PDA

View Full Version : A “Persian” Iran?: Challenging the Aryan Myth and Persian Ethnocentrism



deuterium_1
06-05-2020, 08:14 AM
Hi all

I have long had an interest in the history of Iran as I did a postgraduate degree studying it. I would greatly appreciate your thoughts on this article because there is quite a bit which I disagree with:


Aryanism was one of the most influential of these ideologies, and it identified the Indo-European language tree (which includes Sanskrit, Persian, and most European languages) as proof of a migration of an imagined Aryan nation out of India, through Persia, and into Europe. Aryanism was highly convenient for Europeans because it made sense of the Indian and Persian civilizations they were encountering through their colonial enterprises.


https://ajammc.com/2012/05/18/a-persian-iran-challenging-the-aryan-myth-and-persian-ethnocentrism/


This seems problematic as even when the article was written, archaeologists were divided into two camps regarding the origins of the Proto Indo-Europeans, a Anatolian homeland and a Pontic-Caspian steppe homeland. Lord Colin Renfrew, a chief proponent of the Anatolian hypothesis conceded that Marija Gimbutas had been correct about the Pontic-Caspian Steppe homeland hypothesis:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pmv3J55bdZc

The same page posted these on social media:

37893

37894


Again, this seems quite problematic as Persians are partially descended from Indo-Iranians who migrated to the Iranian plateau about 1000BC-800BC, their Indo-Aryan cousins had migrated centuries before. So more distantly they probably share some ancestry with Europeans if one goes back to the Sintashta culture which was partially formed from ancestry deriving from the Corded Ware culture which did reside in Europe:

37897

37896

Finally, the same page critiques the idea of Iranians being a "model minority", I have found from experience that much of the Persian disapora are highly educated which is partially thanks to the efforts of the Pahlavis, so I am quite confused why that is a bad thing:

37895


I look forward to hearing your thoughts on this article and hopefully it will clarify these viewpoints which I do take issue with.

DMXX
06-05-2020, 08:33 AM
The broad gist of the article is correct vis a vis Persian ethnocentrism since the Pahlavi era (anyone who's bothered to acquaint themselves with Reza Pahlavi's authoritarian, quasi-Sassanid attempt to force culturo-linguistic unity across Iran can't dispute this).

However, I'm not particularly taken by the way in which "Aryanism" of the Iranian variety is described, here. While the historical accounting of how it came about is correct, the article fails to mention that this mindset has only really persisted among the Iranian diaspora (particularly those who'd left prior to, or during, the Islamic Revolution of 1979). I also don't see any propositions regarding why said ideology has persisted within the diaspora (IMO, it's a combination of nostalgia for the pre-Islamic autocracy and, in the case of diasporans residing in European/Western countries, an attempt to foster a contradistinction with other minority groups for the purpose of minimising their perception of being an "outgroup" relative to the native culture or people).

Also, some of the language used in this piece belongs to a specific socio-political "type" in the West, so there's a rhetoric skew in favour of maximising the degree of discrimination (f.ex. describing the occasional bigotry towards Iranian Azeris as "racism", despite the fact that Iranian Azeris are mostly of the same "stock" as other NW Iranian-related groups and their/"our" culture overlaps more with other Iranian groups than any other).

Another issue - The current regime in Iran, by their own admission, doesn't particularly care about maximising the reach of Persian culture or language in the country (I've noticed some non-Iranians claim this is the case, but there's no evidence for this). On the contrary, there's plenty of direct evidence that the Islamic regime is actively eroding the longstanding Persephone norm in the country (f.ex. delivering sermons or occasionally issuing basic commands during live broadcasts in Arabic rather than Persian). Highly curious that the article doesn't state this fact.

Articles like this are quite unfortunate, as they do reveal some inconvenient truths concerning the modern Iranian psyche (f.ex. most Persians look confused when you present them with the observable fact that, had it not been for Turkic-speaking/originated dynasties, the post-Abbasid revival of Persian as a language of prestige across the region wouldn't have happened*), but the omissions or journalistic decisions give one reason to question both the premise and the basis of said truths.

The bit of the article that you take issue with is the fringe "Out of India" hypothesis for IE, which isn't accepted by most linguists or scholars and enjoys predominant support in India. I've noticed a minority of Iranians tend towards that hypothesis as well.

* Practically all Persians owe their/"our" language's revival to Ferdowsi, but seldom few recognise "the Turks" as the pivotal patrons. In the absence of either, it likely wouldn't have extended all the way from Turkey to north India.

deuterium_1
06-05-2020, 11:28 AM
The broad gist of the article is correct vis a vis Persian ethnocentrism since the Pahlavi era (anyone who's bothered to acquaint themselves with Reza Pahlavi's authoritarian, quasi-Sassanid attempt to force culturo-linguistic unity across Iran can't dispute this).

Yes Reza Pahlavi even creation a special institution to "Persianise" Farsi even further


However, I'm not particularly taken by the way in which "Aryanism" of the Iranian variety is described, here. While the historical accounting of how it came about is correct, the article fails to mention that this mindset has only really persisted among the Iranian diaspora (particularly those who'd left prior to, or during, the Islamic Revolution of 1979). I also don't see any propositions regarding why said ideology has persisted within the diaspora (IMO, it's a combination of nostalgia for the pre-Islamic autocracy and, in the case of diasporans residing in European/Western countries, an attempt to foster a contradistinction with other minority groups for the purpose of minimising their perception of being an "outgroup" relative to the native culture or people).

I agree there


Also, some of the language used in this piece belongs to a specific socio-political "type" in the West, so there's a rhetoric skew in favour of maximising the degree of discrimination (f.ex. describing the occasional bigotry towards Iranian Azeris as "racism", despite the fact that Iranian Azeris are mostly of the same "stock" as other NW Iranian-related groups and their/"our" culture overlaps more with other Iranian groups than any other).

Iranian Azeris are largely integrated into society from what I have heard


Another issue - The current regime in Iran, by their own admission, doesn't particularly care about maximising the reach of Persian culture or language in the country (I've noticed some non-Iranians claim this is the case, but there's no evidence for this). On the contrary, there's plenty of direct evidence that the Islamic regime is actively eroding the longstanding Persephone norm in the country (f.ex. delivering sermons or occasionally issuing basic commands during live broadcasts in Arabic rather than Persian). Highly curious that the article doesn't state this fact.

The publication is reluctant to confront that perhaps due to ideology. A few Iranians within Iran who I spoke to resent this heavily


Articles like this are quite unfortunate, as they do reveal some inconvenient truths concerning the modern Iranian psyche (f.ex. most Persians look confused when you present them with the observable fact that, had it not been for Turkic-speaking/originated dynasties, the post-Abbasid revival of Persian as a language of prestige across the region wouldn't have happened*), but the omissions or journalistic decisions give one reason to question both the premise and the basis of said truths.

I completely agree


The bit of the article that you take issue with is the fringe "Out of India" hypothesis for IE, which isn't accepted by most linguists or scholars and enjoys predominant support in India. I've noticed a minority of Iranians tend towards that hypothesis as well.

I am wondering why the author was not aware of recent studies which strongly disprove it. I do wish Iranians are brought up to speed so that they are better informed. I have not seen much commentary on David Reich's studies from the Iranian community, which is a shame.




* Practically all Persians owe their/"our" language's revival to Ferdowsi, but seldom few recognise "the Turks" as the pivotal patrons. In the absence of either, it likely wouldn't have extended all the way from Turkey to north India.

Indeed, the Ghaznavids were very important in patronising Persian culture.

DMXX
06-05-2020, 11:44 AM
Iranian Azeris are largely integrated into society from what I have heard


More than that - Iranian Azeris are inseparable from the Iranian state, both at the top and the bottom of the hierarchy there.

From Sattar Khan through to Reza Shah's family (his wife was Azeri) to Khamanei to Moussavi... Iranian Azeris are also heavily involved in the market economy there (tens of thousands of Azeris are working in Tehran right now).

It's usually outsiders (or diasporan Iranians coloured by the "post-modernist" oppression dictum) who attempt to view things through the thoroughly inaccurate "Persians = bad elite, Azeris = oppressed minority" lens.

Khamanei himself had recently instructed Iranian Azeris to not prioritise the Persian language over Azeri Turkish (this was the general trend from at least the 50's onwards, from what I've gathered).



The publication is reluctant to confront that perhaps due to ideology. A few Iranians within Iran who I spoke to resent this heavily


It is a suspicious omission. Anyone with access to the state-run non-English channels (f.ex. IRIB ) would observe that as a frequent occurance, particularly when Friday prayers take place. I don't watch those channels with any regularity, but have overheard it a handful of times in the past. (edit) Here's the proof. (https://youtu.be/zmgZ3Qc4Yy8?t=8598)



I am wondering why the author was not aware of recent studies which strongly disprove it. I do wish Iranians are brought up to speed so that they are better informed. I have not seen much commentary on David Reich's studies from the Iranian community, which is a shame.


Younger Iranians are much better informed than those aged 40+ from experience - The majority of diasporans I've met still believe one of...
a) The Persian empire is over 5k years old,
b) Iran is an "Aryan nation" and the non-Iranic speakers are "of foreign ancestry",
c) The ancestors of groups like Azeris, Kurds etc. spoke Persian (which was true in part, though as a second language in Sassanid times),
d) PIE arose in Iran itself or near Iran (e.g. S. Caucasus, India)
e) Light pigmentation in Iranians is due to Alexander the Great's soldiers (there's no evidence to support this, as with the Kalash)

Iranians from within Iran seem to be less enamoured by those ideas (for good reason, given the country's economic and social problems).

RCO
06-05-2020, 12:42 PM
Iran is fascinating. We can find some very ancient Iranian Y-DNA and mtDNA, good candidates are the Y-DNA haplogroup J and mtDNA haplogroup HV (HV +H), they were born in Iran or very close, I think.
I presume my Y-DNA lineage lived in Iran or in the ancient Iranian peoples and geographies because we are matching Iranian individuals around 2500 BC. We have a Portuguese cluster and an Iranian cluster.
We have some Iranian J1 lines bifurcating around 10000 BC, so they had been there for a long, long time.
The question about the Iranian origin of PIE is a very good question and data will show how and when, if that's the case as I think.
Iran was invaded by Alexander the Great, the Arabs and the Mongols with consequences.
My ancestor lineage also met the Arabs, the Caliphate, Islamic religion and culture in Northern Portugal, I think my lineage was in Iberia before the Arab invasion, so we still had common cultural elements. We had another reaction, we took part and joined the Reconquista and that's the difference of my lineage in Portugal and Brazil to our cousins lineages that remained in Iran, strangeness in this point.
I love Iranian ancient history and I hope to visit Iranian archaeological places one day.

deuterium_1
06-05-2020, 01:13 PM
Iran is fascinating. We can find some very ancient Iranian Y-DNA and mtDNA, good candidates are the Y-DNA haplogroup J and mtDNA haplogroup HV (HV +H), they were born in Iran or very close, I think.
I presume my Y-DNA lineage lived in Iran or in the ancient Iranian peoples and geographies because we are matching Iranian individuals around 2500 BC. We have a Portuguese cluster and an Iranian cluster.
We have some Iranian J1 lines bifurcating around 10000 BC, so they had been there for a long, long time.
The question about the Iranian origin of PIE is a very good question and data will show how and when, if that's the case as I think.
Iran was invaded by Alexander the Great, the Arabs and the Mongols with consequences.
My ancestor lineage also met the Arabs, the Caliphate, Islamic religion and culture in Northern Portugal, I think my lineage was in Iberia before the Arab invasion, so we still had common cultural elements. We had another reaction, we took part and joined the Reconquista and that's the difference of my lineage in Portugal and Brazil to our cousins lineages that remained in Iran, strangeness in this point.
I love Iranian ancient history and I hope to visit Iranian archaeological places one day.

Well as an Indian, I feel kinship with Iranians because 12,000 years ago we had an influx of Iranian hunter gatherer DNA which is fairly dominant in the Indian subcontinent today.Also Sanskrit was brought to India by Indo-Aryans who shared ancestry with the Ancient Persians and Medes as they both descended from the Proto Indo-Iranian Sintashta culture. The Vedic Gods were closer to that of the Persians, in the Rig Veda there is a reference to Mitra/Mithra who was also worshipped by the Persians.

Culturally we have also been strongly influenced by Iran and during the Mughal era, there was more Persian literature produced in India than in Iran itself.

beyondAtheism
06-05-2020, 01:14 PM
I am wondering why the author was not aware of recent studies which strongly disprove it. I do wish Iranians are brought up to speed so that they are better informed. I have not seen much commentary on David Reich's studies from the Iranian community, which is a shame.




The bit of the article that you take issue with is the fringe "Out of India" hypothesis for IE, which isn't accepted by most linguists or scholars and enjoys predominant support in India. I've noticed a minority of Iranians tend towards that hypothesis as well.


I'm sorry I have to say you guys dont know a thing about this topic if you think OIT is "fringe". LOL. Appeal to authority is so weak.

I can prove the OIT with Linguistics and disprove AIT with Genetics. It's so easy to show that there is 0 steppe introgression in South Asia. This is very basic stuff. You can look at my thread called "Serious Thread" if you dont know what I mean.

It's just "political" and racist to co-opt Indo-European for eurocentric purposes and then to tell a whole culture they have to accept your views because you "Western Scientists" on your side when in fact without the cultural tradition you wouldnt even know what Indo-European or Aryan was.

Eurocentric Aryan Migration guys would lose every debate, linguistic, historical and genetic if they engaged with someone like me who us knowledgeable in the topic.

beyondAtheism
06-05-2020, 01:17 PM
Well as an Indian, I feel kinship with Iranians because 12,000 years ago we had an influx of Iranian hunter gatherer DNA which is fairly dominant in the Indian subcontinent today.Also Sanskrit was brought to India by Indo-Aryans who shared ancestry with the Ancient Persians and Medes as they both descended from the Proto Indo-Iranian Sintashta culture. The Vedic Gods were closer to that of the Persians, in the Rig Veda there is a reference to Mitra/Mithra who was also worshipped by the Persians.


You dont know what you are talking about. Iran_N has South Asian origins, not the other way round. You really shouldnt be talking about these things unless you are properly taught these things. Leave these things to the people who can best represent it.

deuterium_1
06-05-2020, 01:19 PM
I'm sorry I have to say you guys dont know a thing about this topic if you think OIT is "fringe". LOL. Appeal to authority is so weak.

I can prove the OIT with Linguistics and disprove AIT with Genetics. It's so easy to show that there is 0 steppe introgression in South Asia. This is very basic stuff. You can look at my thread called "Serious Thread" if you dont know what I mean.

It's just "political" and racist to co-opt Indo-European for eurocentric purposes and then to tell a whole culture they have to accept your views because you "Western Scientists" on your side when in fact without the cultural tradition you wouldnt even know what Indo-European or Aryan was.

Eurocentric Aryan Migration guys would lose every debate, linguistic, historical and genetic if they engaged with someone like me who us knowledgeable in the topic.

Davidski and Razib Khan have strongly disproved the OIT hypothesis:

https://eurogenes.blogspot.com/2017/06/ancient-herders-from-pontic-caspian.html

http://www.brownpundits.com/2017/06/17/indian-media-is-finally-reporting-on-the-aryan-migration-into-south-asia/


You dont know what you are talking about. Iran_N has South Asian origins, not the other way round. You really shouldnt be talking about these things unless you are properly taught these things. Leave these things to the people who can best represent it.


Let's not get aggressive here.

beyondAtheism
06-05-2020, 01:23 PM
Haha, I've been debating Davidski on his blog for years. He knows I know much more about the topic than him.

Razib is a nut-job.

You are just a pawn who doesnt understand everything himself therefore cannot refute the weak arguments of the 'experts'. This is why this topic is so dangerous, cos average people are taken advantage of by those in power or authority.

DMXX
06-05-2020, 01:23 PM
...

1. This isn't a formal debate and Out of India absolutely is a fringe hypothesis from a Western perspective. You're misapplying the appeal to authority logical fallacy. Observing that position X is mainstream or fringe in a given setting isn't an appeal to authority. In your rush to dismiss other people's comments, you've made a comprehension error, here.
2. This conversation is regarding Iran, not India. With Iran, there is no conceivable way to model modern Iranian populations without an EHG-rich source.
3. Feel free to raise this topic in another thread. Please don't derail this one.

deuterium_1
06-05-2020, 01:26 PM
Haha, I've been debating Davidski on his blog for years. He knows I know much more about the topic than him.

Razib is a nut-job.

You are just a pawn who doesnt understand everything himself therefore cannot refute the weak arguments of the 'experts'. This is why this topic is so dangerous, cos average people are taken advantage of by those in power or authority.

Well ad-hominems don't win arguments

I would greatly appreciate a calm and rational debate here.

pegasus
06-05-2020, 01:31 PM
I'm sorry I have to say you guys dont know a thing about this topic if you think OIT is "fringe". LOL. Appeal to authority is so weak.

I can prove the OIT with Linguistics and disprove AIT with Genetics. It's so easy to show that there is 0 steppe introgression in South Asia. This is very basic stuff. You can look at my thread called "Serious Thread" if you dont know what I mean.

It's just "political" and racist to co-opt Indo-European for eurocentric purposes and then to tell a whole culture they have to accept your views because you "Western Scientists" on your side when in fact without the cultural tradition you wouldnt even know what Indo-European or Aryan was.

Eurocentric Aryan Migration guys would lose every debate, linguistic, historical and genetic if they engaged with someone like me who us knowledgeable in the topic.

How is that even possible? , GAC/TRB ancestry is completely alien to South Asia, it actually confirms that the Steppe ancestry derives from Steppe MLBA related groups. I looked at Mittani outliers last week whose composite Indo Iranian ancestry matches with modern Steppe rich Indo Aryans. The linguistics also strongly link all Indo Iranian language with Balto Slavic languages.

beyondAtheism
06-05-2020, 01:34 PM
1. This isn't a formal debate and
2. This conversation is regarding Iran, not India. With Iran, there is no conceivable way to model modern Iranian populations without an EHG-rich source.


