Scythians - The Greatest Warriors of World

[Alienoz_TR]

Scythians were clustered by common culture, tradition, language (family branch), etc. They were Iranian (ancestry), and most experts and historians agree with this notion. The rest is not important.

I want a quote from Grekov. He is the expert on this issue, not surenas.

What, 6000? 7000? Still clownish.

60.000 or 70.000.

Book 9 chapter 30: Greek army 108.200

 

[Surenas]

Variety among Iranians:

Iranid:

Robust Iranid:

Iranian Nordoid:

Besides the variety in skin color, many of them belong to the Mediterranean/Nordic race.

I want a quote from Grekov. He is the expert on this issue, not surenas.

Most experts agree with me.

 

[Alienoz_TR]

Bring me the phenotypes of Scythians.

See you later, Mr. Expert.

 

[Surenas]

Bring me the phenotypes of Scythians.

She looks if anything more like a North Iranid + cromagnoid/ Iranid + Nordoid and cromagnoid admixture.

Sarmatians:

 

[ThunderCat]

Correct, but the interesting (remarkable) thing about eastern Iranian people was the role of women in their societies. For instance, we know that ancient Sarmatians and Massagetae had women fighters, and women were allowed to have multiple spouses or sexual partners, but the man only one. The name was also given by the mother, unlike a patrilineal society where the name of the father is passed to son and daughter. Iranian people also had famous Iranian female commanders, like Tomyris and Artemisia.

You can even see that today, were Iranian females are quite independent and combative. You can see that also with Kurds, another Iranian people, where you often see women fighters. Unfortunately, the influence of foreign religions (Semitic) also destroyed this tradition, but its still there.

Yes that's true and indeed unfortunate. Instead of only Islam coming out of the Arab world to non-Arabs, much of Arabic customs and culture also spread, not to mention language. Such as the backward custom of marrying first cousins, something the Arabs were forced into due to their small population. But instead many non-Arab Muslims interpreted as a religious one.

Herodotus is the same clown that said 2.6 Million Iranians got defeated by 5000 Greeks in a battle. So I don't take his opinions very seriously. Also the source I gave mentioned clearly they are Iranians, as I originally highlighted, not merely Indo-Europeans.

Now we are on subject of single entity, it could also be said that Central Asian Turks with Epicanthic fold and dark skinned Anatolian Turks are not the same entity.

Herodotus is one of the earliest recorded and respected anthropologists in history. probably 5000 Greeks fought against a smaller army of Persians. Modern Iran at the time had 2.6 million but I doubt all of them would leave their homeland to fight greeks, only a few thousand of them.

 

[ThunderCat]

Check Herodotus. Book 4 chapter 20 to 30 (?) forgot the exact chapter number.

Swedes also speak an Indo European language. That doesnt make them Iranian, right? Language does not make two genetically different people one nation. Indian-European road did culturally and linguistically shaped the people in and around the European Indian trade routes. But white skinned Blond Europeans and dark skinned Indo-Iranians are not single entity.

Ossetians are one of the many clans which inhabited Eurasian steppes.

I think you are complaining about the terminology. i agree terminology is not always appropriate. Like the term "Indo-European" for the prehistoric people who liked in Eurasia. I personally think "Indo-European" languages should have been called Eurasian languages, after all their origin point is in Eurasia. Just like I think Urdu should have been called a Vedic language instead of Indo-Aryan since Urdu and it's sister language descend from Vedic Sanskrit.

But problem is it's in mainstream use so we have to go by them unless in the future these misleading terms can be changed.

 

[Surenas]

Yes that's true and indeed unfortunate. Instead of only Islam coming out of the Arab world to non-Arabs, much of Arabic customs and culture also spread, not to mention language. Such as the backward custom of marrying first cousins, something the Arabs were forced into due to their small population. But instead many non-Arab Muslims interpreted as a religious one.

Correct, but besides traditional Arab culture, its also correlated to Semitic religions like Judiasm, Islam and Christianity. If you look closely, you can see that Semites (society) were traditionally much more male-dominated, conservative and paternal. Unlike Iranian culture, where women had many rights and prominent role in the society. Iran, Afghanistan and Pakistan were eventually Islamized, and that was the end of women influence in societies. If you read Greek history or Alexander's adventure in M-E and Asia; they encountered female fighters in Afghanistan/Pakistan area and he eventually even married a Bactrian princes.

In Afghanistan and Pakistan it has really deteriorated, the role of women in society, but Iran still managed (partially) to keep its ancient culture. In Iran, the role of women is extremely increasing, and thats a good development. Watch Iranian protests in 2009, and Arab protests now. Iranian women were much more involved in those protests, while Arab women were raped on Tahrir square, and didn't had that much influence on those protests.

 

[Shahin Vatani]

Herodotus is one of the earliest recorded and respected anthropologists in history. probably 5000 Greeks fought against a smaller army of Persians. Modern Iran at the time had 2.6 million but I doubt all of them would leave their homeland to fight greeks, only a few thousand of them.

It's not important what you believe. What is important is that Herodotus stated that 2.6 million Persians fought in battle and where defeated by 5000 Greeks. Look up Herodotus' account of the Battle of Thermopylae.

 

[ThunderCat]

It's not important what you believe. What is important is that Herodotus stated that 2.6 million Persians fought in battle and where defeated by 5000 Greeks. Look up Herodotus' account of the Battle of Thermopylae.

