Posted on 07/17/2004 7:07:03 PM PDT by SunkenCiv
Researchers may be able to make more accurate reconstructions of what ancient humans looked like with the first ever use of ancient DNA to determine hair and skin colour from skeletal remains.... German anthropologist, Dr Diane Schmidt of the University of Göttingen... said her research may also help to identify modern day murderers and their victims... In research for her recently completed PhD, Schmidt built on research from the fields of dermatology and skin cancer that have found genetic markers for traits such as skin and hair colour in modern humans... She extracted DNA from ancient human bones as old as 3000 years old from three different locations in Germany and looked for these SNPs. Her findings suggest that red hair and fair skin was very uncommon among ancient Germans. Out of a total of 26 people analysed, Schmidt found only one person with red hair and fair skin, a man from the Middle Ages. All the other people had more UV-tolerant skin that tans easily.
(Excerpt) Read more at abc.net.au ...
If you want to measure it that way there are also light skinned and very blonde haired blue eyed Arabs. What does that mean? Amongst middle eastern cultures (and yes that includes persians) this gene is not naturally forestalled in them. This gene comes from an outside source. They conquered and spread their Aryan gene thus suggesting that they had also an Aryan branch. Same with India, if you go to the city of Yore, they are all blonde haired blue eyed Indians and further up north is also the same. However, that is a mix. The original native Indians of that region are dark but they have an Aryan branch within them because around the 1200 B.C. the Aryan movement began and they also were introduced and conquered by Aryans whom scientists say "their source of hailing is" between the Black Sea and Caspian Sea.
There is no real actual proof of that though. This is just a hypothesis. Berbers have nothing to do with the Vikings (whom were all Scandinavians) that came from up North of Europe. Technically, the Aryans somewhat are distant family members of each other but still. That is not entirely the same.
These nomadic tribes 1) mongols from central Asia and 2) Vikings from Europe, they have some commonality but they are of a different genealogy.
But that is the thing that my curiousity drives me to all of a sudden ask: What does that phrase you just said really mean? That Germans are middle eastern? Meaning an Arab or a Persian or a Jew is the same as a German? If so, why is it not classified really as that?
The only way a White group (such as the French in this case whom are Anglos) have that "dark" gene is because of the Arabs they came in contact with. It works as follows:
One of your "dad's side" probably had an outsider's blood in them from 800 years ago. French and Italians whom already 700 years ago were pillaged by the Moors (dark people) from Northern Africa, had already spread the gene and possibly that was the case. The Roman whom the French were at war with one of them already carried the gene and they had contact and suddenly the "dark" gene is transfered also across the French now.
The Origins of Aryan People
By: M. Sadeq Nazmi-Afshar
http://www.iranchamber.com/history/articles/aryan_people_origins.php
I am Dariush, the great king, the king of kings
The king of many countries and many peoples
The king of this expansive land,
The son of Wishtaspa of Achaemenid,
Persian, the son of a Persian,
'Aryan', from the Aryan race
"From the Darius the Great's Inscription in Naqshe-e-Rostam"
he above scripture is one of most valid written evidences of the history of the Aryan race, and as can be seen, Darius I (Dariush in persian), the Achaemenian king, in the 5th century BCE, declares himself a Persian and form the Aryan race. Herodotus, the father of history, writes (in his book: "History of Herodotus") at the same times: "In ancient times, the Greeks called Iranians "Kaffe", but they were renowned as Aryans among themselves and their neighbors". In another part of his book, Herodotus writes that the Medians were known as Aryans during a certain period. So in two of the oldest written human documents, the race of the Iranians have been mentioned as Aryan.
On the other hand, in many contemporary books, one reads that the Aryans were not original residents of the land of Iran, and that they migrated to Iran from Central Asia or somewhere in the north of Europe. The point is that if some of the oldest written records of the human history confirm that the residents of the Iranian Plateau were Aryans, why should some claim otherwise?
We will discuss the origins of the Iranian race, and we will try to shed light on some unknown corners of history, which has been mixed with ignorance and lies.
We want to extract the facts out of centuries and millennia and out of paleontological studies, old and new, to prove that Iran is the original land of the Aryan race, that this people has never migrated to any other land, and it has defended its homelands for centuries on end.
There are all numerous reasons that the Aryan race has undergone its evolution from the primitive man to the white man in the Iranian Plateau. These reasons can be categorized as historical, geographical, mythological, anthropological and linguistically.