Which samples from Ancient to Modern need EHG? I'll take a look at that.

Davidski was trying to argue theres 'steppe' in Anatolian C but I showed him Anatolia C is best modelled as Anatolia_N + Iran_N/SS1. I imagine its the same in Iran, though there could be small amounts of steppe due to not being far away and due to recent movements.

Oftentimes they just put in a steppe source, get something that looks ok, and then say "oh it looks good lets move on" without really looking at it properly.

deuterium_1
06-05-2020, 01:36 PM
More than that - Iranian Azeris are inseparable from the Iranian state, both at the top and the bottom of the hierarchy there.

Attempts to separate them from Iran only really started the guise of the Soviet Union.



From Sattar Khan through to Reza Shah's family (his wife was Azeri) to Khamanei to Moussavi... Iranian Azeris are also heavily involved in the market economy there (tens of thousands of Azeris are working in Tehran right now).

Are you referring to the "bazaari" classes? there is quite a bit of academic research on them.


It's usually outsiders (or diasporan Iranians coloured by the "post-modernist" oppression dictum) who attempt to view things through the thoroughly inaccurate "Persians = bad elite, Azeris = oppressed minority" lens.

Things are rarely as simple as that


Khamanei himself had recently instructed Iranian Azeris to not prioritise the Persian language over Azeri Turkish (this was the general trend from at least the 50's onwards, from what I've gathered).

It may also be politically expedient from his point of his view




It is a suspicious omission. Anyone with access to the state-run non-English channels (f.ex. IRIB ) would observe that as a frequent occurance, particularly when Friday prayers take place. I don't watch those channels with any regularity, but have overheard it a handful of times in the past. (edit) Here's the proof. (https://youtu.be/zmgZ3Qc4Yy8?t=8598)

There has long been a tussle between Persia and Arabic, according to Francis Robinson it was only under the Ilkhanate that writers began abandoning Arabic in favour of Persian.




Younger Iranians are much better informed than those aged 40+ from experience - The majority of diasporans I've met still believe one of...
a) The Persian empire is over 5k years old,
b) Iran is an "Aryan nation" and the non-Iranic speakers are "of foreign ancestry",
c) The ancestors of groups like Azeris, Kurds etc. spoke Persian (which was true in part, though as a second language in Sassanid times),
d) PIE arose in Iran itself or near Iran (e.g. S. Caucasus, India)
e) Light pigmentation in Iranians is due to Alexander the Great's soldiers (there's no evidence to support this, as with the Kalash)

Iranians from within Iran seem to be less enamoured by those ideas (for good reason, given the country's economic and social problems).

I can verify that from my own experiences with Iranians too.

I remember having a debate with a Persian at the Persia gallery in the British Museum about how the Pahlavis are also at least partly responsible for the positive memory of Cyrus the Great (I do think positively of him personally). It was done for propaganda.

RCO
06-05-2020, 01:37 PM
Well as an Indian, I feel kinship with Iranians because 12,000 years ago we had an influx of Iranian hunter gatherer DNA which is fairly dominant in the Indian subcontinent today.Also Sanskrit was brought to India by Indo-Aryans who shared ancestry with the Ancient Persians and Medes as they both descended from the Proto Indo-Iranian Sintashta culture. The Vedic Gods were closer to that of the Persians, in the Rig Veda there is a reference to Mitra/Mithra who was also worshipped by the Persians.

Culturally we have also been strongly influenced by Iran and during the Mughal era, there was more Persian literature produced in India than in Iran itself.

Give us one example of a single Y-DNA lineage from Sintashta in India and Iran ? I agree with your points but Proto Indo-Iranian was formed in another place and time :).

beyondAtheism
06-05-2020, 01:44 PM
How is that even possible? , GAC/TRB ancestry is completely alien to South Asia, it actually confirms that the Steppe ancestry derives from Steppe MLBA related groups. I looked at Mittani outliers last week whose composite Indo Iranian ancestry matches with modern Steppe rich Indo Aryans. The linguistics also strongly link all Indo Iranian language with Balto Slavic languages.

GAC is just Anatolian + WHG and both signals can be found in South Asia, but they are not related to Steppe, because Steppe and Anatolian separated very anciently from South Asia. South Asians are almost equally related to EHG and Anatolian.

deuterium_1
06-05-2020, 01:46 PM
Give us one example of a single Y-DNA lineage from Sintashta in India and Iran ? I agree with your points but Proto Indo-Iranian was formed in another place and time :).

R1a1a1b2/R1a1a-Z93

R-M560 has been detected in Iranian Azeris too as well as peoples in India and Pakistan.

J1 lineages are common in India too.

RCO
06-05-2020, 01:53 PM
R1a1a1b2/R1a1a-Z93

R-M560 has been detected in Iranian Azeris too as well as peoples in India and Pakistan.

J1 lineages are common in India too.

They are different clusters and they are not directly related to each other in a single expansion tree in the right place and time, so they had not come into close contact in the same movement.

shadowhite
06-05-2020, 01:55 PM
Genetic research More than 70% of Iranians are not Aryans:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W7zqx0YUVBo


https://i.imgur.com/tpg5nsb.png

beyondAtheism
06-05-2020, 01:56 PM
All West Asian and North Eurasian lineages are common in India, esp in tribals, R,G,J, H etc because that is where they expanded into North and West Asia, though obviously many mutations would have appeared once the group left South Asia so those are not found inside. But South Asian tribals have great diversity in Y-DNA HGs and good luck trying to argue they all came from migrations from EHG and Anatolian and Iran_N.

Even the Kalash, which is the most geographically isolated group, has G, J and R. Why would Anatolian and Steppe migrants end up in such an isolated group instead of going into the main population of Indians who are easily accessible.

Good luck explaining Anatolian and EHG ADMIXTURE into the Kalash. Everyone just wanted to get to the most inaccessible and isolated people.

shadowhite
06-05-2020, 02:00 PM
The broad gist of the article is correct vis a vis Persian ethnocentrism since the Pahlavi era (anyone who's bothered to acquaint themselves with Reza Pahlavi's authoritarian, quasi-Sassanid attempt to force culturo-linguistic unity across Iran can't dispute this).

However, I'm not particularly taken by the way in which "Aryanism" of the Iranian variety is described, here. While the historical accounting of how it came about is correct, the article fails to mention that this mindset has only really persisted among the Iranian diaspora (particularly those who'd left prior to, or during, the Islamic Revolution of 1979). I also don't see any propositions regarding why said ideology has persisted within the diaspora (IMO, it's a combination of nostalgia for the pre-Islamic autocracy and, in the case of diasporans residing in European/Western countries, an attempt to foster a contradistinction with other minority groups for the purpose of minimising their perception of being an "outgroup" relative to the native culture or people).

Also, some of the language used in this piece belongs to a specific socio-political "type" in the West, so there's a rhetoric skew in favour of maximising the degree of discrimination (f.ex. describing the occasional bigotry towards Iranian Azeris as "racism", despite the fact that Iranian Azeris are mostly of the same "stock" as other NW Iranian-related groups and their/"our" culture overlaps more with other Iranian groups than any other).

Another issue - The current regime in Iran, by their own admission, doesn't particularly care about maximising the reach of Persian culture or language in the country (I've noticed some non-Iranians claim this is the case, but there's no evidence for this). On the contrary, there's plenty of direct evidence that the Islamic regime is actively eroding the longstanding Persephone norm in the country (f.ex. delivering sermons or occasionally issuing basic commands during live broadcasts in Arabic rather than Persian). Highly curious that the article doesn't state this fact.

Articles like this are quite unfortunate, as they do reveal some inconvenient truths concerning the modern Iranian psyche (f.ex. most Persians look confused when you present them with the observable fact that, had it not been for Turkic-speaking/originated dynasties, the post-Abbasid revival of Persian as a language of prestige across the region wouldn't have happened*), but the omissions or journalistic decisions give one reason to question both the premise and the basis of said truths.

The bit of the article that you take issue with is the fringe "Out of India" hypothesis for IE, which isn't accepted by most linguists or scholars and enjoys predominant support in India. I've noticed a minority of Iranians tend towards that hypothesis as well.

* Practically all Persians owe their/"our" language's revival to Ferdowsi, but seldom few recognise "the Turks" as the pivotal patrons. In the absence of either, it likely wouldn't have extended all the way from Turkey to north India.

The Supreme Leader of the Revolution has repeatedly stressed the importance of the Persian language and the need to protect it. For this reason, reviewing and summarizing the Supreme Leader's statements on the "importance of the Persian language" was on the agenda.

The frequency of warnings and recommendations of the Supreme Leader of the Revolution in their statements about the importance of the Persian language was such that a very important indicator of the "need to care for the Persian language" was obtained. Expressing great concern about the invasion of the Persian language, he warns against its degeneration and recommends that some of them include: allocating places and criteria for the correct refinement of the Persian language, Persianization of poets in poetry, not writing the Persian name in calligraphy. Latin, teaching Persian to children correctly from childhood, avoiding misinterpretations and intertwined combinations, preventing language errors and strengthening the language academy.

Translation from:

https://www.iribnews.ir/fa/news/2435419/%D8%B2%D8%A8%D8%A7%D9%86-%D9%81%D8%A7%D8%B1%D8%B3%DB%8C-%D8%A7%D8%B2-%D9%86%DA%AF%D8%A7%D9%87-%D8%B1%D9%87%D8%A8%D8%B1-%D9%85%D8%B9%D8%B8%D9%85-%D8%A7%D9%86%D9%82%D9%84%D8%A7%D8%A8

deuterium_1
06-05-2020, 02:03 PM
They are different clusters and they are not directly related to each other in a single expansion tree in the right place and time, so they had not come into close contact in the same movement.


Y-DNA of Jats, there is some overlap in Y-chromosome lineages with Iranians:

37899

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5611447/

Agamemnon
06-05-2020, 02:29 PM
It is a suspicious omission. Anyone with access to the state-run non-English channels (f.ex. IRIB ) would observe that as a frequent occurance, particularly when Friday prayers take place. I don't watch those channels with any regularity, but have overheard it a handful of times in the past. (edit) Here's the proof. (https://youtu.be/zmgZ3Qc4Yy8?t=8598)

All the more so because this is a very pronounced and consistent feature of the clerical regime's language policy in Iran, not only are messages such as the one you linked to designed for foreign consumption (here (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XMwVDVSuxFA)'s another example), regime figures make a point of speaking in the local language within Iran's non-Persian provinces (here (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fTm6apshLi0) we have Khamenei addressing Ahwazi Arabs in Arabic). Though the clerical regime in Iran hasn't significantly eroded the Persian language's place and status in Iranian society, it has probably done more to protect and perpetuate minority languages than any other form of government in Iran (which invariably enforced a policy of monolingualism).

Ironically, the Arab perception of the current Iranian regime is the polar opposite, and reflects long-held assumptions and stereotypes that Iran is out to erase Arab language and culture altogether (all the more ironic because some of the Arabic language's greatest grammarians, such as Sibawayh, were Persian). This perception is further reinforced by the fact that Iran-backed figures in Arab politics (such as Hassan Nasrallah) are often fluent in Persian, with videos of them talking Persian spreading like wildfire in social media whenever Iran becomes a topic of contention. The catch, of course, is that the reason they are fluent in Persian isn't because of Iranian soft power, but rather because they studied in prestigious Shi'ite seminaries in Iran (Qom, Isfahan, Mashhad, etc).

RCO
06-05-2020, 02:30 PM
See here
https://www.yfull.com/tree/R-Z93/

Indian branches dowstream of L657 are strongly branching only in India and you can't find anything impressive like that in R1a-Z93 in Iran, only minor desestructured and fragmented small individual R1a branches in Iran.

deuterium_1
06-05-2020, 03:59 PM
See here
https://www.yfull.com/tree/R-Z93/

Indian branches dowstream of L657 are strongly branching only in India and you can't find anything impressive like that in R1a-Z93 in Iran, only minor desestructured and fragmented small individual R1a branches in Iran.

From the Underhill paper published in 2014:

37901

The overlap of Z93 can be seen between India and Iran

Compare that to Z282 which is supposed to be predominant in Europe, it is not really apparent in Portugal:

37902

https://www.nature.com/articles/ejhg201450

The Portugese and Persians are more distant. This is attested in linguistics and archaeology while there has been gene flow between India and Iran for millenia. There really isn't anything comparable when one considers the trading network between Sumeria, the Elamites and the Indus Valley Civilisation during the Bronze Age or much later interactions in the Persianate world from the 13th to 18th Centuries AD.

This is worth checking for further reading on the topic:

http://www.iranicaonline.org/articles/india

I have seen unusual ideas of history and genetics emerge from posters from Europe on this forum, one was using phenotype to ascertain his ancestry and now I see an attempt to link Portugal and Iran (despite being very distant) when it is much more historically plausible to argue for a common link between Iran and Armenia for example.I am sure genetically it is more plausible too especially in NW Iran.

Portugese relations with Iran only really started in the 16th Century AD:

http://www.iranicaonline.org/articles/portugal-i

By then India had been ruled by Persianate dynasties for centuries.

ThaYamamoto
06-05-2020, 04:18 PM
I see Iran as different from South Asia including NWSA as the difference between the Horn of Africa and Nigeria.

deuterium_1
06-05-2020, 04:27 PM
I see Iran as different from South Asia including NWSA as the difference between the Horn of Africa and Nigeria.

In what way?

For example the Parsi community of India have partially preserved Persian admixture as it was just before the Islamisation of Iran was complete:


Among present-day populations, the Parsis are genetically closest to Iranian and the Caucasus populations rather than their South Asian neighbors. They also share the highest number of haplotypes with present-day Iranians and we estimate that the admixture of the Parsis with Indian populations occurred ~1,200 years ago. Enriched homozygosity in the Parsi reflects their recent isolation and inbreeding. We also observed 48% South-Asian-specific mitochondrial lineages among the ancient samples, which might have resulted from the assimilation of local females during the initial settlement. Finally, we show that Parsis are genetically closer to Neolithic Iranians than to modern Iranians, who have witnessed a more recent wave of admixture from the Near East.

https://genomebiology.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13059-017-1244-9

tipirneni
06-05-2020, 04:37 PM
Y-DNA of Jats, there is some overlap in Y-chromosome lineages with Iranians:

37899

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5611447/

The Jat population cluster with up north, not Iranians. The Y DNA is mostly derived from other places in India maybe some exceptions.

deuterium_1
06-05-2020, 04:44 PM
The Jat population cluster with up north, not Iranians. The Y DNA is mostly derived from other places in India maybe some exceptions.

Yet more similar than someone from Portugal?.

Parsis definitely cluster with Iranians:

37903

DMXX
06-05-2020, 04:55 PM
Admin comment: Any more of this Out of India-related OT will be deleted without warning and you (beyondatheism) will receive an infraction if you can't bring yourself to take it elsewhere.


All the more so because this is a very pronounced and consistent feature of the clerical regime's language policy in Iran, not only are messages such as the one you linked to designed for foreign consumption (here (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XMwVDVSuxFA)'s another example), regime figures make a point of speaking in the local language within Iran's non-Persian provinces (here (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fTm6apshLi0) we have Khamenei addressing Ahwazi Arabs in Arabic). Though the clerical regime in Iran hasn't significantly eroded the Persian language's place and status in Iranian society, it has probably done more to protect and perpetuate minority languages than any other form of government in Iran (which invariably enforced a policy of monolingualism).

Ironically, the Arab perception of the current Iranian regime is the polar opposite, and reflects long-held assumptions and stereotypes that Iran is out to erase Arab language and culture altogether (all the more ironic because some of the Arabic language's greatest grammarians, such as Sibawayh, were Persian). This perception is further reinforced by the fact that Iran-backed figures in Arab politics (such as Hassan Nasrallah) are often fluent in Persian, with videos of them talking Persian spreading like wildfire in social media whenever Iran becomes a topic of contention. The catch, of course, is that the reason they are fluent in Persian isn't because of Iranian soft power, but rather because they studied in prestigious Shi'ite seminaries in Iran (Qom, Isfahan, Mashhad, etc).

As ever, you have a firm and clear grasp of the very odd dynamics that exist across multiple politico-cultural axes in this region. This is exactly correct.

The regime in Iran has most certainly done a better job at approaching the issue of linguistic and identity rights in the country (unless one belongs to an "unfavourable" religious minority, such as Zoroastrianism, Judaism or the Baha'i faith). They have understood several lessons from the Pahlavi regime (ostensibly as they were their antagonists on the ground at that time).

Iran is a highly diverse country, which makes separatism an (eventually) easy sell if there isn't some degree of local placation, an innate unifying factor isn't maximised and a foreign threat isn't propped up as a distraction tool. The Shah did a very bad job at placating the rural class (it was his lavish courting of bourgeois foreigners to commemorate "2,500 years of Persian empire" that really instigated unrest just prior to the 1979 revolution, from what I've read).
Much the same way the CCP have pacified the citizens of China with increased prosperity (all the fundamental flaws with a centralised managed economy aside), the Islamic regime have done similarly with Iran's minorities with respect to language, which (alongside with religion and socioeconomic rank) were the separating factors in Iran.

Modifying the country's legislature to grant Azeris, Kurds, Turkmen and the like the ability to study their languages up to university level is an admittedly big improvement from the Shah's time - The regime have also (along these same lines) been quite progressive with respect to drug use on paper (rehab clinics are now ubiquitous across the country)... Which begs the question as to why drugs are so easily available in Iran from Afghanistan now (the implication of this is clear).


The Supreme Leader of the Revolution has repeatedly stressed the importance of the Persian language and the need to protect it. For this reason, reviewing and summarizing the Supreme Leader's statements on the "importance of the Persian language" was on the agenda.
...
Translation from:
...

What a government commits to words isn't always what a government commits to action.

