel (Dussaud 1955; Ricci 1984). The emergence of Islam in the 7th century ce furthered the unification of the Arabian tribal populations. This unified Arab-Islamic community engaged in a large movement of expansion, the Fertile Crescent and Egypt being the first areas to have been conquered. It is very difficult to trace the tribal composition of the Muslim armies, but it is known that tribes of Yemeni origin formed the bulk of those Muslim contingents that conquered Egypt in the middle of the 7th century ce. Egypt was the primary base for raids further west into the Maghrib. The conquest of North Africa was difficult and took a few decades to complete (Abun-Nasr 1987). The region was militarily and administratively attached to Egypt until the beginning of the 8th century ce. Arab tribes of northern origin entered North Africa as well, both as troops and as migrants. A major wave of migration of such tribes, the Banu Hilal and Banu Sulaym, occurred during the 11th century ce (Abun-Nasr 1987). Thus, the Arabs, both southern (Yemeni) and northern, added to the heterogeneous Maghribi ethnic melting pot.
Little is known of the origins of the indigenous population of the Maghrib, the Berbers, except that they have always been a composite people. After the 8th century ce, a process of Arabization affected the bulk of the Berbers, while the Arab-Islamic culture and population absorbed local elements as well. Under the unifying framework of Islam, on the one hand, and as a result of the Arab settlement, on the other, a fusion took place that resulted in a new ethnocultural entity all over the Maghrib. In addition, Berber tribes sometimes claimed Arab descent in order to enhance their prestige. For example, the Berber nomadic tribe of the western Sahara, the Lamtuna, claimed descent from one of the South Arabian eponyms, Himyar. One of the chiefs of this Berber tribe, Lamtuna, is sometimes referred to as Saharawi, meaning “one of the nomads” or “one who comes from the Sahara” (Ibn al-Athir 1898, p. 462; Ibn Khallikan 1972, pp. 113, 128–129; Lewicki 1986). In Arabic sources, however, the name Saharawi is seldom used and does not seem to refer to a specific genealogical group. In light of these historical data, it is not surprising to find, among the Berbers and contemporary Saharawis of northern Africa, Y chromosomes that may have been introduced by recurrent waves of invaders from the Arabian Peninsula.
These documented historical events, together with the finding of a particular Eu10 haplotype in Yemenis, Palestinians, and NW Africans, are suggestive of a recent common origin of these chromosomes. Remarkably, the only non-Arabs in whom this haplotype has been observed to date are the Berbers (Bosch et al. 2001). It appears that the Eu10 chromosome pool in NW Africa is derived not only from early Neolithic dispersions but also from recent expansions from the Arabian peninsula.
American Society of Human Genetics"
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC379148/
Also I was not aware of their being an "Arab" or "North African" genome considering the fact that all haplogroups predate all living ethnic groups by millennia and given that all ethnic groups are social constructs.
Anyway this runs contrary to ground realities which show the following:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_J_(Y-DNA)
Basically across the entire Arab world (which shares a millennia long common Semitic and Afro-Asiatic history and ancestry that predates the Neolithic period and all existing ethnic groups in the Arab world) the same haplogroups are found. The only difference is their frequency but Arabs cluster with each other more than any other people on all genetic tests which is not strange given history.