Against the reasons we will discuss, no valid evidence has been produced to prove that the Aryans migrated from Central Asia or any other place to Iran. What European historians have written in this regard is based on unscientific and unproven hypotheses influenced by anti-Iranian and political ideas.
The reason for the migration of Aryans from Iran to other places of the world should be searched in climatic events. At the end of Ice Age, as a result of excessive rainfall on the Alborz and Zagros Mountains and the melting of the ice accumulated on the mountains, the rivers flowing through the Iranian Plateau were much larger than they are today. Therefore there was a large lake in the place where to day is the Central Desert. One of the most interesting mythological texts says in this regard:
"...In the second phase of the creation of the world, Ahura Mazda created the waters, and the waters flowed towards Farakhekrat Sea which covers one third of the world from the southern outskirts of Alborz." With the continuous warming of the earth and the decrease in rainfall, this lake gradually dried up and the peoples living around it, who had a common language and Aryan culture, was forced to migrate from Iran. The routes of this great migration are an evidence for the central position of Iran, for the Aryan peoples have set Iran as the center and set out on migration in any direction.
As a matter of fact, many Western historians have declined to accept the politicized version of history, admitting that Iran was the origin of the Aryan race.
Hegel writes in his book The Philosophy of history: "The principle of evolution begins with the history of Iran". Another prominent orientologist says that: A large part of our cultural and material legacy was unveiled in southwestern Asia the center of which was Iran." Petri, in a famous speech, said that "When Egypt had only just begun the art of pottery, the people of Susa (in Iran) were painting beautiful pictures on ceramics." this shows that the Iranian civilization was 3,000 years ahead of that of Egypt, dating back at least to 12,000 years ago. In other words, when Central Asia was totally buried under thick layers of ice, Iranians were creating pictures on earthenware, which indicates their art and creativity.
Considering the existence of this 12,000 years-old civilization in Iran, would it not be unlikely that 6,000 years ago, a group of people spontaneously crossed the ice covered Siberian lands, suddenly wiping such a civilization off the earth. The word Aryan has roots in world that Iranians called themselves by Ayria, meaning free, noble and steady. The world Iran is derived from this very root, having been transformed from to Ayran Iran, meaning the land of the Aryans. This is the most ancient term applied to the Iranian Plateau, and such a term has never been detected anywhere else in the world, e.g. Europe or Turkistan.
The myth of Aryan's migration to Iran implies that a people have come to Iran from a remote land, giving their name to an already inhabited land which had no name, and that no trace of their name has been remained in their name has been remained in their original homeland. In historical records, Central Asia has been mentioned as the land of Sakas, Masagets, Touran, Soghd, Kharazm, Khiveh, and Turkistan, none of which words has any relation to the word Aryan.
Paleontology is one of the sciences that confirm the formation of the white race in Ian. The Homo sapiens evolved from its Neanderthal ancestors in a 30,000- year process between 50,000 to 20,000 years ago. In the Hutu and Kamarband caves near Behshahr, Iran, bones of men from different historical periods have been found, showing that a kind of human race has continuously dwelled in this area and evolved, meaning that there has been no migration.
In Babylonian and Assyrian sources, one of the largest ancient Iranian tribes has been mentioned as Kas Su, Kassi and Kashi, which in ancient languages and also in the modern language of the people of Gilan means fair-eyed and fair-faced. The name of central city of Kashan (Kassan) is a relic of this ancient Aryan tribe. Many relics of the Kassi tribe has also been found in the Khorramabad region, including paintings in the cave of Dusheh which date back to 15,000 BC. In these paintings, people can be seen riding horses. This is a very valid evidence against the erroneous theories which say that the Aryans brought the horse form Central Asia to Iran around 4,000 BC. Like its ancient riders, the horse is indigenous to Iran since at least 17,000 years ago.
Geology and meteorology confirm the evolution of man in the Iranian Plateau. The supporters of the theory of the migration of the Aryans from the north to Iran assume that with the fall in the temperature during the ice age, men were forced to migrate from the north (Central Asia) to the south (Iran). But the homo race was formed at the end of the third ice age, i.e. when the weather was gradually warming from the south to the north. Therefore, it would have been natural for people to migrate from south to north, and not the other way round. In fact, Central Asia was not habitable for men for thousands of years after the ice age, it only became so in the historic age as a result of the melting and receding of the arctic ice cap. Later groups of Iranians and Chinese migrated to these areas and formed the Turk race through cross breeding. The Indians are a hybrid of early Dravidians and the white Iranian race, a fact, which is evident from their dark skin.