Without getting too political, that apparent maxim has been fulfilled many times in both recent and distant history.

Rhetorically consider why a regime of theocrats espousing an expansionist Shi'a strain of political Islam would care about protecting the status of the nation's primary language.

If the answer isn't obvious, please refer to Aga's and my comments above.

ancestryfan1994
06-05-2020, 05:10 PM
Been a while since Ive posted here, and this is a topic that has been something of an enigma for myself for years now. DMXX has given a very good breakdown already, but I figured I'll chime in with my two cents based on my own personal experience with the term "Aryan" as it relates to Iranians.

Usually you will hear the word aryan amongst the Iranian diaspora, and indeed from what I've experienced it has strong connections to nostalgia for the pre revolutionary Iran, it was a term very frequently associated with the shah (eg aryamehr). Ive heard Iranians back in the mainland use the term too, again mostly among the anti Islamic republic/pro Pahlavi crowd (probably a very hefty chunk of the nation). Basically in a nutshell I think the article/screenshots are right about the words usage, what I was told by countless relatives and older family friends etc, is that the Iranian peoples ancestry is related to europeans, with the main one being that Germans are a long lost people of ours who left Iran hundreds/thousands of years ago and migrated to Europe, and that genetically we are one ancient ethnic group, the aryans. I've heard Italy and all other sorts be mentioned too. At the time when I first heard these claims I was very young and unable to comprehend it properly, so it seemed interesting. Of course now with genetics being so advanced I scoff at the claims when somebody brings it up, to the point where I feel to pull up a PCA and ask them where Iranians cluster with germans (or any europeans) if the theory is true, but of course they wont understand.

I can also confirm that in my personal experience the term also has a racial motive to it, as I usually heard it being used in a manner to put Iranians on a higher pedestal compared to the rest of the region. This is very likely influenced by the current situation Iran finds itself in, which in turn means most Iranians are desperate to find something positive to change the average perception of how Iranians are viewed by westerners to something more sexy than turbans and Islamic verses etc. For a long time the "Aryan" story was the method of choice, but thankfully over the last few years its died down and instead now I hear people just talk about other aspects of the culture that are not artificial. I haven't heard the term be used for a good few years personally, and I hope it stays that way, because the whole gist of it was so wrong it became embarrassing after a while.

You'd be surprised at how many smart and wise people from the elder generations have/had got behind this whole thing. The ones I encountered certainly weren't stupid or lacked any common sense, and they weren't bad people at all, but they had carried this nostalgic notion back from a time when life was great for them and the country was in a much more better situation, and it kind of just snowballed into something else.

beyondAtheism
06-05-2020, 05:27 PM
Ironically theres actually alot of Iranian type stuff in German language and literature, mostly through the Scythians though.

Just look at the Jewish names of Germany, Ashkanaz, itself derived from Ashkabad in Iran, also Asgard home of the Aesir and Odin.

Yeah, I think they Iranians are kind of right because all Euros have Iranian type ancestry because Yamna-like and Scythians were pretty close to Iran (Turkmenistan) and Anatolian ancestry in Europe also has Iranian connections.

I guess we just need to look at ANE in Iran to see if there were significant steppe incursions. Problem is often when they find EHG/ANE in Iran it is actually Eastern (South Central Asian) but lack of ancient samples means we cant use that and then in terms of ADNA we just get South Asian = West Asian + ANE, so they just count the extra ANE on top and just put the West Asian into local Iran_N or Anatolia or something.

drobbah
06-05-2020, 06:47 PM
I see Iran as different from South Asia including NWSA as the difference between the Horn of Africa and Nigeria.

The genetic distance between Nigerians (excluding some Fulanis) and Horners is far larger than the difference between NWSA & Iran

ThaYamamoto
06-05-2020, 07:14 PM
The genetic distance between Nigerians (excluding some Fulanis) and Horners is far larger than the difference between NWSA & Iran

I know bro, I meant from a cultural angle.

drobbah
06-05-2020, 07:22 PM
I know bro, I meant from a cultural angle.
Nigerians and Horners are not culturally similar either.The Iranians and NWSA speak languages in the same language family,have direct interactions with each other (leads to cultural similarity) and share a common genetic background with the exception of the divergent AASI in South Asians.

deuterium_1
06-05-2020, 07:23 PM
Admin comment: Any more of this Out of India-related OT will be deleted without warning and you (beyondatheism) will receive an infraction if you can't bring yourself to take it elsewhere.

Thank you DMXX




As ever, you have a firm and clear grasp of the very odd dynamics that exist across multiple politico-cultural axes in this region. This is exactly correct.

The regime in Iran has most certainly done a better job at approaching the issue of linguistic and identity rights in the country (unless one belongs to an "unfavourable" religious minority, such as Zoroastrianism, Judaism or the Baha'i faith). They have understood several lessons from the Pahlavi regime (ostensibly as they were their antagonists on the ground at that time).

Integrating the Arabs has been a challenge however and it isn't helped by anti-Arab sentiment among many Iranians.


Iran is a highly diverse country, which makes separatism an (eventually) easy sell if there isn't some degree of local placation, an innate unifying factor isn't maximised and a foreign threat isn't propped up as a distraction tool. The Shah did a very bad job at placating the rural class (it was his lavish courting of bourgeois foreigners to commemorate "2,500 years of Persian empire" that really instigated unrest just prior to the 1979 revolution, from what I've read).
Much the same way the CCP have pacified the citizens of China with increased prosperity (all the fundamental flaws with a centralised managed economy aside), the Islamic regime have done similarly with Iran's minorities with respect to language, which (alongside with religion and socioeconomic rank) were the separating factors in Iran.

Modifying the country's legislature to grant Azeris, Kurds, Turkmen and the like the ability to study their languages up to university level is an admittedly big improvement from the Shah's time - The regime have also (along these same lines) been quite progressive with respect to drug use on paper (rehab clinics are now ubiquitous across the country)... Which begs the question as to why drugs are so easily available in Iran from Afghanistan now (the implication of this is clear).

Sheikh Khazal's rebellion is a good example of the vulnerability of Iran to separatist movements.



What a government commits to words isn't always what a government commits to action.

Without getting too political, that apparent maxim has been fulfilled many times in both recent and distant history.

Rhetorically consider why a regime of theocrats espousing an expansionist Shi'a strain of political Islam would care about protecting the status of the nation's primary language.

If the answer isn't obvious, please refer to Aga's and my comments above.

They're kind of the opposite of the Pahlavis who were very concerned about protecting the status of Farsi.


Been a while since Ive posted here, and this is a topic that has been something of an enigma for myself for years now. DMXX has given a very good breakdown already, but I figured I'll chime in with my two cents based on my own personal experience with the term "Aryan" as it relates to Iranians.

Usually you will hear the word aryan amongst the Iranian diaspora, and indeed from what I've experienced it has strong connections to nostalgia for the pre revolutionary Iran, it was a term very frequently associated with the shah (eg aryamehr). Ive heard Iranians back in the mainland use the term too, again mostly among the anti Islamic republic/pro Pahlavi crowd (probably a very hefty chunk of the nation). Basically in a nutshell I think the article/screenshots are right about the words usage, what I was told by countless relatives and older family friends etc, is that the Iranian peoples ancestry is related to europeans, with the main one being that Germans are a long lost people of ours who left Iran hundreds/thousands of years ago and migrated to Europe, and that genetically we are one ancient ethnic group, the aryans. I've heard Italy and all other sorts be mentioned too. At the time when I first heard these claims I was very young and unable to comprehend it properly, so it seemed interesting. Of course now with genetics being so advanced I scoff at the claims when somebody brings it up, to the point where I feel to pull up a PCA and ask them where Iranians cluster with germans (or any europeans) if the theory is true, but of course they wont understand.

I have also keen Iranians convert to Christianity when they fled to the West


I can also confirm that in my personal experience the term also has a racial motive to it, as I usually heard it being used in a manner to put Iranians on a higher pedestal compared to the rest of the region. This is very likely influenced by the current situation Iran finds itself in, which in turn means most Iranians are desperate to find something positive to change the average perception of how Iranians are viewed by westerners to something more sexy than turbans and Islamic verses etc. For a long time the "Aryan" story was the method of choice, but thankfully over the last few years its died down and instead now I hear people just talk about other aspects of the culture that are not artificial. I haven't heard the term be used for a good few years personally, and I hope it stays that way, because the whole gist of it was so wrong it became embarrassing after a while.

Indeed one of the biggest insults to an Iranian is to call them an "Arab", even "Turk" is sometimes used in a derogatory sense.



You'd be surprised at how many smart and wise people from the elder generations have/had got behind this whole thing. The ones I encountered certainly weren't stupid or lacked any common sense, and they weren't bad people at all, but they had carried this nostalgic notion back from a time when life was great for them and the country was in a much more better situation, and it kind of just snowballed into something else.

Well apparently there has been a resurge in Pahlavi nostalgia in Iran.


The genetic distance between Nigerians (excluding some Fulanis) and Horners is far larger than the difference between NWSA & Iran

Thank you for this.


I know bro, I meant from a cultural angle.

Indian Shia are pretty close culturally to the Iranians and somewhat genetically to an extent.

It is worth reading Justin Jones' Shiism in colonial India:

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Shia-Islam-Colonial-India-Sectarianism/dp/1107004608

Ayatollah Khamenei's grandfather was descended from an Iranian family which had settled in Kintoor, Awadh in North India in the 18th Century during the rule of the Nawabs. His grandfather's name was Seyyed Ahmad Musavi "Hindi" (Indian). Reportedly Khomeini used "Hindi" as his pen name, that doesn't sound culturally distant considering the pivotal role that he played in transforming Iran in 1979.

ThaYamamoto
06-05-2020, 07:31 PM
Nigerians and Horners are not culturally similar either.The Iranians and NWSA speak languages in the same language family,have direct interactions with each other (leads to cultural similarity) and share a common genetic background with the exception of the divergent AASI in South Asians.

Bro stop coming for my wig, I mean that this is exactly how different I see Iranians from South Asians. Lol. Regardless of genetics, they are not similar people culturally at all, including the Shia. Its like comparing Russians with Greeks, culturally vastly different regardless of the Slavicisation of the Mediterranean.

drobbah
06-05-2020, 07:48 PM
Bro stop coming for my wig, I mean that this is exactly how different I see Iranians from South Asians. Lol. Regardless of genetics, they are not similar people culturally at all, including the Shia. Its like comparing Russians with Greeks, culturally vastly different regardless of the Slavicisation of the Mediterranean.
Your entitled to your opinion even though it's incorrect and I find it very strange for someone who knows Africa that you made the comparison between Horners and Nigerian, that's like comparing Yemenis with Tamils.

ThaYamamoto
06-05-2020, 08:12 PM
Your entitled to your opinion even though it's incorrect and I find it very strange for someone who knows Africa that you made the comparison between Horners and Nigerian, that's like comparing Yemenis with Tamils.

You've misunderstood, that's the exact reason the comparison was made - to highlight the vast cultural difference. This has actually nothing to do with Africa. At all. Iono my dude maybe read it again.

I see Iran as different (vastly) from South Asia including NWSA as the difference between the Horn of Africa and Nigeria (a massive difference, not even including the huge genetic differentiation).

misnomer
06-05-2020, 08:20 PM
I can also confirm that in my personal experience the term also has a racial motive to it, as I usually heard it being used in a manner to put Iranians on a higher pedestal compared to the rest of the region. This is very likely influenced by the current situation Iran finds itself in, which in turn means most Iranians are desperate to find something positive to change the average perception of how Iranians are viewed by westerners to something more sexy than turbans and Islamic verses etc. For a long time the "Aryan" story was the method of choice, but thankfully over the last few years its died down and instead now I hear people just talk about other aspects of the culture that are not artificial. I haven't heard the term be used for a good few years personally, and I hope it stays that way, because the whole gist of it was so wrong it became embarrassing after a while.

In india the usage of this word is not racial at all and never has been. it has always been a mark of respect, nobility and knowledge, like 'Sir'

ārya mārga (Sanskrit, also āryāṣṭāṅgikamārga, ie noble eightfold path), are also terms very frequently used in earliest buddhist pali texts, and in no way shape or form are about race, because a path which all people can take cannot be about race.

It has also come down in various forms. eg for grandmother in Marathi (from āryā) and borrowed into dravidian kannada from marathi


ajī (अजी).—f (āryā S) A grandmother (pat. or mat.)

Also most common honorific suffix in common Hindi. eg Narendra Modi ji or Gandhiji

The words ariya, ayya, ajja and aje are the distorted versions of the word Arya found in languages such as Pali and Prakrit. It has taken the form of "ji" in Hindi and "ayya" in Telugu, Tamil and Kannada.


and many others.

I havent read too much in detail about how ancient iranians used the word, but i am not at all pleased with how 19th and 20th century european 'scholars' changed the context of the word.

Awale
06-05-2020, 08:21 PM
Nigerians and Horners are not culturally similar either.The Iranians and NWSA speak languages in the same language family,have direct interactions with each other (leads to cultural similarity) and share a common genetic background with the exception of the divergent AASI in South Asians.

To be fair, brother, a huge portion of Nigeria is Chadic speaking (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hausa_people) which, as you know, belongs to the Afro-Asiatic language family like Somali and those same Chadic speakers tend to be Muslim and have been for a long-time so it's not like there aren't cultural and linguistic ties between Nigerians and Horners. But genetically the distinction is indeed pretty deep.


Bro stop coming for my wig, I mean that this is exactly how different I see Iranians from South Asians. Lol. Regardless of genetics, they are not similar people culturally at all, including the Shia. Its like comparing Russians with Greeks, culturally vastly different regardless of the Slavicisation of the Mediterranean.

Gonna have to side with Drobbah on this. The historical, linguistic and cultural ties between Iranians and South Asians, especially NWSAs, runs pretty deep. I'd go so far as to say Iranics, including those in Iran, are probably the closest people to them in all respects. Genetics, linguistics, history and culture. Both Indo-Iranian speaking peoples, related pre-Islamic beliefs, geographically closeby, lots of historical ties and constant contact, lots of shared ancient ancestry... The list goes on. But sure, there are obvious and marked differences.

ThaYamamoto
06-05-2020, 08:28 PM
To be fair, brother, a huge portion of Nigeria is Chadic speaking (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hausa_people) which, as you know, belongs to the Afro-Asiatic language family like Somali and those same Chadic speakers tend to be Muslim and have been for a long-time so it's not like there aren't cultural and linguistic ties between Nigerians and Horners. But genetically the distinction is indeed pretty deep.



Gonna have to side with Drobbah on this. The historical, linguistic and cultural ties between Iranians and South Asians, especially NWSAs, runs pretty deep. I'd go so far as to say Iranics, including those in Iran, are probably the closest people to them in all respects. Genetics, linguistics, history and culture. Both Indo-Iranian speaking peoples, related pre-Islamic beliefs, geographically closeby, lots of historical ties and constant contact, lots of shared ancient ancestry... The list goes on. But sure, there are obvious and marked differences.

Yeah I totally get you, and what you've stated can't be argued against - except for the fact that I predicated the statement with a personal pronoun, I see Iran as.... As in, for me, from an entirely personal perspective, see none of the so-called similarities between Iranians and South Asians, having grown up among both communities and having family marry into both cultures. There's nothing South Asian about my girl, at all, an Azeri...but like I said ... this is purely personal and has no academic or genomic [obviously] basis. Afghans are far closer, again, in my opinion, to South Asians, if not NWSA entirely.

passion
06-05-2020, 08:35 PM
I see Iran as different from South Asia including NWSA as the difference between the Horn of Africa and Nigeria.

iran is a middle eastern country , it is not similar to any region of south asia , niether comparable.

ThaYamamoto
06-05-2020, 08:43 PM
iran is a middle eastern country , it is not similar to any region of south asia , niether comparable.

Yes exactly my point, can you read?

passion
06-05-2020, 08:58 PM
Yes exactly my point, can you read?

yes I can read , I wasnt familiar with horn of africa and nigeria anology to draw the levels of differences here , since I am not from your region. I am Pakistani.

beyondAtheism
06-05-2020, 09:05 PM
Anciently there is a big difference between the Western Iranian Anatolian-like farming communities of Zagros and Djeitun and the Eastern regions which were more similar to South and Central Asia (Baluchistan).

In the Chalcolithic and Bronze Age there is a dominance of the region by the BMAC, which seems rooted in Eastern Iran and Central Asia, with links to South Asia. This culture is the origin of Classical Iranian culture (Zoroastrianism, the Sistani Cycle, Kaviani Banner etc) and this is why most of Iranian culture has ancient ties to the East. The most famous Iranian hero is Rustam, who's family control Zabulestan (Baluchestan) in the Shahname, a region which is close to the settlements of Pashtun people today. it looks like classical Iranian culture (BMAC) is a mergeing of Western Farming and Eastern Nomadic cultures but mostly originating in the Eastern sphere.

There is also alot of early farming and animal husbandry that may have originated in Afghanistan and spread Westward in the Early Neolithic period.

The Western Iranian population is probably closer to Anatolian as that region has higher population density compared to Eastern Iran/Afghanistan, so they are genetically different, but classical Iranian culture is more Eastern so hence Iranian and South/Central Asians are quite close culturally and linguistically.

Kulin
06-05-2020, 09:25 PM
It is rather pointless arguing about this. The best comparison from my point of view would be the difference between the Horn of Africa and Peninsular Arabia to Iran and Southern Asia. Both of these sets of regions share extensive cultural/linguistic/genetic similarities, but are differentiated by the presence of divergent genetic admixtures, nilotic for the former and AASI for the latter.

passion
06-05-2020, 09:31 PM
middle east and south asia are different regions so they are different , there isnt much to rationalize here.

deuterium_1
06-05-2020, 10:37 PM
Bro stop coming for my wig, I mean that this is exactly how different I see Iranians from South Asians. Lol. Regardless of genetics, they are not similar people culturally at all, including the Shia. Its like comparing Russians with Greeks, culturally vastly different regardless of the Slavicisation of the Mediterranean.