Genetics
Haplogroup J and E1b1b are the most frequent Y-DNA haplogroups in the Arab world. E1b1b is the most frequent paternal clade among the populations in the western part of the Arab world (Maghreb, Nile Valley and Horn of Africa), whereas haplogroup J is the most frequent paternal clade toward the east (Arabian peninsula and Near East). Other less common haplogroups are R1a, R1b, G, I, L and T.[304][305][306][307][308][309][310][311][312][313][314][315][316]
J-M267
J-M172
E-M215
Listed here are the human Y-chromosome DNA haplogroups in Arabian peninsula, Mashriq/Levant, Maghreb and Nile Valley.[317][318][319][320][321][322][323] Yemeni Arabs J(82.3%), E1b1b (12.9%) and E1b1a (3.2%).[324][325] Saudi Arabs J1 (58%), E1b1b(7.6%), E1b1a (7.6%), R1a (5.1%), T (5.1%), G (3.2%) and L (1.9%).[326][327] Emirati Arabs J (45.1%), E1b1b (11.6%), R1a (7.3%), E1b1a (5.5%), T(4.9%), R1b (4.3%) and L (3%).[324] Omani Arabs J (47.9%), E1b1b (15.7%), R1a (9.1%), T (8.3%), E1b1a (7.4%), R1b (1.7%), G (1.7%) and L (0.8%).[328] Qatari Arabs J (66.7%), R1a (6.9%), E1b1b (5.6%), E1b1a (2.8%), G (2.8%) and L (2.8%).[329][330] Lebanese Arabs J (45.2%), E1b1b (25.8%), R1a (9.7%), R1b (6.4%), G, I and I (3.2%), (3.2%), (3.2%).[331] Syrian Arabs J (58.3%),[332][333] E1b1b (12.0%), I(5.0%), R1a (10.0%) and R1b 15.0%.[331][333] Palestinian Arabs J (55.2%), E1b1b (20.3%), R1b (8.4%), I(6.3%), G (7%), R1a and T (1.4%), (1.4%).[334][335] Jordanian Arabs J (43.8%), E1b1b (26%), R1b (17.8%), G (4.1%), I (3.4%) and R1a (1.4%).[336] Iraqi Arabs J (50.6%), E1b1b (10.8%), R1b (10.8%), R1a (6.9%) and T (5.9%).[337][338] Egyptian Arabs E1b1b (36.7%) and J (32%), G (8.8%), T (8.2% R1b (4.1%), E1b1a (2.8%) and I(0.7%).[319][339] Sudanese Arabs J (47.1%), E1b1b (16.3%), R1b (15.7%) and I(3.13%).[340][341] Moroccan Arabs E1b1b (75.5%) and J1 (20.4%).[342][343] Tunisian ArabsE1b1b(49.3%), J1 (35.8%), R1b (6.8%) and E1b1a (1.4%).[344] Algerian Arabs E1b1b (54%), J1 (35%), R1b(13%).[344] Libyan Arabs E1b1b (35.88%), J (30.53%), E1b1a (8.78%), G (4.20%), R1a/R1b (3.43%) and E (1.53%).[345][346]
The mtDNA haplogroup J has been observed at notable frequencies among overall populations in the Arab world.[347] The maternal clade R0 reaches its highest frequency in the Arabian peninsula,[348] while K and T(specifically subclade T2) is more common in the Levant.[347] In the Nile Valley and Horn of Africa, haplogroups N1and M1;[348] in the Maghreb, haplogroups H1 and U6 are more significant.[349]
There are four principal West Eurasian autosomal DNA components that characterize the populations in the Arab world: the Arabian, Levantine, Coptic and Maghrebi components.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arabs#Genetics
Another thing, Arabs and Berbers are closely related people and where that long before the Arab conquests, expansion and Islam. As all genetic tests confirm. Let alone linguistic and cultural similarities.
Haplogroup J and E are those that dominate the Arab world and surprise, surprise, those two haplogroups are found at its highest frequencies in all as in all, Arab countries and populations.
Not only that almost everyone in the Arab world identifies as an Arab and follows Arab culture, excluding closely related fellow Semitic and Afro-Asiatic peoples, which is the most important thing, even if we assume that there was no genetic relation, which is obviously the case.
You go and tell an Libyan Arab that he is not an Arab and see the reaction, lol.
We share language, Islamic history as well as ancient pre-Islamic history, ancestry, culture, religion (s), geography, cuisine, climate and we look alike, excluding our Afro-Arab minorities.
I guess more than 99% of all other ethnic groups.
Case closed and we are off-topic too.