So why have some European historians said that the origin of the Iranians is Central Asia? Because in 1833, an Oxford University professor used the term Aryan to describe a group of languages with common origins. Although he later admitted that parts of his theory were erroneous, the theory of an Aryan race was used by a group of romanticist writers and western historians in quest for an ancient identity.
The Germans, eyeing vast expanses of land in Central Asia, called themselves Aryans and cried for a return to the homeland. They used the Swastika, which, as a "wheel of Mithra (Sun/Fire)" used to be the arm of the Iranians since ancient times, as a Nazi symbol, to have an alibi to invade Russia.
The French, British, Russians and recently Americans found different reasons to call themselves Aryans
I'm sorry to inform you, but the very fact you compare Jews-Arabs both Semites with Iranians who are indo-europeans proves how ignorant you're on the subject.
I posted an informative post.. hopefully you'll do some more research.
First of all Freedom, you are telling me this because?I am from the region and I would know this more accurately. Darius is OF ARMENIAN ORIGIN as was Cyrus. They are not Persians, first off. Persians had an Aryan settlement.
What?! You just proved that thinking is not your strong point. I did not COMPARE them at all. I said if you were to MEASURE IT THAT WAY as you suggested earlier then that means there are Jewish and Arab nations who have blonde-hair and blue-green eyes. You just need to read more carefully. I am from the region of Iran and you are telling me?
You are going about looking at this way too distant and the wrong way. The Iranian plateu today was not always theirs. 50% of their territory was conquered and it just remained. Northern Iran was once where ancient Armenia used to be. During the 500s B.C. they invaded that region and took that piece of land. Meaning all of their dynasties of Kings are of Armenian origin. It is sort of like how the Romans used some Germans to "romanize" them for the purpose of preserving their empire. All that article says is one of the THEORIES that scientists are skeptical about and it is skewed as it states it.
There is no such things as "iranians" Iraq Iran India Pakistan and Afghanistan all of which are located in Asia are just terms that derive from the word ARYAN. The people are PERSIANS and Persia was later as I said earlier, changed to "Iran" in 1960. Go check your history, I have done numerous amounts of research upon Aryan peoples and history. Persians do not get on the map till 500 B.C. They come from their relatives the Medes. Because around the years 1000 and 2000 B.C. there was no "Persia" or even "iran" for that matter. That region was consisting of mainly:
Bactria
Parthia
Gedrosia
Media
Persia comes later on after the last empire falls aka the Babylonian empire.
For YEARS (and your article you posted is not accurate or updated) scientists have coincidentally mixed up and confused Armenian as another dialect of "farsi" and basically the Persians for years have taken credit for that. But if you were to trace all of their history and affinities you will clearly see that that is not the case. Historians and linguists are basically comprehending the issues more better now and realize that the source of Aryans do not come from Iran and people should get over that myth. They come from the region between the Caspian Sea and the Black Sea. The Persians just got a SETTLEMENT there as did the Afghans and Pakis as did the Indians. My point is that just because they have a similar linguistic root does not mean that they are the "same as Germans" who come from a totally different region and root.
" Later groups of Iranians and Chinese migrated to these areas and formed the Turk race through cross breeding. The Indians are a hybrid of early Dravidians and the white Iranian race, a fact, which is evident from their dark skin."
So TURKS whom are of a totally Altaic Asian non-aryan non-semitic breed, are a formation of Persians? HAHAHA
Dravidians were ONE GROUP of Aryans that came from the region between the Black Sea and Caspian Sea. They migrated TO Iran then TO India. All I am saying is that your fallacy of that as flattering as it may be is not factual. Iran India Afghanistan Pakistan Iraq= derivatives of the word "Aryan" and these regions all had SETTLEMENTS of Aryan tribes who brought that blonde hair and blue eyed gene to them. It is a mixture. If you see any Persian Afghan Paki or Indian with that feature, it is evident that they have the Aryan gene still left in them. But my overally thesis is that these people have this gene because of a contact they had in 1200 B.C. with an outside source, thus giving them an Aryan branch.