Almost all North Indian languages have been influenced by the Persian language and likewise in Karnataka where Dakhini Urdu developed under the patronage of the Bahmanid kings thanks to the immigration of Persians to their courts. Perceptions don't match the historical record.

This is accepted in academia so it is quite strange to see resistance to such a suggestion, almost every scholar who deals with Persian manuscripts has visited India at least once due to the presence of Persian manuscripts at libraries at Rampur, Aligarh and Patna (I have visited the latter's Khuda Bakhsh library). Please read this at least:


INDIA vi. Political and Cultural Relations (13th-18th centuries)

INDIA

vi. POLITICAL AND CULTURAL RELATIONS: FROM THE 13TH TO THE 18TH CENTURIES

Relations between peoples of the Iranian plateau and India were extensive and uninterrupted between the 13th and 18th centuries. Migration, commerce, and politics all led to a range of cross-regional influences, most of which flowed from Iran to India.

In the 13th century, Mongol invaders drove large numbers of Persianized Turks from greater Khorasan into north India, where they supplied the administrative and military manpower for the Delhi Sultanate (1206-1526; q.v.). Another wave of migrants appeared in the late 14th and 15th centuries when the breakaway provinces of the Delhi Sultanate in Bengal and the Deccan, having been denied access to trade routes leading to Delhi, actively recruited Iranian administrators, soldiers, and men of letters (Golčin-e Maʿāni, passim). The poet Hafez (d. 1388) was solicited by rulers in Bengal and the Deccan. Sultan Firuz Shah (1397-1422) annually sent ships to the Persian Gulf to recruit Iranian talent for the Bahmanid kingdom (see BAHMANID DYNASTY). His successor, Aḥmad Shah I (1422-36), recruited a body of 3,000 archers from Khorasan and the Persian Gulf regions to form the elite corps of his army (Ferešta, pp. 308, 322; Briggs, pp. 227, 249). Others came as merchants, such as Maḥmud Gāwān (d. 1481), a horse-trader who had migrated from Gilān to the Deccan in the mid-15th century, became the vizier of the Bahmanid Sultanate, and in turn used his influence and connections to encourage others from the Iranian world to follow in his footsteps (Nayeem, pp. 401-3).

Many Persianized Turks accompanied Ẓahir-al-Din Moḥammad Babor (q.v.) as he moved from Samarkand to Kabul to Delhi, where in 1526 he launched the Indo-Timurid, or Mughal, dynasty. When Afghan rivals drove his son and successor Homāyun (see HOMĀYUN PĀDŠĀH) out of north India thirteen years later, the exiled king found refuge in the Safavid court of Shah Ṭahmāsp. Upon his successful reconquest of north India in 1555, Homāyun brought with him numerous Iranian literati, administrators, and artists. The Mughals’ taste for Iranian culture, and their considerable wealth compared to Safavid Persia’s more modest resources, served as a magnet attracting many more Iranian to India. Whereas Shah ʿAbbās (1588-1629), for example, is known to have weighed but one poet in gold for a poetic eulogy he wrote, in Mughal India even high-ranking nobles are known to have done as much, while Shah Jahān weighed at least three Iranian poets in gold (Ahmad, pp. 120, 125, 127). News of such lavish patronage swiftly reached Safavid Persia, where Kawṯari, a panegyrist of Shah ʿAbbās I, complained of his homeland’s meager patronage compared to that of India (Ahmad, p. 118). Indeed, nearly all the great poets of Safavid Iran migrated to India in this period, with only one of them, Ṣāʾeb, returning permanently to his homeland (Ahmad, p. 122). In 1563 Shaikh Ḥosayn Ḥariṯi, the first Shaikh-al-Islam under the Safavids, bluntly advised his son, “If you seek this world alone, then go to India” (Stewart, p. 390).

In the 17th century, as Iranian administrators, scholars, soldiers, clerics, artisans, and poets continued to find patronage in Indo-Muslim courts, many immigrants maintained their ties with Persia. Some even continued normal business transactions with their homeland. Around 1661, when Mirzā Neẓām-al-Din Aḥmad of Golkonda learned of the death of his uncle in Shiraz, he wrote to the Safavid court in Isfahan requesting that his late uncle’s aw-qāf (religious endowment) property be seized from its present trustees (wakils) and handed over to his own attorney in accordance with the principle of Islamic power of attorney (wakālat-nāma-ye šarʿi; Islam, pp. 172-73). Such arrangements hardly suggest a permanent move from Iran to India. In fact, they resemble a more modern pattern, in which migrants move into overseas job markets and regularly send remittances to families back home.

Commercial contact between India and Iran was driven by such factors as India’s chronic need for warhorses and Persia’s demand for Indian textiles. Some of the most illustrious Iranians who served Indian courts had begun their careers exporting horses to India. Moving in the opposite direction were Indian spices, pepper, and textiles (linen, silk, muslin, chintz, calico), which found ready markets in Iran. It is estimated that in 1639 alone roughly 20,000 to 25,000 camels annually reached the Safavid capital of Isfahan, most of them carrying Indian cotton goods (Levi, p. 46, n. 110). Maritime and overland routes between the two regions flourished, because rulers generally encouraged, and even depended upon, the trade they carried. For centuries, permanent communities of Iranian merchants had settled along India’s Gujarat, Konkan, and Malabar coasts, where they built mosques, established local social networks, and served as cultural and economic brokers between their Hindu overlords and the world across the Arabian Sea. In this way, as the memoirs of travelers like Ebn Baṭṭuṭa (d. 1377; q.v.) amply attest, Iranian culture quietly took root along India’s coasts.

Politics formed the third mechanism of Indo-Iranian contact. From the 15th century on, most Muslim courts in India maintained embassies at, and correspondence with, their counterparts in Persia. Such contact was especially active whenever Indian rulers sought outside intervention against local rivals, as when the imperial Mughals expanded southward, inducing Deccani courts to appeal for aid from the imperialists’ principal antagonist, Safavid Persia. In 1612, Bijapur’s Sultan Ebrāhim II, though a Sunnite, wrote to Shah ʿAbbās professing the Deccan to be as much a part of Iran as Khorasan, Fārs, or Azerbaijan. He even described himself a mere manṣab-dār (office-holder) in service to the Safavid emperor, to whom he offered his “reverential prostration” (sejda-ye taʿẓim; Islam, pp. 131-37). Throughout most of this period, the Safavid and the Mughal rulers frequently contested their mutual border, lying athwart Afghanistan, until it was finally brushed aside by Nāder Shah’s invading army with the subsequent sack and plunder of Delhi in 1739.

As a result of these contacts, a broad axis of distinctly Iranian influences emerged in the medieval period that stretched along the spine of South Asia from Kabul to Lahore to Delhi, with extensions running from Delhi east to Patna, southwest to Ahmadabad in Gujarat, and south into the heart of the Deccan plateau. The steady influx of Persianized Turks and Iranians along the trade and migration corridors that comprise this axis, together with the identification of Iranian culture with prestige and cosmopolitanism, led to the further diffusion of that culture among aspiring ruling houses, both Hindu and Muslim. This is seen in the widespread assimilation of Iranian or Persianized styles of architecture, music, art, literature, technology, dress, and cuisine.

In areas lying along this geo-cultural axis—i.e., Punjab, the upper and middle Ganges plain, Gujarat, Deccan—ruling elites actively patronized all aspects of Iranian culture. When courts in these areas adopted Persian as the language of fiscal administration, as they typically did, there emerged upper-caste, non-Muslim clerks who learned and used the language, just as their 19th-century counterparts would do with English. Hindu clerical castes continued to cultivate Iranian language and literature well into the twentieth century, long after these courts had ceased to exist. In north India the local vernacular, Hindawi, assimilated a good deal of Iranian vocabulary while retaining its syntax and grammar, resulting in the emergence of a new, hybridized tongue, Urdu. Gradually, the Persian script was adapted to this language, which by the 16th century had begun to acquire its own literary status.

In regions lying beyond this Persianized axis, such as Bengal, Kashmir, or the coastal south, Persian was not adopted in the revenue administration. Yet even here, a host of Persian words became naturalized in languages such as Marathi, Telugu, or Bengali. At the same time, Persian romance literature seeped into popular culture whenever bilingual intellectuals translated such works into vernacular tongues. This occurred in places even as distant as the Arakan coast of Burma, where the 17th century poet Alaol translated Neẓāmi’s Eskandar-nāma and Haft Paykar (qq.v.) into Bengali.

Iran’s religious influences on India were equally profound. When the Bahmanid kingdom broke up in the early 16th century, the rulers of two of its five successor states, Bijapur and Golkonda, seized the opportunity to declare Shiʿism their state religion, imitating what Shah Esmāʿil (1501-24) had recently done in Persia. In 1537 Shah Ṭāher (d. 1546), himself an émigré from Shah Esmāʿil’s court, converted to Shiʿism the ruler of a third successor state, Sultan Borhān Neẓām Shah I (1510-53) of Ahmadnagar, who in turn spent thousands of gold coins recruiting more Shiʿite clerics to his kingdom (Kazimi, p. 47). By the 1530s Shah Ṭāher reported to Shah Ṭahmāsp that the entire Deccan was on the way to a religious reformation (eṣlāhá; Islam, pp. 122, 124). Iranian Sufis, too, exerted profound influence on Indian politics and culture, especially when internal politics made it desirable for Indo-Muslim rulers to seek external bases of legitimacy. Thus, when Aḥmad Shah I sought to re-invigorate the Bahmanid state, he sent a mission to Kerman to entreat the renowned mystic Šāh Neʿmat-Allāh Wali (d. 1431) to come and adorn his new capital at Bidar. Although that shaikh never left Iran, his entire family ultimately settled in Bidar, where they formed a powerful bloc of Iranian influence at the heart of the Bahmanid state (Ferešta, pp. 328-29; Briggs, pp. 258 ff.).

Notions of statecraft and sovereignty were among the most pervasive of Iranian influences on India. The Persianized Turks who established the Delhi Sultanate in the 13th century, especially Ēltotmeš (r. 1210-35, q.v.), projected ideas and symbols of kingship distinctly associated with pre-Islamic Iran. These included rules of court etiquette, the mystique surrounding the office of the sovereign, the naming of royal children after pre-Islamic Iranian heroes, and, beginning with Ēltotmeš, the image of the king as the “second Alexander.” In the Deccan, ʿAbd-al-Malek ʿEṣāmi eulogized his Indo-Muslim patrons by modeling his historical poem Fotuḥ-al-salāṭin (1350) directly on Ferdowsi’s Šāh-nāma.

Rulers also projected their authority through the “Circle of Justice,” an ideology that linked power with wealth and wealth with justice. Traceable to ancient Mesopotamia and associated especially with the Sasanian monarch Ḵosrow I Anuširvān (r. 531-79), the notion was subsequently elaborated by medieval Iranian theorists like Neẓām-al-Molk (d. 1092), Abu Ḥāmed Ḡazāli (q.v.; d. 1111), Faḵr-al-Din Rāzi (d. 1209), and Rašid-al-Din Fażl-Allāh (d. 1318; Darling, pp. 3-19; Subtleny pp. 53-65). Among the Mughals, the idea was projected most prominently by Jahāngir (1605-28) and Shah Jahān (1628-58), with the latter going so far as to build “forty-pillared” audience halls in all his capitals in imitation of the “forty-pillared hall” of Persepolis (Koch, pp. 148-49, 152). The ideology of justice, which had no precedent in ancient Indian treatises on statecraft, possessed sufficient prestige to spread even into areas in India never exposed to Muslim rule (see Wagoner, 1993, p. 95). The same is true of Iranian administrative practices like the eqṭāʿ (q.v.), a military service land grant, the idea of which was voluntarily assimilated by non-Muslim Indian regimes as early as the 13th century (see the discussion of nāyankaramu tenure in 13th century Andhra, in Talbot, pp. 164-66).

Many revolutionary technologies arrived via Iran or Central Asia in the 13th and 14th centuries. The technology of paper-making and the use of lime-mortar for domed roofing both reached India in the 13th century. By the 14th century the spinning wheel, six times more efficient than hand spinning, had arrived from Persia, as had the animal-powered Iranian wheel, which facilitated deep-well irrigation in India’s arid northwest. The calico-printing technique and the bow and string for cotton-carding also reached India in the 14th century, probably from Persia. Also, in the 16th century Iranian immigrants in the Deccan seem to have introduced the upright loom, with colored woolen weft-threads based on patterns set in paper (Habib, 1969, pp. 141-60; Habib, 1980, pp. 3-10). Finally, a host of innovations in military technology—such as the use of stone ashlar masonry and bent-axis gateways in fortifications, the counterweight trebuchet (manājiq, maḡrebi) for siege engines, and the iron stirrup and horseshoe for cavalry warfare—appear to have entered India via the Iranian plateau in the 13th century.

The most visible form of Iranian influence in India is found in the hundreds of architectural monuments patronized by rulers who looked to Iran for their aesthetic inspiration, and often for their architects. The trend began with India’s first sultan, Qoṭb-al-Din Aybak (r. 1206-10; q.v.), whose congregational mosque in Delhi followed the Iranian plan of a central open courtyard surrounded by cloistered halls on three sides, with a prayer chamber on the fourth side (Tsukinowa, pp. 54-60). When unruly provinces declared their independence from Delhi’s authority in the 14th century, they sometimes sought to legitimize themselves architecturally by bypassing their former masters in Delhi and imitating Iranian imperial models. This appears to have happened in the case of Bengal’s Adina Mosque (1375), which in structural terms recalls the third-century Sasanian palace, Ṭāq-e Kesrā (Eaton, pp. 40-47). Somewhat later, Mughal rulers readily assimilated the complex geometrical formulae, the vaulting techniques, and the intersecting arches associated with Timurid practices in Central Asia and Khorasan. In India these elements appeared first in Homāyun’s tomb (1571), whose architect had himself come from Bukhara. Through Timurid influence, too, came the Iranian conception of the garden, symbolic of paradise, with water channels, poo1s, and pavilions (Subtleny, pp. 119-20). Already evident in Bābor’s own memoirs, the aesthetic of the garden was translated into many Mughal architectural triumphs, most famously the Tāj Maḥal (1632-43; Golembek, pp. 43-50; Subtleny, pp. 120-21).

http://www.iranicaonline.org/articles/india-vi-relations-from-the-13th-to-the-18th-centuries


The sentences in bold are hypotheses yet to be proven as fact.

The Rakhigarhi paper appears to suggest that to be the case:

37906


Yeah I totally get you, and what you've stated can't be argued against - except for the fact that I predicated the statement with a personal pronoun, I see Iran as.... As in, for me, from an entirely personal perspective, see none of the so-called similarities between Iranians and South Asians, having grown up among both communities and having family marry into both cultures. There's nothing South Asian about my girl, at all, an Azeri...but like I said ... this is purely personal and has no academic or genomic [obviously] basis. Afghans are far closer, again, in my opinion, to South Asians, if not NWSA entirely.

I have seen it many times though from personal experience, I have attended conferences stressing the commonalities between both cultures with academics around the world presenting papers on the topic. A Persian friend from Karaj who studied with me at Cambridge and is now working at Harvard's Art Museum has looked at Indian manuscripts written in the Persian language and has asked me to help her look for it in Aligarh's libraries, because they have a collection of Persian manuscripts there.

The same can be said for numismatics where the Persian language was used for centuries on Indian coinage, I can provide pictures.

ThaYamamoto
06-05-2020, 10:51 PM
Almost all North Indian languages have been influenced by the Persian language and likewise in Karnataka where Dakhini Urdu developed under the patronage of the Bahmanid kings thanks to the immigration of Persians to their courts. Perceptions don't match the historical record.

This is accepted in academia so it is quite strange to see resistance to such a suggestion, almost every scholar who deals with Persian manuscripts has visited India at least once due to the presence of Persian manuscripts at libraries at Rampur, Aligarh and Patna (I have visited the latter's Khuda Bakhsh library). Please read this at least:



http://www.iranicaonline.org/articles/india-vi-relations-from-the-13th-to-the-18th-centuries



The Rakhigarhi paper appears to suggest that to be the case:

37906



I have seen it many times though from personal experience, I have attended conferences stressing the commonalities between both cultures with academics around the world presenting papers on the topic. A Persian friend from Karaj who studied with me at Cambridge and is now working at Harvard's Art Museum has looked at Indian manuscripts written in the Persian language and has asked me to help her look for it in Aligarh's libraries, because they have a collection of Persian manuscripts there.

The same can be said for numismatics where the Persian language was used for centuries on Indian coinage, I can provide pictures.

I see. I stand corrected then. I got love for all ya'll.

deuterium_1
06-05-2020, 10:58 PM
I see. I stand corrected then. I got love for all ya'll.

This is worth reading too:

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Lion-Lotus-History-India-1000-1800/dp/0713995823

Nowruz is even celebrated in Kashmir:

https://en.irna.ir/news/82872887/Norouz-in-Kashmir-Heralding-spring-with-festive-spirit

They have their own version of the Haft Sin like Iranians do for Nowruz.

passion
06-05-2020, 11:21 PM
Almost all North Indian languages have been influenced by the Persian language and likewise in Karnataka where Dakhini Urdu developed under the patronage of the Bahmanid kings thanks to the immigration of Persians to their courts. Perceptions don't match the historical record.

This is accepted in academia so it is quite strange to see resistance to such a suggestion, almost every scholar who deals with Persian manuscripts has visited India at least once due to the presence of Persian manuscripts at libraries at Rampur, Aligarh and Patna (I have visited the latter's Khuda Bakhsh library). Please read this at least:



http://www.iranicaonline.org/articles/india-vi-relations-from-the-13th-to-the-18th-centuries



The Rakhigarhi paper appears to suggest that to be the case:

37906



I have seen it many times though from personal experience, I have attended conferences stressing the commonalities between both cultures with academics around the world presenting papers on the topic. A Persian friend from Karaj who studied with me at Cambridge and is now working at Harvard's Art Museum has looked at Indian manuscripts written in the Persian language and has asked me to help her look for it in Aligarh's libraries, because they have a collection of Persian manuscripts there.