.svg)
.PNG)
You can't compare Semitic to such a large language family like Indo-European (comparison with Afro-Asiatic would be slightly more apt). It would be better to compare it to a sub-group like Indo-Iranian perhaps.
Regarding the homogenity of Semitic groups how close do you think Yemeni Bedouins or South Algerians are to Ashkenazi Jews, genetically? This is further complicated by the fact that in the southern Arabian peninsula and parts of North Africa the amount of Sub-Saharan African admixture varies, although most of these population have some degree of it. This can easily pull away a population from others since it is an East Eurasian component.
Also, I was asking for proof of Peninsular and Gulf Arabs being autosomally closer to Southern Europeans than Iranians were. Iranians have Caucasus component that pulls them towards populations in Caucasus Mountains, parts of which are in Europe. SW Asian peaks among Saudi Bedouins and is also found in East Africa, giving them East African pull. I was asking if they were autosomally similar, I wasnt talking about haplogroups.
By the same logic R1a is found all over South Asia with its varying branches and in Eastern Europe too. You can call this an Indo-European marker.
Last edited:
Timur
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Mar 23, 2014
- Messages
- 4,647
- Reaction score
- -1
- Country
- Location
tell me more about this problems? what happened?
SALMAN F
BANNED
- Joined
- Jul 6, 2013
- Messages
- 4,367
- Reaction score
- -23
- Country
- Location
you are right but its the other way around comparing Arabs with Iran and the rest of the world is very embarrassing because arabs could be compared to Africa
its the other way around don't compare your Isis and Taliban empires with the likes of Cyrus or Darius
he is not so called Muslim but Iranian nationalist who worships his culture and values
the Koran is just a copy of the Avesta and the Talmud
your umma and Arab nation doesn't exist only in the minds of the Islamist and Arabists who were invented by the British and french to topple the ottoman empire
This seems like a huge measuring contest..
Its good that iran has decided to attend hajj this year....
Any future of islam lies in shias and sunnis coming together and repulsing the constant invasion of civilization we are facing...
This arab iran nationalism has nithing to do wth islam... keep it separate
We are dwindling on extinsion and u guys are boasting which is oldest civilization??
Its good that iran has decided to attend hajj this year....
Any future of islam lies in shias and sunnis coming together and repulsing the constant invasion of civilization we are facing...
This arab iran nationalism has nithing to do wth islam... keep it separate
We are dwindling on extinsion and u guys are boasting which is oldest civilization??
TheTravla
FULL MEMBER
New Recruit
- Joined
- Aug 30, 2016
- Messages
- 42
- Reaction score
- -1
- Country
- Location
I've seen firsthand how SA security personal treat Iranian pilgrims in a heavy handed manner.
Saeed Owhadi should place a carpet ban on anyone who has been on Hajj already. There's just no need for people to go twice especially when their lives are at stake. Those who do make the pilgrimage should be well informed of the risk beforehand and go at their own discretion.
Saeed Owhadi should place a carpet ban on anyone who has been on Hajj already. There's just no need for people to go twice especially when their lives are at stake. Those who do make the pilgrimage should be well informed of the risk beforehand and go at their own discretion.
Shapur Zol Aktaf
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Feb 10, 2013
- Messages
- 3,711
- Reaction score
- -6
- Country
- Location
I think it's the fault of the Iranians, they can expect this behaviour.
Last edited:
salarsikander
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Oct 12, 2013
- Messages
- 8,860
- Reaction score
- 2
- Country
- Location
And you what do you think ?
Oh please the arrogant and misplaced egoistic people think, their reduced quantity will make difference
Shapur Zol Aktaf
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Feb 10, 2013
- Messages
- 3,711
- Reaction score
- -6
- Country
- Location
I think personally Iranians should not go there, with the money they can help orphans, support the environment, instead of performing some rituals which are the same as in the period before Islam.
True religion is not in rituals, but in deeds and doing good.
Similar threads