As much as you like it to be and I hate to burst your bubble but the most basic division of the Indian society is of Aryans and Dravidians. According to this division, nearly 72% of Indians are Aryans and 28% are Dravidians. The north Indians are the descendants of Aryans and the south Indians are Dravidians. The languages spoken in five states of south India are considered Dravidian languages and most of the languages spoken in the north are considered Aryan languages. The general script of the Aryan languages is different from the general script of Dravidian languages. The Indians also distinguish themselves by the general north Indian accent and general south Indian accent.
According to general Indian legend, the Aryans arrived in north India somewhere from Armenia to Iran and southern Russia at around 1500 BC. Before the Aryans, the Dravidian people resided in India. The Aryans disregarded the local cultures. They began conquering and taking control over regions in north India and at the same time pushed the local people southwards or towards the jungles and mountains in north India. According to this historical fact the general division of Indian society is made. North Indians are Aryans and south Indians are Dravidians. But this division isn’t proper because of many reasons.
Many Indians immigrated from one part of India to other parts of India and not all local people of north India were pushed southwards by the Aryans. Some stayed and served the Aryans and others moved to live in the forests and the jungles of north India. Before the arrival of the Aryans there were also other communities in India like Sino-Mongoloids and Austroloids. There were also other foreign immigrations and invaders who arrived in India, from time to time.
There are many that completely doubt that there was ever any Aryan invasion in India. This skepticism is based on the dating of the Aryan invasion of India and the fact that Hinduism and the caste system are believed to have been established as the result of the meetings between the intruding Aryans and original residents of India, the Dravidians.
The Aryans came as conquerors, displacing earlier peoples, in most of the places where the languages were spoken. They were able to conquer so much territory because their nomadic lifestyle, their use of the horse and wheeled vehicles such as chariots gave them a decisive military advantage. However, it is difficult to tell what language people spoke from pre-literate artifacts; where conquest has occurred, it may have been one group of Indo-Europeans by another. There are many that completely doubt that there was ever any Aryan invasion in India. This skepticism is based on the dating of the Aryan invasion of India and the fact that Hinduism and the caste system are believed to have been established as the result of the meetings between the intruding Aryans and original residents of India, the Dravidians.
The caste system is believed to have been established by the Aryans. The fair skinned Aryans who occupied parts of India established the caste system, which allowed only them to be the priests (Brahman), aristocracy (Kshatria) and the businessmen (Vaisia) of the society. Below them in hierarchy were the Sudras who consisted of two communities. One community was of the locals who were subdued by the Aryans and the other were the descendants of Aryans with locals. In Hindu religious stories there are many wars between the good Aryans and the dark skinned demons and devils. The different Gods also have dark skinned slaves. There are stories of demon women trying to seduce good Aryan men in deceptive ways. There were also marriages between Aryan heroes and demon women. Many believe that these incidences really occurred in which, the gods and the positive heroes were people of Aryan origin. And the demons, the devils and the dark skinned slaves were in fact the original residence of India whom the Aryans coined as monsters, devil, demons and slaves. Normally the date given to Aryan invasion is around 1500 BC. But according to Hinduism experts some of the events in Hinduism occurred much earlier. Some of the events like the great war in the Mahabharta epic is believed to have occurred (based on astronomical research) 7000 years ago.
According to this Hindu experts the word Aryan is a misinterpretation of the original Sanskrit word, Arya. Arya means pure or good in Sanskrit. In the holy Vedas the good people were called Arya. Some of the European scholars of Indian culture in the 19th century were Germans. These German scholars who found that Swastika was also a holy symbol among the Hindus distorted, the word Arya to Aryan.
Your ignorance is purely stated within your arrogant writings that fail to make sense. You are protecting "iranians' which tells me you must be one. Anyway, my point is:
Aryans= outsiders that first settled into present day Iran aka Persia then they moved else where to India.
Their source was never Iran it was the region between the Black Sea and Caspian sea. You are just reciting ONE THEORY that suggests "it could have been from northern iran" well others theories also state that the source of Aryans could have been from India and the area near Pakistan and Afghanistan. However, most of the valid updated proofs show that only 30% of Iranians were Aryan same with the Indians (if I had to be generous). They had a settlement and thus replaced the already existed native Persian people there who were all dark complected and alas spread their outsider gene the blonde hair and blue eyes around. But in reality, NO ONE KNOWS for sure exactly the source of Aryans come from. Some say India some say Pakistan and Afghanistan and some others say Germany and people who are ill conceived say "iran." But that is could not be anymore untruer even if it came from Sadam himself. No one really knows where the Aryans truely came from.