The same can be said for numismatics where the Persian language was used for centuries on Indian coinage, I can provide pictures.

you can use google to find anything , I can find articles on ancient chinese influence on Pakistan

deuterium_1
06-05-2020, 11:33 PM
you can use google to find anything , I can find articles on ancient chinese influence on Pakistan

Let's try to debate the topic at hand

There is a big warning at the top of this forum for a reason.

I have access to this:

https://www.alumni.cam.ac.uk/benefits/journals-and-online-resources/jstor

Administrator
06-06-2020, 01:16 PM
[ADMIN]

Multiple posts - Created by South Asian users who willfully defied an administrator's message by derailing this discussion with South Asian genetics in a West Asian sociological thread - Have been deleted and infractions have been issued.

Please ensure that you follow the input of a member of staff if they decide to intervene in a thread.

Thanks for your cooperation,

deuterium_1
06-06-2020, 02:03 PM
[ADMIN]

Multiple posts - Created by South Asian users who willfully defied an administrator's message by derailing this discussion with South Asian genetics in a West Asian sociological thread - Have been deleted and infractions have been issued.

Please ensure that you follow the input of a member of staff if they decide to intervene in a thread.

Thanks for your cooperation,



Thank you

pegasus
06-06-2020, 02:50 PM
Anyways on topic , this paper serves as a very good primer for understanding Plateau Iranian populations.


https://journals.plos.org/plosgenetics/article?id=10.1371/journal.pgen.1008385

deuterium_1
06-07-2020, 08:13 AM
Anyways on topic , this paper serves as a very good primer for understanding Plateau Iranian populations.


https://journals.plos.org/plosgenetics/article?id=10.1371/journal.pgen.1008385

Are Iranians in the Northwest more Caucasus shifted while Iranians in Razavi Khorasan are more Afghan/Central Asian shifted?.

Coldmountains
06-07-2020, 09:57 AM
Are Iranians in the Northwest more Caucasus shifted while Iranians in Razavi Khorasan are more Afghan/Central Asian shifted?.

Iranians from Khorasan are overall closer to Iranians from Fars and Central Iran (Around 50-60% West Iranic IA-like) but shifted towards South Pashtuns and Yaghnobi/Pamiri. Still many in Khorasan and Mashad have recent ancestry from places like Herat and are probably slightly more eastern shifted.

deuterium_1
06-07-2020, 10:00 AM
Iranians from Khorasan are overall closer to Iranians from Fars and Central Iran but shifted towards South Pashtuns and Yaghnobi/Pamiri. Still many in Khorasan and Mashad have recent ancestry from places like Herat and are probably slightly more eastern shifted.

It fits in with the historical record as Iranians in the north-east did travel, trade and migrate to cities such as Herat which is quite Persianised today according to friends who have visited there for academic research.

I know there have been Herati samples posted in this forum, it would be interesting to compare them with Mashhadis for example.

As DMXX alluded to, it was this same region which was the birthplace of the Persian revival after the Arab conquests.

pegasus
06-07-2020, 05:30 PM
Are Iranians in the Northwest more Caucasus shifted while Iranians in Razavi Khorasan are more Afghan/Central Asian shifted?.

There have been a lot of internal movements within Iran, you can find huge populations of Kurds and CIC related Iranians in Mashhad, to the point I would say the core population would be much closer to those in Isfahan and Shiraz than Herat ( I noticed CM already touched on it), I think analyzing samples from isolated ethnic Persian communities in Birjand ( Jonoobi Khorasan) and Zabol ( Sistan) would provide better insight.

deuterium_1
06-07-2020, 07:16 PM
There have been a lot of internal movements within Iran, you can find huge populations of Kurds and CIC related Iranians in Mashhad, to the point I would say the core population would be much closer to those in Isfahan and Shiraz than Herat ( I noticed CM already touched on it), I think analyzing samples from isolated ethnic Persian communities in Birjand ( Jonoobi Khorasan) and Zabol ( Sistan) would provide better insight.

Weren't the Afshar tribe resettled in Khorasan for example?

ancestryfan1994
06-09-2020, 05:46 PM
In india the usage of this word is not racial at all and never has been. it has always been a mark of respect, nobility and knowledge, like 'Sir'

ārya mārga (Sanskrit, also āryāṣṭāṅgikamārga, ie noble eightfold path), are also terms very frequently used in earliest buddhist pali texts, and in no way shape or form are about race, because a path which all people can take cannot be about race.

It has also come down in various forms. eg for grandmother in Marathi (from āryā) and borrowed into dravidian kannada from marathi



Also most common honorific suffix in common Hindi. eg Narendra Modi ji or Gandhiji


and many others.

I havent read too much in detail about how ancient iranians used the word, but i am not at all pleased with how 19th and 20th century european 'scholars' changed the context of the word.

Yeah, Im aware of the Indian usage of the word, but you can say the way Indians and Iranians use the term is practically like comparing apples to oranges. For us, it has always been a way to proclaim some sort of superior heritage that has ties to Germans as our "long lost brothers", and usually it would be as specific as that for some reason, not a pan European type of thing, but specifically Germans.

It is obviously pure bullsh**, but unfortunately that's how we've used it. However like I said, I've noticed a slight shift recently in Iranians appreciating the more down to earth and realistic parts of our culture, and championing those as opposed to some artificial connection with Germans.

Education is key, the more people educate themselves with real information, the more better equipped they are to make the right judgements on things. In this case, a simple breakdown of population genetics using a modern world wide population PCA would be more than enough to make anybody realize the fallacy of these claims. There is no special genetic/cultural link between Iranians and Germans.

I'm sure the Germans must laugh when they hear this stuff.

deuterium_1
06-09-2020, 11:28 PM
Yeah, Im aware of the Indian usage of the word, but you can say the way Indians and Iranians use the term is practically like comparing apples to oranges. For us, it has always been a way to proclaim some sort of superior heritage that has ties to Germans as our "long lost brothers", and usually it would be as specific as that for some reason, not a pan European type of thing, but specifically Germans.

It is obviously pure bullsh**, but unfortunately that's how we've used it. However like I said, I've noticed a slight shift recently in Iranians appreciating the more down to earth and realistic parts of our culture, and championing those as opposed to some artificial connection with Germans.

Education is key, the more people educate themselves with real information, the more better equipped they are to make the right judgements on things. In this case, a simple breakdown of population genetics using a modern world wide population PCA would be more than enough to make anybody realize the fallacy of these claims. There is no special genetic/cultural link between Iranians and Germans.

I'm sure the Germans must laugh when they hear this stuff.

It was very much in fashion during the Pahlavi era, Reza Shah was particularly keen on the idea of Iranians being "Aryans". It is etymologically linked to older names for Iran such as Eranshahr.

http://www.iranicaonline.org/articles/eran-eransah

Xeon
08-14-2020, 05:51 AM
Well as an Indian, I feel kinship with Iranians because 12,000 years ago we had an influx of Iranian hunter gatherer DNA which is fairly dominant in the Indian subcontinent today.Also Sanskrit was brought to India by Indo-Aryans who shared ancestry with the Ancient Persians and Medes as they both descended from the Proto Indo-Iranian Sintashta culture. The Vedic Gods were closer to that of the Persians, in the Rig Veda there is a reference to Mitra/Mithra who was also worshipped by the Persians.

Culturally we have also been strongly influenced by Iran and during the Mughal era, there was more Persian literature produced in India than in Iran itself.


Iran and south asia are completely different areas with different native population and culture. India itself can be an entire continent considering how many different languages, culture and people are within it.
As far as Iran_N goes, average iranian doesnt even have the amount as people think mostly because its heavily diluted, otherwise iranians would cluster near south asian groups while in reality it is completely the opposite.
based on g25, I am closer to greeks and south italians than to any group within eastern pakistan alone. This is mostly because of the higher CHG and anatolian/levant farmer admixture in iranians, which in total outnumbers the Iran_N.
I would assume the pre iranic population of southern iran, like the elamites having close ties to the IVC but a lot has changed since then. migrations from the Caucasus, Anatolian/levant have definingly changed iran.

even in recent history, many georgians for example were transported to central iran, they even have their own city in iran. iranians have virtually diluted the Neolithic admixture. Iran went as far as chechnya, fighting russia deep within southern russia and central asia, many migrations took place during that era as well.

Xeon
08-14-2020, 06:00 AM
To be fair, brother, a huge portion of Nigeria is Chadic speaking (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hausa_people) which, as you know, belongs to the Afro-Asiatic language family like Somali and those same Chadic speakers tend to be Muslim and have been for a long-time so it's not like there aren't cultural and linguistic ties between Nigerians and Horners. But genetically the distinction is indeed pretty deep.



Gonna have to side with Drobbah on this. The historical, linguistic and cultural ties between Iranians and South Asians, especially NWSAs, runs pretty deep. I'd go so far as to say Iranics, including those in Iran, are probably the closest people to them in all respects. Genetics, linguistics, history and culture. Both Indo-Iranian speaking peoples, related pre-Islamic beliefs, geographically closeby, lots of historical ties and constant contact, lots of shared ancient ancestry... The list goes on. But sure, there are obvious and marked differences.

But in reality, i dont see these cultural similarities as south Asians claim to have with iranians. I attended a university in the west with a high south asian population, mostly punjabi and central indian. I can say without a doubt that the 2 cultures are severely different. from language, behavior, tradition, mentality, marriage and food. the closest people, both culturally and genetically to me and most Iranians would be azeris, Armenians and Turks.
Iranian culture at its core is no different than assyrian, armenian, turkish or as far as chechen culture. they all share similatiries but south asian culture is something that I would consider alien considering it is a native culture originating thousands of miles away. I remember talking to a punjabi about culture and some of the things he would say amazed me of how extreme it was. like 3 day marriages, family behavior, social structure. it is all extremely different from any west asian culture. For example, south asians operate on a caste system which still doesnt make sense to me. this would be very alien in Iran or anywhere in west asia. I dont understand how and why a population operates on a caste system in the 21st century. in iran, you have azeris, lurs, persians and just about every iranian national mixing in urbanized areas. outside of iran, we tend to marry outside of our ethnicity more than any culture i know. every iranian friend i have in canada has settled down with a european/latin american or north american. the concept of race preservation doesn't exist in iran

ancient religion and a linguistic link due to indo european expansion does not justify anything. otherwise slavic and iranic populations would be just as close but theyre not.
culture isnt just about ancient invasions and expansion that result in influence, it is much more than that. it is common mentality, behavior, tradition, social structure, and just about how a society operates.
middle east and south asia are completely 2 different worlds based on these aspects alone.

whether you are in chechnya, turkey, syria or iran, you will see varying degrees of similarities in these aspects. I had the opportunity to visit Vladikavkaz, capital of North Ossetia and the culture there is no different than the culture I was brought up with in Iran, excluding religious influence. countries like Azerbaijan, i would consider little iran, considering how heavily similar they are to iran, with the exception of language.

deuterium_1
08-14-2020, 08:55 AM
But in reality, i dont see these cultural similarities as south Asians claim to have with iranians. I attended a university in the west with a high south asian population, mostly punjabi and central indian. I can say without a doubt that the 2 cultures are severely different. from language, behavior, tradition, mentality, marriage and food. the closest people, both culturally and genetically to me and most Iranians would be azeris, Armenians and Turks.
Iranian culture at its core is no different than assyrian, armenian, turkish or as far as chechen culture. they all share similatiries but south asian culture is something that I would consider alien considering it is a native culture originating thousands of miles away. I remember talking to a punjabi about culture and some of the things he would say amazed me of how extreme it was. like 3 day marriages, family behavior, social structure. it is all extremely different from any west asian culture. For example, south asians operate on a caste system which still doesnt make sense to me. this would be very alien in Iran or anywhere in west asia. I dont understand how and why a population operates on a caste system in the 21st century. in iran, you have azeris, lurs, persians and just about every iranian national mixing in urbanized areas. outside of iran, we tend to marry outside of our ethnicity more than any culture i know. every iranian friend i have in canada has settled down with a european/latin american or north american. the concept of race preservation doesn't exist in iran

ancient religion and a linguistic link due to indo european expansion does not justify anything. otherwise slavic and iranic populations would be just as close but theyre not.
culture isnt just about ancient invasions and expansion that result in influence, it is much more than that. it is common mentality, behavior, tradition, social structure, and just about how a society operates.
middle east and south asia are completely 2 different worlds based on these aspects alone.

whether you are in chechnya, turkey, syria or iran, you will see varying degrees of similarities in these aspects. I had the opportunity to visit Vladikavkaz, capital of North Ossetia and the culture there is no different than the culture I was brought up with in Iran, excluding religious influence. countries like Azerbaijan, i would consider little iran, considering how heavily similar they are to iran, with the exception of language.

Western Punjab was on the periphery of the Delhi Sultanate and the Mughal Empire, one shouldn't take them as representative of Persianiate influence in South Asia at all. Same with Eastern Bengal (what is now Bangladesh), I can suggest books if you wish to read up. I am referring to the Gangetic plains which was one of the main centres of Persianate culture in South Asia, particularly from Delhi to Lucknow. Sadly you are unlikely to meet many in Canada or even here in the UK.

In the 19th Century, Persian lost its official status under British rule. It had enjoyed primacy as a language of governance for 600 years. What is interesting is that despite this fact, the first Persian newspapers were actually printed in India by Ram Mohan Roy:

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/1461670X.2015.1054159?scroll=top&needAccess=true

https://www.milligazette.com/Archives/15072001/Art5ts.htm

The newspaper Habl-al Matin (which was important during the 1906 Constitutional Revolution) was published in Calcutta,India as well:

https://www.jstor.org/stable/4310043?seq=1


The dynamics of the Caucasus are quite different because of the nature of Russian and Soviet rule which tried to separate the present day Republic of Azerbaijan culturally and ethnically from Iran. It has been a long and persistent issue.

Xeon
08-14-2020, 10:14 AM
Western Punjab was on the periphery of the Delhi Sultanate and the Mughal Empire, one shouldn't take them as representative of Persianiate influence in South Asia at all. Same with Eastern Bengal (what is now Bangladesh), I can suggest books if you wish to read up. I am referring to the Gangetic plains which was one of the main centres of Persianate culture in South Asia, particularly from Delhi to Lucknow. Sadly you are unlikely to meet many in Canada or even here in the UK.

In the 19th Century, Persian lost its official status under British rule. It had enjoyed primacy as a language of governance for 600 years. What is interesting is that despite this fact, the first Persian newspapers were actually printed in India by Ram Mohan Roy:

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/1461670X.2015.1054159?scroll=top&needAccess=true

https://www.milligazette.com/Archives/15072001/Art5ts.htm

The newspaper Habl-al Matin (which was important during the 1906 Constitutional Revolution) was published in Calcutta,India as well:

https://www.jstor.org/stable/4310043?seq=1


The dynamics of the Caucasus are quite different because of the nature of Russian and Soviet rule which tried to separate the present day Republic of Azerbaijan culturally and ethnically from Iran. It has been a long and persistent issue.

I will have to read those articles on my own time but like I stated before. India in general is a massive land mass with ancient native population, pre dating any small indo aryan migrations.
India is also secluded from the rest of asia for the most part. During its entire history, it has developed its own native culture. And you must understand, culture is much deeper than simply language.
As I stated before, every little detail about how a society operates is part of culture. Social structures, collective behavior/mentality, food, music, art and etc... these are all essential to what formulates
an identity of a region or country. I can definitely say that Persian culture itself is a collection of ancient Mesopotamian civilized culture and indo Iranian culture. Take our alphabet for example, we Iranians never had our own alphabet, mostly because Persians migrated to Iran as nomads, they hadn't developed their alphabet like sumerians, Assyrians and Elamites had. Persians took from them. Ancient Persian cities and art was a mix of Babylonian and Indo Iranian art. We Persians took a lot from people around us, just like how the Romans took from the Greeks.

the Mughals colonization of india is no different than the european colonization of african nations during ww1/2. only difference is of course time and degree of influence. take Cameroon for example, it is a french speaking african country. but does that mean they are culturally the same as the French? of course not. no amount of colonization would have the strength to change culture at its core, especially a rich, native culture that has been flourishing for thousands of years. while the Mughals indeed influenced India, I doubt it was ever strong enough to change the core, native culture of India. I shouldnt have to literally provide examples in how different our cultures are but they are clearly there, almost all of them are essential aspects of society. I will one day travel to India and see it for myself, northern india that is. I have seen many travel videos of india, done by european tourists, Ive seen both the village life and urban but I will have to do my own research.

if you simply ask any Iranian, which group they feel the closest to, without hesitation they will list these following countries in various orders,
Turkey, Azerbaijan, Afghanistan(Persian speaking community) and Armenia.

also as for the Caucasus, i cant say that's entirely true. from experience both north and south Caucasians take heavy pride in their Kavkaz culture which is very different from your typical slavic-russian culture.
it is true that Russia had an influence on aspects of their culture but no way did it change much of it. the soviets indeed modernized some aspects of kavkaz culture but it remains distinct. Russia had briefly conquered northern iran, Mazandaran province as well but in no way could they change it. they tried but it didnt work.

deuterium_1
08-14-2020, 12:26 PM
I will have to read those articles on my own time but like I stated before. India in general is a massive land mass with ancient native population, pre dating any small indo aryan migrations.
India is also secluded from the rest of asia for the most part. During its entire history, it has developed its own native culture.

Indian culture has been strongly influenced by foreign influences. Much of what you call Indian cuisine today includes ingredients which only arrived in the last 500 years or so. The first South Asian Empire in India, the Mauryan Empire used Aramaic and Greek. Brahmi (from which Devanagari script ultimately derives) has been theorised to have developed under Achaemenid influence in the Indus Valley. Chanakaya and Pannini both lived in Taxila which was under Persian rule in their lifetimes.