I seriously doubt he wrote that. I'd like to first know what the population of modern Iran was at that time. You probably got it from a wrong source or misinterpretation. Like most info we have today on the Scythians are from Herodotus

 

[Shahin Vatani]

I seriously doubt he wrote that. I'd like to first know what the population of modern Iran was at that time. You probably got it from a wrong source or misinterpretation. Like most info we have today on the Scythians are from Herodotus

I didn't take it from a source, I took it from his actual book. Here is the exact page:

http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Hdt.+7.186

From Herodotus's "Histories" he claims that 2.6 million armed soldiers where joined by 2.6 million support personnel totalling 5.2 million Persians who travelled to Greece for battle.

 

[ThunderCat]

Correct, but besides traditional Arab culture, its also correlated to Semitic religions like Judiasm, Islam and Christianity. If you look closely, you can see that Semites (society) were traditionally much more male-dominated, conservative and paternal. Unlike Iranian culture, where women had many rights and prominent role in the society. Iran, Afghanistan and Pakistan were eventually Islamized, and that was the end of women influence in societies. If you read Greek history or Alexander's adventure in M-E and Asia; they encountered female fighters in Afghanistan/Pakistan area and he eventually even married a Bactrian princes.

In Afghanistan and Pakistan it has really deteriorated, the role of women in society, but Iran still managed (partially) to keep its ancient culture. In Iran, the role of women is extremely increasing, and thats a good development. Watch Iranian protests in 2009, and Arab protests now. Iranian women were much more involved in those protests, while Arab women were raped on Tahrir square, and didn't had that much influence on those protests.

Thing is most of modern Iran's ancient culture is recorded even if not in practice. Pakistan's prehistoric cultures died out even before Islam came, so learning what it exactly was would be even harder. The only thing left of our ancient heritage are some cultural arts and traditions but the strongest link to our ancient Aryan psst would be in the Kalash people of the north who are also facing the threat of extinction thanks to Islamic extremism which is why I worry about them.

If they go, all knowledge to our past goes. There is however a strong interest amongst Pakistanis growing of our prehistoric past due to the age of the Internet, so I wouldn't loose all hope.

 

[ThunderCat]

I didn't take it from a source, I took it from his actual book. Here is the exact page:

Herodotus, The Histories, Book 7, chapter 186

From Herodotus's "Histories" he claims that 2.6 million armed soldiers where joined by 2.6 million support personnel totalling 5.2 million Persians who travelled to Greece for battle.

1) I'd question the poor translation " This then is the number of soldiers. As for the service-train which followed them and the crews of the light corn-bearing vessels and all the other vessels besides which came by sea with the force, these I believe to have been not fewer but more than the fighting men. [2] Suppose, however, that they were equal in number, neither more nor fewer. If they were equal to the fighting contingent, they made up as many tens of thousands as the others. The number, then, of those whom Xerxes son of Darius led as far as the Sepiad headland and Thermopylae was five million, two hundred and eighty-three thousand, two hundred and twenty. "

2) If a country like Finland with a population of only 3.5 million can defeat the mighty Soviet military in World War 1 (with a little external help) , why couldn't the Greeks defeat the Persians in their own terrain?

3) Are you going to discount everything else Herodotus stated because you wish to believe he might be wrong about the Persian army numbers?

 

[Shahin Vatani]

1) I'd question the poor translation " This then is the number of soldiers. As for the service-train which followed them and the crews of the light corn-bearing vessels and all the other vessels besides which came by sea with the force, these I believe to have been not fewer but more than the fighting men. [2] Suppose, however, that they were equal in number, neither more nor fewer. If they were equal to the fighting contingent, they made up as many tens of thousands as the others. The number, then, of those whom Xerxes son of Darius led as far as the Sepiad headland and Thermopylae was five million, two hundred and eighty-three thousand, two hundred and twenty. "

2) If a country like Finland with a population of only 3.5 million can defeat the mighty Soviet military in World War 1 (with a little external help) , why couldn't the Greeks defeat the Persians in their own terrain?

3) Are you going to discount everything else Herodotus stated because you wish to believe he might be wrong about the Persian army numbers?

1. It is a highly respected translation by A.D. Godley who was public orator at the University of Oxford. This edition was also published by Harvard University Press.

2. Once again you are confusing population with army size. Herodotus said Persia sent 5.2 million men (half of them soldiers) to Greece and they got defeated by 5000 men. Anybody with any semblance of reality would find this highly preposterous and laughable.

3. It tells a story of how horribly wrong Herodotus's evidence could be. He has been wrong many other times as well, so it is not a one off. He was a revolutionary historian for his time and day, but relying on Herodotus in the 21st century as the sole proprietor of truth on a matter is not wise. At most his accounts should be cross examined with other accounts and historic evidences, which is what most modern historians do.

 

[Ethiopian Dude]

scythians were nomadic savages who practised canabalism according to many greek sources....the bible groups them under extreem barbarians. They are the ancestors of the english scottish, irish,german and dutch race.they use to live in central asia before they migrated to europe when the roman empire was in decline.These people were known as sakas in india they use to plunder the northern part of india in ancient times they were also slaves of the indians for many centuries when the indian empire dominated central asia under the kushans......thats one of the main reasons western europeans and particularly the british always insult indians in the media and movies covertly......... they know the real history of their origins..........europeans are desendents of indian albinos...... they are scared to death of the world finding out their real origin and why they became white(albino).

 

[Mard]

hi guys, I have a question, why do indian Gujjars, Rajputs and even Jats to an extent look different from the pakistani ones? It seems Indians ones are clearly much more mixed with local Indian blood. For example I knew several Gujjar families from northern Punjab in Pakistan and many of them resembled Pashtuns and even Kalash, like they had very fair skin and also had colored hair brownish/reddish, but when I met an Indian Gujjar from Indian state of Gujarat in India, he was almost as Dark as a Tamil person. My question is, are these people even considered one group of people? just because they are Gujjars, Jats, Rajputs, are they even same people now?