Have you attempted any kind of further ethnic analysis of the Indian or Persian community? Is it true that there are far more South Indians/Iranians there than North Indians/Iranians?
I think you just say what you say to create a sense of self-superiority for your futile people.
Around the year 2000 BC, originating in the Caucasus, a sun worshipping Indo-European tribe calling themselves Aryans, using a language known as Sanskrit, invaded central Asia and occupied territory as far as the north of India. These invaders were what became known as the original Aryans. The name Tajik (also spelled Tadjik, Tajek) refers a group of people who are believed to be one of the pure and close decedents of the ancient Aryans. Their country was called Aryana Vajeh and the name "Taa-jyaan" from which came the word Tajik is mentioned in The Avesta. Persians are an offshoot the Aryans (Tajiks) who moved from Aryana Vejahy westward.
The word Aryan or Arya found its way to Europe in 1700s when European explorers began to learn about Sanskrit, the ancient language of the sacred text of India which mentions about the Aryans and their migration to India.
The Zoroaster's Gathas were also directed to an Aryan audience and there are several references to this community as being situated in the "home" of the Aryans.
In fact, all of those countries spanning their age of conquest bear names directly related to them - India, Iran, Iraq are all corruptions of the original word "Aryan". (Far off distant racial cousins of the Aryans went west, penetrating as far as Ireland, giving the name "Eire" to that land - also a derivative of the word Aryan).
http://www.stormfront.org/whitehistory/hwr5c.htm
ALSO ANOTHER THEORY WITH MORE VALIDITY THAN YOURS STATES:
However, to European academic the "Aryan" roots and culture was by definition white-European which had no relation to people of Central Asia (Tajiks), or Iranians. It was assumed that the Indo-European speaking peoples of Iran, Central Asia and India somehow deviated and were an offshoot of Aryans.
The Rig-Veda refers to Aryans as non-native of India, the migrants who pushed their way into India. This answer was far more attractive to European because it allowed them to explain how the subcontinent of India came to adopt an Indo - European language. In this process the European pushed aside the Book of Avesta which presented a very different view of the Aryans. It was ignored because it was offering a different answer than the Europeans were looking for. The Book of Avesta was written much earlier that of Rig-Veda and contains many references to the Aryans and the "home" of the Aryans (Tajiks). Taking into account both the Avesta and Rig-Veda, the migration of Aryans to the subcontinent of India did occur according to Rig Veda. However Avesta does not mention of any migrating people from North of Central Asia. On contrary Avesta regards Aryana Vejahe (later Bactra and then Khorasan) as the home of Aryans. The Aryan emigration to Indian subcontinent did occur but it was rather from the home of Aryans and not from any where else.
Bottomline: They were born into the Black Sea and Iran was one of the places they settled and thus spread that blonde haired blue eyed gene to the original presiding Persians there.
Archetype is claiming Cyrus the Great was not Persian, but actually Armenian. Having read tons of books, i've never once heard that theory in my life. Any of you hear of this?
ZOROASTER
c.630 - c.550 BC
Persian Prophet
Zoroaster, also called Zarathustra, was an ancient Persian prophet who founded the first world religion - Zoroastrianism.
According to the 'Zend Avesta', the sacred book of Zoroastrianism, he was born in Azerbaijan, in northern Persia. He is said to have received a vision from Ahura Mazda, the Wise Lord, who appointed him to preach the truth. Zoroaster began preaching his message of cosmic strife between Ahura Mazda, the God of Light, and Ahriman, the principle of evil. According to the prophet, man had been given the power to choose between good and evil. The end of the world would come when the forces of light would triumph and the saved souls rejoice in its victory. This dualism was part of an evolution towards monotheism in the Middle East. Zoroaster's teaching became the guiding light of Persian civilization. After Alexander the Great conquered Persia Zoroastrianism began to die out in Persia, but it survived in India where it became the basis of the Parsi religion.
http://www.hyperhistory.com/online_n2/people_n2/persons1_n2/zoroaster.html
"NO ONE KNOWS for sure exactly the source of Aryans come from. Some say India some say Pakistan and Afghanistan and some others say Germany and people who are ill conceived say "iran." But that is could not be anymore untruer even if it came from Sadam himself." - ARchetype
Nevermind he just proved his IQ doesn't surpass 75. I'm going to use those last two sentences as my tagline - idiot quote of the day.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.