And you must understand, culture is much deeper than simply language.
As I stated before, every little detail about how a society operates is part of culture. Social structures, collective behavior/mentality, food, music, art and etc... these are all essential to what formulates
an identity of a region or country. I can definitely say that Persian culture itself is a collection of ancient Mesopotamian civilized culture and indo Iranian culture. Take our alphabet for example, we Iranians never had our own alphabet, mostly because Persians migrated to Iran as nomads, they hadn't developed their alphabet like sumerians, Assyrians and Elamites had. Persians took from them. Ancient Persian cities and art was a mix of Babylonian and Indo Iranian art. We Persians took a lot from people around us, just like how the Romans took from the Greeks.

This negates to mention how Persian identity as you may know it is a more modern invention imposed on Iran by Reza Shah Pahlavi.During the Mughal era, more Persian literature was produced in India than in Iran itself because there was considerably more patronage. This book is worth reading:

https://www.hup.harvard.edu/catalog.php?isbn=9780674975859





the Mughals colonization of india is no different than the european colonization of african nations during ww1/2. only difference is of course time and degree of influence. take Cameroon for example, it is a french speaking african country. but does that mean they are culturally the same as the French? of course not. no amount of colonization would have the strength to change culture at its core, especially a rich, native culture that has been flourishing for thousands of years. while the Mughals indeed influenced India, I doubt it was ever strong enough to change the core, native culture of India. I shouldnt have to literally provide examples in how different our cultures are but they are clearly there, almost all of them are essential aspects of society. I will one day travel to India and see it for myself, northern india that is. I have seen many travel videos of india, done by european tourists, Ive seen both the village life and urban but I will have to do my own research.

It is better to read academic books and perhaps meet academics in the field in India and even near to you in North America who can explain it to you. Mughals continued the Persianisation which had started under the Delhi Sultanate, the influence of Amir Khusro's work in helping form what is now Hindi and Urdu is evidence that their work started early.

Colonisation would imply colonies, there was never specific colonies of Mughals in North India like the Europeans.


if you simply ask any Iranian, which group they feel the closest to, without hesitation they will list these following countries in various orders,
Turkey, Azerbaijan, Afghanistan(Persian speaking community) and Armenia.

And Georgia?. Georgia has long been under Persian influence too. Most famously Erekle II who served under Nadir Shah and participated in his invasion of India.



also as for the Caucasus, i cant say that's entirely true. from experience both north and south Caucasians take heavy pride in their Kavkaz culture which is very different from your typical slavic-russian culture.
it is true that Russia had an influence on aspects of their culture but no way did it change much of it. the soviets indeed modernized some aspects of kavkaz culture but it remains distinct. Russia had briefly conquered northern iran, Mazandaran province as well but in no way could they change it. they tried but it didnt work.

Azerbaijan has definitely embraced the Soviets' invention of a separate Azeri identity so I am not sure.

passion
08-14-2020, 01:30 PM
Western Punjab was on the periphery of the Delhi Sultanate and the Mughal Empire, one shouldn't take them as representative of Persianiate influence in South Asia at all. Same with Eastern Bengal (what is now Bangladesh), I can suggest books if you wish to read up. I am referring to the Gangetic plains which was one of the main centres of Persianate culture in South Asia, particularly from Delhi to Lucknow. Sadly you are unlikely to meet many in Canada or even here in the UK.

In the 19th Century, Persian lost its official status under British rule. It had enjoyed primacy as a language of governance for 600 years. What is interesting is that despite this fact, the first Persian newspapers were actually printed in India by Ram Mohan Roy:

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/1461670X.2015.1054159?scroll=top&needAccess=true

https://www.milligazette.com/Archives/15072001/Art5ts.htm

The newspaper Habl-al Matin (which was important during the 1906 Constitutional Revolution) was published in Calcutta,India as well:

https://www.jstor.org/stable/4310043?seq=1


The dynamics of the Caucasus are quite different because of the nature of Russian and Soviet rule which tried to separate the present day Republic of Azerbaijan culturally and ethnically from Iran. It has been a long and persistent issue.

lots of middle classes through out devloping world are infleunced by certain globalized trends that are common , you have to look at core culture of the region specially rural areas . it is so different that any linguistic and genetic link to a west asian country that I saw lots of people talking about on online froms from both sides(mostly from india and iran) , came as a surprise to me.

deuterium_1
08-14-2020, 03:15 PM
lots of middle classes through out devloping world are infleunced by certain globalized trends that are common , you have to look at core culture of the region specially rural areas . it is so different that any linguistic and genetic link to a west asian country that I saw lots of people talking about on online froms from both sides(mostly from india and iran) , came as a surprise to me.

It is pre-globalisation for sure.

The Persianate culture of the Delhi Sultanate was a legacy of the work of the Samanids to convert Central Asian Turks to Islam.

The Mughals' Persianate culture was very much a continuation of the Timurids who produced some of the finest Persian manuscripts such as Baysonghur's Shahnama.

There are a lot of Persian manuscripts in India such as in Rampur, Khuda Baksh library and Aligarh.

passion
08-14-2020, 04:15 PM
It is pre-globalisation for sure.

The Persianate culture of the Delhi Sultanate was a legacy of the work of the Samanids to convert Central Asian Turks to Islam.

The Mughals' Persianate culture was very much a continuation of the Timurids who produced some of the finest Persian manuscripts such as Baysonghur's Shahnama.

There are a lot of Persian manuscripts in India such as in Rampur, Khuda Baksh library and Aligarh.

Weren't mughals central asians ,how were they related to persians?

pegasus
08-14-2020, 08:19 PM
Iran and south asia are completely different areas with different native population and culture. India itself can be an entire continent considering how many different languages, culture and people are within it.
As far as Iran_N goes, average iranian doesnt even have the amount as people think mostly because its heavily diluted, otherwise iranians would cluster near south asian groups while in reality it is completely the opposite.
based on g25, I am closer to greeks and south italians than to any group within eastern pakistan alone. This is mostly because of the higher CHG and anatolian/levant farmer admixture in iranians, which in total outnumbers the Iran_N.
I would assume the pre iranic population of southern iran, like the elamites having close ties to the IVC but a lot has changed since then. migrations from the Caucasus, Anatolian/levant have definingly changed iran.

even in recent history, many georgians for example were transported to central iran, they even have their own city in iran. iranians have virtually diluted the Neolithic admixture. Iran went as far as chechnya, fighting russia deep within southern russia and central asia, many migrations took place during that era as well.

Yes, that is correct, Halaf farming dramatically transformed most populations on the Iranian plateau, only the SE/E edge of the Iranian plateau was a sort of refugia for Zagrosian rich populations which were once widespread in the Neolithic and Mesolithic. So this huge demographic shift happened 7-7.5 Kya. Though Maykop related populations from the Caucasus, did not remotely have the effect that Yaz Indo Iranians from C/SC Asia did so the impact of recent Georgians would be minimal or nil. I think you are misconstruing what Deuterenium and Awale are saying and they are talking from a broad and relative context, in which case they are correct. Though the Persianization was largely mediated via post Khwarzemian C/SC Asians and thats a point often missed.

Xeon
08-14-2020, 11:27 PM
Weren't mughals central asians ,how were they related to persians?

they were a perso-turkic dynasty. not exactly Persian nor Turkic. it was a mixture of both. At the same time,
Iran was under the Safavid empire, another perso-turkic dynasty. in fact, both factions actually fought each other over Afghanistan.
It wasn't even the Persians who influenced south Asia, the influence came indirectly from a related people following a mix of persian/turkic culture
and as well persian elites

Xeon
08-14-2020, 11:37 PM
Yes, that is correct, Halaf farming dramatically transformed most populations on the Iranian plateau, only the SE/E edge of the Iranian plateau was a sort of refugia for Zagrosian rich populations which were once widespread in the Neolithic and Mesolithic. So this huge demographic shift happened 7-7.5 Kya. Though Maykop related populations from the Caucasus, did not remotely have the effect that Yaz Indo Iranians from C/SC Asia did so the impact of recent Georgians would be minimal or nil. I think you are misconstruing what Deuterenium and Awale are saying and they are talking from a broad and relative context, in which case they are correct. Though the Persianization was largely mediated via post Khwarzemian C/SC Asians and thats a point often missed.

I definitely agree with what you're saying. the migrations took place during the safavid control of the entire north/south caucasus. at the time, irans population was around 8 million. the 300,000 georgians along with minority of other north Caucasians had an affect on the local cities and regions they were transported to. In northern and central iran, it is common to find georgian cultural clubs and communities all around.
but nonetheless, I agree that theres a broad connection between iran and certain south asian communities through the Indo-Iranian migration and influence but as far as core culture goes, they are 2 extremely different worlds.
even to this day, iran is changing by the year. westernization and eurocentrism in iran has been growing since reza shah and ataturk era. the culture is always changing and evolving. there are many examples that ive noticed within the years. One of the main changes ive noticed is the wedding process in iran. it has become very europeanized, even more so than armenian or georgian ones considering they follow a more Christian style wedding. globalization has had its affect on iran for sure.

Coldmountains
08-15-2020, 08:42 AM
I definitely agree with what you're saying. the migrations took place during the safavid control of the entire north/south caucasus. at the time, irans population was around 8 million. the 300,000 georgians along with minority of other north Caucasians had an affect on the local cities and regions they were transported to. In northern and central iran, it is common to find georgian cultural clubs and communities all around.
but nonetheless, I agree that theres a broad connection between iran and certain south asian communities through the Indo-Iranian migration and influence but as far as core culture goes, they are 2 extremely different worlds.
even to this day, iran is changing by the year. westernization and eurocentrism in iran has been growing since reza shah and ataturk era. the culture is always changing and evolving. there are many examples that ive noticed within the years. One of the main changes ive noticed is the wedding process in iran. it has become very europeanized, even more so than armenian or georgian ones considering they follow a more Christian style wedding. globalization has had its affect on iran for sure.

The connection is not so much because of common Proto-Indo-Iranian origin and belonging to a broad linguistic group. These connections are very old and often not easy recognizable. Rather Persian civilization/language/culture expanded during the late Sassanid and especially Islamic period rapidly in Central Asia, South Central Asia and many parts of South Asia, what effected almost all groups in the region including the non-Persian speaking and non-muslim people. But like other mentioned before persianized East Iranics/Turks/Indo-Aryans would mostly bring this persian influences to South Asia. There were also influences directly from South Asia effecting regions more in the West but this would be mostly in Pre-Islamic times and regions of modern day Afghanistan, East Iran and Tajikistan. In Afghanistan you would have transitional Indo-Iranian border regions, which fluctuated in different ages between the Iranic or Indo-Aryan world, but with the arrival of Islam decisively became closer to Islamic-Persian civilization

deuterium_1
08-15-2020, 07:33 PM
Weren't mughals central asians ,how were they related to persians?

They were Persianate in culture just like their Timurid ancestors. Humayun's wife Hamida Banu Begum was a Persian who was descended from Sheikh Ahmad-e Jami.

Jami was from Kashmar, Iran.

Xeon
08-17-2020, 07:19 AM
The connection is not so much because of common Proto-Indo-Iranian origin and belonging to a broad linguistic group. These connections are very old and often not easy recognizable. Rather Persian civilization/language/culture expanded during the late Sassanid and especially Islamic period rapidly in Central Asia, South Central Asia and many parts of South Asia, what effected almost all groups in the region including the non-Persian speaking and non-muslim people. But like other mentioned before persianized East Iranics/Turks/Indo-Aryans would mostly bring this persian influences to South Asia. There were also influences directly from South Asia effecting regions more in the West but this would be mostly in Pre-Islamic times and regions of modern day Afghanistan, East Iran and Tajikistan. In Afghanistan you would have transitional Indo-Iranian border regions, which fluctuated in different ages between the Iranic or Indo-Aryan world, but with the arrival of Islam decisively became closer to Islamic-Persian civilization

Like I said countless of times before. Culture is not as simple as people here make it seem like. I don't know how many times I have to repeat the fact that the social structure, collective mentality / behavior and how the Iranian society operates is extremely different in contrast to south Asia as a whole. South Asia itself has even different cultures within it. Connecting a community thousands of miles away to an entire continent-like country like India is illogical. This doesn't even make sense.

It's not a hard concept to understand. I'm speaking as an Iranian, born and raised in Iran. The aspects which are important to me are the ones that make up the societal identity.

Once again, these are aspects of internal culture which cannot be exported to other areas and communities. India as a whole as been evolving for literally thousands of years, prior to any info European migration. They have developed their own internal culture which has absolutely nothing to do with anyone outside of India.

Persians influenced their closest neighbors next door, that doesn't mean their internal culture became persianized. Arabs ruled Iran for centuries and didn't change anything other than the religion. Iraqi Arabs live their lives based on Arabic/Islamic culture, despite the fact that the Persian capitals were in Iraq at one point. Armenia has its own societal identity and they had direct contacts with the parthians whom were an eastern Iranian community. Many Georgian Kings were born within the Iranian empires, they exported Persian culture but did that change their societal identity as Georgians? Never.

Coldmountains
08-17-2020, 07:35 AM
Like I said countless of times before. Culture is not as simple as people here make it seem like. I don't know how many times I have to repeat the fact that the social structure, collective mentality / behavior and how the Iranian society operates is extremely different in contrast to south Asia as a whole. South Asia itself has even different cultures within it. Connecting a community thousands of miles away to an entire continent-like country like India is illogical. This doesn't even make sense.

It's not a hard concept to understand. I'm speaking as an Iranian, born and raised in Iran. The aspects which are important to me are the ones that make up the societal identity.

Once again, these are aspects of internal culture which cannot be exported to other areas and communities. India as a whole as been evolving for literally thousands of years, prior to any info European migration. They have developed their own internal culture which has absolutely nothing to do with anyone outside of India.

Persians influenced their closest neighbors next door, that doesn't mean their internal culture became persianized. Arabs ruled Iran for centuries and didn't change anything other than the religion. Iraqi Arabs live their lives based on Arabic/Islamic culture, despite the fact that the Persian capitals were in Iraq at one point. Armenia has its own societal identity and they had direct contacts with the parthians whom were an eastern Iranian community. Many Georgian Kings were born within the Iranian empires, they exported Persian culture but did that change their societal identity as Georgians? Never.

Of course people were persianized. This happened and is still very much happening in Iran and outside of Iran. For example much of Afghanistan and Tajikistan is today Persian-speaking and has a Persian culture. Modern day borders don't represent cultural or ethnic borders. There is no deep ethnic and cultural divide between Tajiks from Herat and Persians from Khorasan. Armenia and Georgia are not good examples because they were not Islamized in the first place and Persian culture/language spread often with Islam. In Central Asia urban regions became a centre of Persian culture so much that much of medieval Persian literature and culture got very important impulses from former non-Persian East Iranic regions.

passion
08-17-2020, 08:34 AM
The connection is not so much because of common Proto-Indo-Iranian origin and belonging to a broad linguistic group. These connections are very old and often not easy recognizable. Rather Persian civilization/language/culture expanded during the late Sassanid and especially Islamic period rapidly in Central Asia, South Central Asia and many parts of South Asia, what effected almost all groups in the region including the non-Persian speaking and non-muslim people. But like other mentioned before persianized East Iranics/Turks/Indo-Aryans would mostly bring this persian influences to South Asia. There were also influences directly from South Asia effecting regions more in the West but this would be mostly in Pre-Islamic times and regions of modern day Afghanistan, East Iran and Tajikistan. In Afghanistan you would have transitional Indo-Iranian border regions, which fluctuated in different ages between the Iranic or Indo-Aryan world, but with the arrival of Islam decisively became closer to Islamic-Persian civilization

imo indo iranic links are mainly limited to east iranics(gedrosia/Gandhara) and indus valley people , still there are sufficient cultural differences between pak punjabis and pak pashtuns along with obvious similarities .You have to live in the region to understand the differences , e.g to many outsiders Germans and Brits might appear similar , but if you live in England and Germany , you will realize they are actually different worlds and cultural spheres. Saying that we obviously live in one world and people have infleunced each other and with the emergence of technology driven globalization , cultural differences are bridging up more like everyone plays xbox and eat fast food but still i never understand overemphasis of iran links to south asia compared to other coutries in middle east, also this is mostly an online phenomena, in real life people to people contact are negligible among these countries.

Coldmountains
08-17-2020, 08:41 AM
imo indo iranic links are mainly limited to east iranics(gedrosia/Gandhara) and indus valley people , still there are sufficient cultural differences between pak punjabis and pak pashtuns along with obvious similarities .You have to live in the region to understand the differences , e.g to many outsiders Germans and Brits might appear similar , but if you live in England and Germany , you will realize they are actually different worlds and cultural spheres. Saying that we obviously live in one world and people have infleunced each other and with the emergence of technology driven globalization , cultural differences are bridging up more like everyone plays xbox and eat fast food but still i never understand overemphasis of iran links to south asia compared to other coutries in middle east, also this is mostly and online phenomena, in real life people to people contact are negligible among these countries.

well i not claimed that Iran or even Afghanistan has today much if any direct South Asian influences (These influences faded away with the arrival of Islam). South Asia shows links today to Iran because of influences from the West and Persianiate dynasties expanding there in medieval times.

passion
08-17-2020, 08:46 AM
well i not claimed that Iran or even Afghanistan has today much if any direct South Asian influences (This influences faded away with the arrival of Islam). South Asia shows links today to Iran because of influences from the West and Persianiate dynasties expanding there in medieval times.

links between pashtun region of afghanistan and pakistan and indus valley region is pretty much a fact , but it is simply a function of geography, as these regions are right next to eaxh other .
iran i dont know,major population centers of iran are much closer to caucasus.

Coldmountains
08-17-2020, 08:53 AM
links between pashtun region of afghanistan and pakistan and indus valley region is pretty much a fact , but it is simply a function of geography, as these regions are right next to eaxh other .
iran i dont know,major population centers of iran are much closer to caucasus.

Genetically yes but culturally i don't see direct South Asian influences in core Pashtun regions of Afghanistan anymore. There is a dardic substrate in many regions but it not influenced Pashtun culture that much and is already outside of core Indo-Aryan civilization. Pashtuns for a long time lived in a pastoralist/rural zone peripheral to both Persian and Indo-Aryan civilization (Proto-Pashtuns unlikely were either Zoroastrian or Buddhist/Hinduist) so they were relatively late Islamized and also managed to preserve their non-Persian East Iranic language.

pegasus
08-17-2020, 09:50 AM
imo indo iranic links are mainly limited to east iranics(gedrosia/Gandhara) and indus valley people , still there are sufficient cultural differences between pak punjabis and pak pashtuns along with obvious similarities .You have to live in the region to understand the differences , e.g to many outsiders Germans and Brits might appear similar , but if you live in England and Germany , you will realize they are actually different worlds and cultural spheres. Saying that we obviously live in one world and people have infleunced each other and with the emergence of technology driven globalization , cultural differences are bridging up more like everyone plays xbox and eat fast food but still i never understand overemphasis of iran links to south asia compared to other coutries in middle east, also this is mostly and online phenomena, in real life people to people contact are negligible among these countries.

There have been ebb and flow of influences through out time, from a current time construct a lot of influence is now via religious movements in particular Dar Uloom/Deobands where Urdu is the medium , so knowing the language becomes imperative to be in the loop as these movements have become popular. In Afghan border regions many rural Pashtuns don't know Dari/Persian even and this is not including those who have returned from Pakistan after spending 20-30 years. Pashtun society is incredibly tribal at its core and its unique as well.

deuterium_1
08-17-2020, 04:01 PM
There have been ebb and flow of influences through out time, from a current time construct a lot of influence is now via religious movements in particular Dar Uloom/Deobands where Urdu is the medium , so knowing the language becomes imperative to be in the loop as these movements have become popular. In Afghan border regions many rural Pashtuns don't know Dari/Persian even and this is not including those who have returned from Pakistan after spending 20-30 years. Pashtun society is incredibly tribal at its core and its unique as well.

There has been a cultural flow between what is now Afghanistan and Pakistan even in recent times, look at the recent popularity of cricket in Afghanistan for example.

passion
08-17-2020, 04:41 PM
There has been a cultural flow between what is now Afghanistan and Pakistan even in recent times, look at the recent popularity of cricket in Afghanistan for example.

cricket is spread by pashtuns , pashtuns case is unique , pashtuns imo are closest to indus valley people if you include all the things including socioeconomics and geopolitics at the same time being sufficiently unique/distinct as well , even genetically they have same building blocks, but different proportion.
iran´s case is very different.

deuterium_1
08-17-2020, 05:44 PM
cricket is spread by pashtuns , pashtuns case is unique , pashtuns imo are closest to indus valley people if you include all the things including socioeconomics and geopolitics at the same time being sufficiently unique/distinct as well , even genetically they have same building blocks, but different proportion.
iran´s case is very different.

The Persian which influenced Hindi and Urdu was the Dari dialect, tbh I have found Dari to be fairly similar with Farsi. I thought that the distinction was artificial?.

Alain
08-17-2020, 05:51 PM
The Persian which influenced Hindi and Urdu was the Dari dialect, tbh I have found Dari to be fairly similar with Farsi. I thought that the distinction was artificial?.

My work colleague once explained to me that Dari and Farsi are comparable to Standard (High) German and Swiss German, for example, a dialect and you can communicate without any problems, in contrast to, for example, Sorani and Kurmanij linguists who have quite a few communication problems

deuterium_1
08-17-2020, 05:56 PM
My work colleague once explained to me that Dari and Farsi are comparable to Standard (High) German and Swiss German, for example, a dialect and you can communicate without any problems, in contrast to, for example, Sorani and Kurmanij linguists who have quite a few communication problems

I have had little problem using my Farsi to communicate with Dari speakers so it is definitely true.

Yes I have heard that about Kurdish dialects.

Rahuls77
08-17-2020, 06:11 PM
A rudimentary guess on may part.

While Pashtu has been largely influenced by farsi and arabic for the past several centuries, the roots of the language go back to a period long back, to the Khotanese Saka and it has some similarities to the Tocharian as well, which sounds, to me at least, a little like Russian(a Slavic language).

Dari was a growth of Persian, spoken in the courts, which probably reduced the stature of Pashto, which somehow never went out of speech.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=scIfaNtoMzA


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Du4QKwkGcE

Rahuls77
08-17-2020, 06:23 PM
Not sure if it is appropriate to call Avestan an Eastern Iranic language, for it is the oldest known and preserved(with literary works of its own) of the Iranic languages. But it is interesting again, for how it compares with the contemporary Iranian.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TnjSAPye6d8

And the Yazghulami, another surviving Eastern Iranic language.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkozCzLiDlM

Another would be language of the Yaghnobis. Pashto is derived from a source older than Farsi I think.

Xeon
08-17-2020, 07:54 PM
Of course people were persianized. This happened and is still very much happening in Iran and outside of Iran. For example much of Afghanistan and Tajikistan is today Persian-speaking and has a Persian culture. Modern day borders don't represent cultural or ethnic borders. There is no deep ethnic and cultural divide between Tajiks from Herat and Persians from Khorasan. Armenia and Georgia are not good examples because they were not Islamized in the first place and Persian culture/language spread often with Islam. In Central Asia urban regions became a centre of Persian culture so much that much of medieval Persian literature and culture got very important impulses from former non-Persian East Iranic regions.


Again, you're making broad statements without even acknowledging internal culture of the people's. Tajiks and afghan communities who speak Persian do indeed share massive cultural similarities but at it's core, they live their lives differently to that of Iranians from Tehran or Isfahan. They speak the same language, they share the same holidays and tradition, maybe even the food overlaps but how the society operates within each region is different.

Even in Iran, it's extremely sad to say but afghans are treated badly. Mostly because the ones who come to Iran are refugees or migrants looking for better opportunity. Iran itself is a shithole so I can't see why they would wanna do that in the first place. But because of obvious differences in the behavior/mentality of afghans and Iran, they are seen as outsiders. However, in the west, Persian speaking afghans seem no different. They are always within Iranian clusters.

Pashtun for example are very different from Iran. We never look at pashtun population of Afghanistan and think that we are close to them. They are very traditional and tribal. This type of culture is not exactly favored in Iran. Iranians themselves make fun of rural people for simply being rural. Kind of like how Americans make fun of their southern states.

And to address your other point, Armenia infact was a Zoroastrian practicing country prior to becoming an orthadox country. That's something that people forget. Armenia and Georgia were part of ancient, pre Islamic Iranian empires for literally a thousand years, in total. So many cultural influence took place during those times. But it never changed their internal culture. In fact, linguists once classified Armenian as an Iranian language because of how similar they were at one point, due to the heavy Iranian influence.

Xeon
08-17-2020, 08:00 PM
Not sure if it is appropriate to call Avestan an Eastern Iranic language, for it is the oldest known and preserved(with literary works of its own) of the Iranic languages. But it is interesting again, for how it compares with the contemporary Iranian.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TnjSAPye6d8

And the Yazghulami, another surviving Eastern Iranic language.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkozCzLiDlM

Another would be language of the Yaghnobis. Pashto is derived from a source older than Farsi I think.

Persian was derived from avestan which was an eastern Iranian language. Persian tribes migrated from central Asia, into central Iran. The language which they originally spoke was avestan. This eventually evolved to old Persian within modern day Iran.

Eastern Iranian languages pre date Persian since Persian itself was derived from eastern Iranian

Xeon
08-17-2020, 08:03 PM
My work colleague once explained to me that Dari and Farsi are comparable to Standard (High) German and Swiss German, for example, a dialect and you can communicate without any problems, in contrast to, for example, Sorani and Kurmanij linguists who have quite a few communication problems

The difference between dari and Farsi is the difference between american english and Australian English. I can fully understand a dari speaker, except that their version of Persian is much more formal and does not have the urbanized slang which Tehran dialect of farsi has

Persian itself varies between Iranian cities and provinces. A Persian speaker from Tehran might actually have trouble understanding a Persian speaker from Isfahan, central Persian province of Iran. Formality and accent of Persian varies amongst different provinces in Iran, let alone tajikistan or Afghanistan

Rahuls77
08-17-2020, 08:19 PM
The difference between dari and Farsi is the difference between american english and Australian English. I can fully understand a dari speaker, except that their version of Persian is much more formal and does not have the urbanized slang which Tehran dialect of farsi has

Persian itself varies between Iranian cities and provinces. A Persian speaker from Tehran might actually have trouble understanding a Persian speaker from Isfahan, central Persian province of Iran. Formality and accent of Persian varies amongst different provinces in Iran, let alone tajikistan or Afghanistan

Yes, farsi is derived from Avestan, however has over the past several centuries acquired borrowed a lot from Arabic and other neighboring languages, possibly even from older Semitic languages to the South and West of the historic Persia, that is the reason why it appears a little distant from Avestan, and similarly, Pashto is derived from another Iranic language, which would have been a cousin or in some manner related to the Avestan. Same is true of Pashtun genetics, it is composed of the Easterly influences, from the East Iranic populations, modern and historic, both.

StarDS9
08-17-2020, 08:27 PM
As a Kurd, I find some Persian speakers hard to pick up any words where as some I can easily pickup words.

It's sane with Kurdish languages, some I have difficulty understanding where as others I can pretty much understand everything.

Rahuls77
08-17-2020, 08:35 PM
Pashtun for example are very different from Iran. We never look at pashtun population of Afghanistan and think that we are close to them. They are very traditional and tribal. This type of culture is not exactly favored in Iran. Iranians themselves make fun of rural people for simply being rural. Kind of like how Americans make fun of their southern states.


Iran has had a rich urban civilisation, especially during the Islamic period. While in Afghanistan, it has been mostly the cities, which again had a Central Asian flavour, that was strongly influenced by its traditional tribal and rural culture. In fact starting in the 20th century, there was an attempt by some Afghans, such as Amanullah Khan and his coterie, to import a westernisation, the kind of which was also beginning to be seen in Iran and Turkey, however Iran and Turkey already had a strong urban base and as such receptive to the changes, while in Afghanistan, we all know how and where Amanullah Khan ended up.
However, following him, Nadir Shah, Dost Mohammed and then Daud Khan tried to negotiate with the rural or the traditional Afghan consensus, investing massively in modern education, the result of which was a section of the rural Afghans taking up communism and what followed that is quite well-known as well.
What rules Afghanistan, today and forever, is the rural bloc, highly religious and deeply suspicious of any outsiders.

Xeon
08-17-2020, 08:56 PM
As a Kurd, I find some Persian speakers hard to pick up any words where as some I can easily pickup words.

It's sane with Kurdish languages, some I have difficulty understanding where as others I can pretty much understand everything.

A persian speaking Lur will have an easier time understanding a kurd. Luri itself is derived from middle persian. it is one of the closest modern languages to old persian.
Lurs in iran, just like the kurds have always been very defensive and stubborn to change and influence. they retained their genetics and language to a high extent.
They seem to be the closest people to kurds infact. I am half Lur and on gedmatch, my first matches are always kurdish. even more so than some kurds themselves.

Xeon
08-17-2020, 09:10 PM
Iran has had a rich urban civilisation, especially during the Islamic period. While in Afghanistan, it has been mostly the cities, which again had a Central Asian flavour, that was strongly influenced by its traditional tribal and rural culture. In fact starting in the 20th century, there was an attempt by some Afghans, such as Amanullah Khan and his coterie, to import a westernisation, the kind of which was also beginning to be seen in Iran and Turkey, however Iran and Turkey already had a strong urban base and as such receptive to the changes, while in Afghanistan, we all know how and where Amanullah Khan ended up.
However, following him, Nadir Shah, Dost Mohammed and then Daud Khan tried to negotiate with the rural or the traditional Afghan consensus, investing massively in modern education, the result of which was a section of the rural Afghans taking up communism and what followed that is quite well-known as well.
What rules Afghanistan, today and forever, is the rural bloc, highly religious and deeply suspicious of any outsiders.

my point exactly. your last points clearly shows the distinction between Iran and Afghanistan which all Iranians are aware of.
Iran has been westernized in the past by Reza Shah and his son. they were irreligious and Eurocentric. they were very progressive and
dreamt of turning Iran into a European-like power. by European, I do not mean europeanizing Iranian culture since they were the epitome of
Iranian culture. they were in fact the first and last Iranian dynasties after the sassanids who associated with Persian culture rather than Islamic culture.
They wanted to heavily urbanize Iran and modernize Iran. Since at the time, the most successful, progressive and modern region
happened to be europe and it still is to this day. Reza shah was Iran's ataturk, they were very good friends and wanted to modernize both countries.
But Reza shahs reign was short lived and because of that he couldnt achieve his final goal. hes extremely admired as an Iranian hero by all Iranians, except for the minority of Islamists and regime supporters.
Mostly because Reza shah personally went after islamists and clerics. he alienated them as he saw islamic/arabic culture as backwards.
This man changed Iran for the good, he modernized a broken down country for the better of the people and it certainly has paid off.

Xeon
08-17-2020, 10:14 PM
Yes, farsi is derived from Avestan, however has over the past several centuries acquired borrowed a lot from Arabic and other neighboring languages, possibly even from older Semitic languages to the South and West of the historic Persia, that is the reason why it appears a little distant from Avestan, and similarly, Pashto is derived from another Iranic language, which would have been a cousin or in some manner related to the Avestan. Same is true of Pashtun genetics, it is composed of the Easterly influences, from the East Iranic populations, modern and historic, both.

that is very true, however, Iran still has access to middle persian. middle persian never died out in Iran. we call it Pahlavi. it was spoken during the Sassanid era. iranian linguists and academia have actually managed to revive middle persian.
this would mean that for every arabic loan word in persian, there is a persian equivalent. Many iranian academics have shown interests in completely cleaning out persian from arabic and other borrowed words. but as you can imagine,
this is not currently possible at the moment due to the regime which values arabic/islamic culture. it may become a possibility in the future as this regime is dying out.

deuterium_1
08-18-2020, 12:11 AM
Again, you're making broad statements without even acknowledging internal culture of the people's. Tajiks and afghan communities who speak Persian do indeed share massive cultural similarities but at it's core, they live their lives differently to that of Iranians from Tehran or Isfahan. They speak the same language, they share the same holidays and tradition, maybe even the food overlaps but how the society operates within each region is different.

Even in Iran, it's extremely sad to say but afghans are treated badly. Mostly because the ones who come to Iran are refugees or migrants looking for better opportunity. Iran itself is a shithole so I can't see why they would wanna do that in the first place. But because of obvious differences in the behavior/mentality of afghans and Iran, they are seen as outsiders. However, in the west, Persian speaking afghans seem no different. They are always within Iranian clusters.

Pashtun for example are very different from Iran. We never look at pashtun population of Afghanistan and think that we are close to them. They are very traditional and tribal. This type of culture is not exactly favored in Iran. Iranians themselves make fun of rural people for simply being rural. Kind of like how Americans make fun of their southern states.

And to address your other point, Armenia infact was a Zoroastrian practicing country prior to becoming an orthadox country. That's something that people forget. Armenia and Georgia were part of ancient, pre Islamic Iranian empires for literally a thousand years, in total. So many cultural influence took place during those times. But it never changed their internal culture. In fact, linguists once classified Armenian as an Iranian language because of how similar they were at one point, due to the heavy Iranian influence.

In the context of Afghanistan and Central Asia durning the Islamic period, Persian/Dari supplanted other Iranian languages such as Soghdian, Bactrian, Khotanese and Khwarezmian.

Yaghnobi is the last remnant of Soghdian.

pegasus
08-18-2020, 01:23 AM
There has been a cultural flow between what is now Afghanistan and Pakistan even in recent times, look at the recent popularity of cricket in Afghanistan for example.

Cricket is very popular among Afghan Pashtuns, not other Afghans (Tajiks, Hazaras) , they are into football. This game was introduced to them via their Pashtun brethren in Pakistan. Passion stated it best because of where they are situated by osmosis they will get influenced because they are tied culturally and esp socioeconomically to their brethren across the border. A lot of colonial influences via Pakistan are relatively recent , ie more English nouns entering Pashto as well English becoming more ubiquitous in schools which was not the case prior to the 90s. Some influences are clearly very archaic esp in terms of diet. Dishes like Dandakai,Shola, are aerial and are very similar to Mung bean "Kitchree", I would imagine these dishes date from the IVC because of their lack of modern ingredients and how rustic and ubiquitous they still remain. Since your on topic of games/sports, only one game is insanely ubiquitous to the point of near addiction and that would be Ludo.

Xeon
08-18-2020, 02:29 AM
In the context of Afghanistan and Central Asia durning the Islamic period, Persian/Dari supplanted other Iranian languages such as Soghdian, Bactrian, Khotanese and Khwarezmian.

Yaghnobi is the last remnant of Soghdian.

I'm aware of that and that's something I find upsetting considering the history behind eastern Iranian languages. They are as closest as you can get to what the proto Indo Iranians spoke. And to see them replaced like that is upsetting. It is what it is I guess. Even ossetian is on the verge of death, not even ossetians themselves speak it anymore, except for a minority. it has been replaced by Russian. Just like how central asian iranic languages were replaced by Persian. History repeats itself.

This is the result of nomadic culture conquered by much stronger empires. Most of the eastern Iranian languages died out because they did not have the cultural nor societal strength to keep them alive. It's sad for sure

deuterium_1
08-18-2020, 07:11 AM
Cricket is very popular among Afghan Pashtuns, not other Afghans (Tajiks, Hazaras) , they are into football. This game was introduced to them via their Pashtun brethren in Pakistan. Passion stated it best because of where they are situated by osmosis they will get influenced because they are tied culturally and esp socioeconomically to their brethren across the border. A lot of colonial influences via Pakistan are relatively recent , ie more English nouns entering Pashto as well English becoming more ubiquitous in schools which was not the case prior to the 90s. Some influences are clearly very archaic esp in terms of diet. Dishes like Dandakai,Shola, are aerial and are very similar to Mung bean "Kitchree", I would imagine these dishes date from the IVC because of their lack of modern ingredients and how rustic and ubiquitous they still remain. Since your on topic of games/sports, only one game is insanely ubiquitous to the point of near addiction and that would be Ludo.

To many Pashtuns, the Durand line is artificial anyway.

Even curry/korma reportedly has its roots in the Indus Valley Civilisation lol:

https://slate.com/human-interest/2013/01/indus-civilization-food-how-scientists-are-figuring-out-what-curry-was-like-4500-years-ago.html


I'm aware of that and that's something I find upsetting considering the history behind eastern Iranian languages. They are as closest as you can get to what the proto Indo Iranians spoke. And to see them replaced like that is upsetting. It is what it is I guess. Even ossetian is on the verge of death, not even ossetians themselves speak it anymore, except for a minority. it has been replaced by Russian. Just like how central asian iranic languages were replaced by Persian. History repeats itself.

This is the result of nomadic culture conquered by much stronger empires. Most of the eastern Iranian languages died out because they did not have the cultural nor societal strength to keep them alive. It's sad for sure


Yaghnobi is facing a similar fate sadly.

Alain
08-18-2020, 08:05 AM
To many Pashtuns, the Durand line is artificial anyway.

Even curry/korma reportedly has its roots in the Indus Valley Civilisation lol:

https://slate.com/human-interest/2013/01/indus-civilization-food-how-scientists-are-figuring-out-what-curry-was-like-4500-years-ago.html




Yaghnobi is facing a similar fate sadly.

My favorite spice is "turmeric", which of course also occurs in curry, preferably braised turmeric with chicken legs with onions and carrots and served with basmati rice and the seared fat over the rice plus a salad of your choice and yogurt-mint sauce��

Rahuls77
08-18-2020, 09:06 AM
To many Pashtuns, the Durand line is artificial anyway.

Even curry/korma reportedly has its roots in the Indus Valley Civilisation lol:

https://slate.com/human-interest/2013/01/indus-civilization-food-how-scientists-are-figuring-out-what-curry-was-like-4500-years-ago.html



What we call the Korma could have been derived from Ghormeh Sabzi, only in name, but the recipe was completely South Asian. In fact the so-called Mughlai or Awadhi food is comparatively quite spicier and uses a lot of oil in its preparation compared to Persian or the Central Asian cuisine.

Alain
08-18-2020, 09:30 AM
What we call the Korma could have been derived from Ghormeh Sabzi, only in name, but the recipe was completely South Asian. In fact the so-called Mughlai or Awadhi food is comparatively quite spicier and uses a lot of oil in its preparation compared to Persian or the Central Asian cuisine.

Yes, that's right, once had an Iranian girlfriend and she doesn't want spicy like me, the Persian cuisine is rather sour. Mild, for example, Shirin Polo and she always gave me jalapeños and ayran / dogh / lassi to drink, it's my favorite drink and im Summer top, can drink it in large quantities without any problem. Those who really eat spicy food have to deal with Indian and Thai cuisine, Chicken tikka masala also great but here you can also see British influences

Xeon
08-18-2020, 09:45 AM
Yes, that's right, once had an Iranian girlfriend and she doesn't want spicy like me, the Persian cuisine is rather sour. Mild, for example, Shirin Polo and she always gave me jalapeños and ayran / dogh / lassi to drink, it's my favorite drink and im Summer top, can drink it in large quantities without any problem. Those who really eat spicy food have to deal with Indian and Thai cuisine, Chicken tikka masala also great but here you can also see British influences

That's an excellent observation and very much describes Iranian cuisine as a whole. Iranian cuisine doesnt use many spices, I can really think of 2-3 that are used in all Iranian dishes, in some there are none, zafron is the main spice used in most dishes. It doesn't have the spice-rich aspect compared to other cuisines from the area and as well as south Asia. For example, even the most basic Indian dishes are extreme to me. We don't eat spicy food but rather we prefer sourness. It's odd

pegasus
08-18-2020, 01:54 PM
What we call the Korma could have been derived from Ghormeh Sabzi, only in name, but the recipe was completely South Asian. In fact the so-called Mughlai or Awadhi food is comparatively quite spicier and uses a lot of oil in its preparation compared to Persian or the Central Asian cuisine.

Ghorme Sabzi is not popular in Central Asian or Afghan cooking at all, its a very Iranian dish, there are other Kormas , Kachaloo and Morg. Iranians also don't use the word Korma they use Khoresht. There are many dishes which are similar , but Iranian food is definitely blander as their spice palette is mainly just turmeric, black pepper, saffron. There are spice mixes like Advieh but that too is quite mild. Central Asian spice palette is more Cardamom-clove heavy. There is a load of common dishes with but they are often rendered and spiced a bit differently. Dishes like Korma , Do Piaza are rendered in a similar way but frying cumin in oil and adding chili powder are completely left out. Though some do eat a raw green chili on the side.

Rahuls77
08-18-2020, 02:29 PM
Ghorme Sabzi is not popular in Central Asian or Afghan cooking at all, its a very Iranian dish, there are other Kormas , Kachaloo and Morg. Iranians also don't use the word Korma they use Khoresht. There are many dishes which are similar , but Iranian food is definitely blander as their spice palette is mainly just turmeric, black pepper, saffron. There are spice mixes like Advieh but that too is quite mild. Central Asian spice palette is more Cardamom-clove heavy. There is a load of common dishes with but they are often rendered and spiced a bit differently. Dishes like Korma , Do Piaza are rendered in a similar way but frying cumin in oil and adding chili powder are completely left out. Though some do eat a raw green chili on the side.

I know about Ghormeh Sabzi, that its Iranian, however with some of the South Asians keen to stay loyal to 'their Persian Shorafa' roots, they try to claim all sorts of things and tend to claim their families eat 'Farsi khana' at home, while they cannot savor the bland Persian fare, for their palates are used to with the desi mughlai and awadhi spicy food.

And even Chilli is actually alien to Asia, it was an import from the Americas, South Asians would use black pepper in the past. And the Pashtuns as well. In fact the spicy food we now get in South Asia, with red chilli powder has completely changed the taste of the spices that were used two centuries ago.

parasar
08-18-2020, 04:01 PM
I know about Ghormeh Sabzi, that its Iranian, however with some of the South Asians keen to stay loyal to 'their Persian Shorafa' roots, they try to claim all sorts of things and tend to claim their families eat 'Farsi khana' at home, while they cannot savor the bland Persian fare, for their palates are used to with the desi mughlai and awadhi spicy food.

And even Chilli is actually alien to Asia, it was an import from the Americas, South Asians would use black pepper in the past. And the Pashtuns as well. In fact the spicy food we now get in South Asia, with red chilli powder has completely changed the taste of the spices that were used two centuries ago.

In our area we used to use magadhi or long pepper. And later the chilis belonging to the capsicum family were introduced from the Americas.

"Long pepper, the botanical name is Piper Longum. In India it has multiple names, often called Pipli / Pippali / Peepal in Hindi and other native languages. The Sanskrit names are Pippali, Vaidahi or Magadhi."
https://naturalherbssite.wordpress.com/2017/05/12/piper-longum-long-pepper-pipli-pippali/

Alain
08-18-2020, 04:02 PM
Yes, that's true with the chilli it came from the New World just like the tomato and the Portuguese and British brought it to the subcontinent and there it is very popular and the Naga people grow one of the hottest types of chilli, before it was pepper or Szechuan Pepper but pure ginger is also hot or garlic, but there is also a milder variant of garlic that Iranians put in water. Without this global spice trade one would not know many things, just like eggplant, cucumber, pepper, turmeric ... Much comes from the subcontinent and is very popular in Europe today.

jesus
08-18-2020, 04:43 PM
my point exactly. your last points clearly shows the distinction between Iran and Afghanistan which all Iranians are aware of.
Iran has been westernized in the past by Reza Shah and his son. they were irreligious and Eurocentric. they were very progressive and
dreamt of turning Iran into a European-like power. by European, I do not mean europeanizing Iranian culture since they were the epitome of
Iranian culture. they were in fact the first and last Iranian dynasties after the sassanids who associated with Persian culture rather than Islamic culture.

Then how did Persian culture thrive and expand during that era? The Seljuqs did much more to Persian culture than your beloved Phalavis.

parasar
08-18-2020, 05:05 PM
Then how did Persian culture thrive and expand during that era? The Seljuqs did much more to Persian culture than your beloved Phalavis.

I believe the Pahlav is same as the Prakrit word Bahl (Sanskrit Bahlika) for Bactria/Bakhdi. It is thought to originally derive from Parth/Parthav with the rt becoming l and and l and h interchanging, though I am not certain about that.

Xeon
08-18-2020, 07:55 PM
I believe the Pahlav is same as the Prakrit word Bahl (Sanskrit Bahlika) for Bactria/Bakhdi. It is thought to originally derive from Parth/Parthav with the rt becoming l and and l and h interchanging, though I am not certain about that.

Pahlavi comes from the parthians. It doesn't go that deep

Halgurd
08-18-2020, 08:22 PM
Wait what? The seljuks were oghuz Turks. Sunni Muslims too I might add.

During the era of Seljuks most of the population of Iran was Sunni.

Alain
08-18-2020, 08:29 PM
Yes, that's true the Safavids consolidated the Shiite faith in Iran

Xeon
08-18-2020, 09:04 PM
During the era of Seljuks most of the population of Iran was Sunni.

Yes but how does that equate to Iranian culture? Sunni Muslim culture is far from it. Like I stated before, Iranian culture is almost entirely based on Zoroastrianism. Art, tradition, holidays, mythology, behavior and mentality was all based on Zoroastrianism teaching. Iranians became Muslim by name while following their older Zoroastrian based culture

Scarlet Ibis
08-19-2020, 07:13 AM
The thread is temporarily locked.

Scarlet Ibis
08-19-2020, 07:58 AM
The thread is back open.

However, please review the ToS. Anthrogenica is not a political or religious forum. As everyone in this thread has been warned and put on notice now, there will be no other warnings after this one. Thanks

kyp.snow
08-19-2020, 08:20 AM
Does "Persian" from a genetic point of view even exist? If so who are they?
Aren't a huge percentage of Persians in fact just Kurdish/Lur like tribes settled and speaking Persian?

Which people/Region would be closest to be actually Persian? Yazd/Kerman? I also read that Fars region would be best representative. But aren't they too Western-shifted?

kyp.snow
08-19-2020, 11:02 AM
Thats normal. Native speakers of geographically far widespread and dominant languages are usually genetically diverse.

Example Azeris(or Turks) of Iran are usually closer to their Iranian neighbours than Anatolian Turks. Anatolian Turks themselves are genetically diverse like Trabzon vs Aydin.

With persian, New persian did not only replace east iranic languages in early islamic ages but also a lot of middle iranian languages in Iran (of most were NW iranian languages - and those were probably influenced by middle persian anyway).
Before that Persian was more like lingua franco in those regions.

I think by kurdish/lur like tribes you mean nomadic tribes. ancient persians and other ancient iranics themselves were nomads from south central asia and mixed with the local population in Iran around 1000 BC. Similar to turkic waves to Anatolia, Azerbaijan and Iran.

Do you agree on that Yazd etc. would be closer to these Iranic Nomads genetically than Western Iranians? Probably because of less dense population in that region.

deuterium_1
08-19-2020, 12:14 PM
Parsig is an attempt to revive Middle Persian in modern times:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-6KEqPcwC-E

NK19191
08-19-2020, 09:26 PM
During the era of Seljuks most of the population of Iran was Sunni.

Iranians were predominately Hanafi Islam before the Safavids. This is what historian Bernard Lewis and others refer to as Islam Ajam or Iranian interpretation of Islam. This is the version of Sunni Islam that embraced by the Turks of Central Asia and South Asians.


"Iran was indeed Islamized, but it was not Arabized. Persians remained Persians. And after an interval of silence, Iran reemerged as a separate, different and distinctive element within Islam, eventually adding a new element even to Islam itself. Culturally, politically, and most remarkable of all even religiously, the Iranian contribution to this new Islamic civilization is of immense importance. The work of Iranians can be seen in every field of cultural endeavor, including Arabic poetry, to which poets of Iranian origin composing their poems in Arabic made a very significant contribution. In a sense, Iranian Islam is a second advent of Islam itself, a new Islam sometimes referred to as Islam-i Ajam. It was this Persian Islam, rather than the original Arab Islam, that was brought to new areas and new peoples: to the Turks, first in Central Asia and then in the Middle East in the country which came to be called Turkey, and of course to India. The Ottoman Turks brought a form of Iranian civilization to the walls of Vienna."

NK19191
08-19-2020, 09:27 PM
Parsig is an attempt to revive Middle Persian in modern times:



this is of no significance. I am not sure what the purpose of this post is. I mean what is the purpose of reviving a dead language .

NK19191
08-19-2020, 09:30 PM
Yes but how does that equate to Iranian culture? Sunni Muslim culture is far from it. Like I stated before, Iranian culture is almost entirely based on Zoroastrianism. Art, tradition, holidays, mythology, behavior and mentality was all based on Zoroastrianism teaching. Iranians became Muslim by name while following their older Zoroastrian based culture

NO true at all. Islamic Golden age occurred mostly in the Iranian world. I am not sure what you are trying to say.

Also, the Seljuk period was culturally superior to anything Iranians have done since the downfall of the Safavids.

Surely the Pahlavi period and Islamic republic period are more similar to the Qajarid period than anything else.


During the Seljuk period, Iran was home to Nizamieh education centers some of the most advanced educational centers in the world at the time.

NK19191
08-19-2020, 09:34 PM
Persian itself varies between Iranian cities and provinces. A Persian speaker from Tehran might actually have trouble understanding a Persian speaker from Isfahan, central Persian province of Iran. Formality and accent of Persian varies amongst different provinces in Iran, let alone tajikistan or Afghanistan

The Tehrani accent is pretty much the accent you hear among the urbanized Iranians no matter where you are. Especially among the younger Iranians. From Tabriz to Bandar Abbas from Mashhad to Ahwaz.

Among Afghans in Kabul due to the return of some Afghan immigrants from Iran and Iranian TV. Kabuli accent is also having some Iranian influence. Afghans have a myriad of accents.

NK19191
08-19-2020, 09:49 PM
Iran has had a rich urban civilisation, especially during the Islamic period. While in Afghanistan, it has been mostly the cities, which again had a Central Asian flavour, that was strongly influenced by its traditional tribal and rural culture. In fact starting in the 20th century, there was an attempt by some Afghans, such as Amanullah Khan and his coterie, to import a westernisation, the kind of which was also beginning to be seen in Iran and Turkey, however Iran and Turkey already had a strong urban base and as such receptive to the changes, while in Afghanistan, we all know how and where Amanullah Khan ended up.
However, following him, Nadir Shah, Dost Mohammed and then Daud Khan tried to negotiate with the rural or the traditional Afghan consensus, investing massively in modern education, the result of which was a section of the rural Afghans taking up communism and what followed that is quite well-known as well.
What rules Afghanistan, today and forever, is the rural bloc, highly religious and deeply suspicious of any outsiders.

The current country of Afghanistan is only 250 years old, since the rise of the Durranis which gave rise to the Pashtun national consciousness

When the silk road was the primary route that connected Eastern Eurasia with Western Eurasia. much of Afghanistan was part of the Greater Khorasan region.

Rahuls77
08-19-2020, 10:09 PM
The current country of Afghanistan is only 250 years old, since the rise of the Durranis which gave rise to the Pashtun national consciousness

When the silk road was the primary route that connected Eastern Eurasia with Western Eurasia. much of Afghanistan was part of the Greater Khorasan region.

Khorasan was Iranic and urban, for most part. While the Pashtun ethnogenesis has roots in a tribal milieu, at least in how it expanded and grew, however the urban Afghanistan had forever remained Khorasan-like, in its culture and nature, which isn't the same as Iranian but close enough. The end of Khorasam came with the Mongols, however growth of the Pashtun was not always antagonistic to whatever was left of Khorasan, as the Turko-Mongols as well as the Pashtuns in the cities were somewhat absorbed into the urban life and there was some kind of harmony and peace between the two. The urban and tribal-rural friction, did not start until the late 17th and early 18th Centuries. And it was mostly because of religious reasons. At least that is what I understand.

NK19191
08-19-2020, 10:33 PM
they were in fact the first and last Iranian dynasties after the sassanids who associated with Persian culture rather than Islamic culture.


can you please back this up with references? I mean this is first I have heard such a thing.

NK19191
08-19-2020, 10:37 PM
Khorasan was Iranic and urban, for most part. While the Pashtun ethnogenesis has roots in a tribal milieu, at least in how it expanded and grew, however the urban Afghanistan had forever remained Khorasan-like, in its culture and nature, which isn't the same as Iranian but close enough. The end of Khorasam came with the Mongols, however growth of the Pashtun was not always antagonistic to whatever was left of Khorasan, as the Turko-Mongols as well as the Pashtuns in the cities were somewhat absorbed into the urban life and there was some kind of harmony and peace between the two. The urban and tribal-rural friction, did not start until the late 17th and early 18th Centuries. And it was mostly because of religious reasons. At least that is what I understand.

Urbanized cities are where high culture and civilizations have been created. Even In the western part of Iranian plateau Kurdish, Luri tribes were historically the defender of Iran and most of the armies in Iran included large number of them where larger urban centers like Shiraz, Isfahan, Hamadan, Tabriz etc were centers of the Iranian civilization.

Scarlet Ibis
08-20-2020, 02:52 AM
This thread is closed again. As I said, no other warnings will be issued. Thanks