________ EGYPTSEARCH'S NEW DEFINITION OF RACE ________________the two races of mankind
The following is a description of the most popular view of race here at Egyptsearch.
Old traditional definitions of race that include facial features no longer apply .
In the new definition of race the word "race" itself is not as necessary because the new definition has simplified and clarified the issue. There are now only two categories "black" and "white".
We are all familiar and use the term "black" on this site frequently. As we know the word "black" people is commonly used to include a range of people who are dark but not necessarily charcoal pitch black nor are the white people completely without pigment but are within a range of light skin.
The new Egypt Search definition of Race is based solely on two ranges of darkness or lightness of a person's skin.
Once this light to dark midpoint is firmly established a person falls into one of the two ranges, racial categories called "black" or "white". We do this intuitively when we look at a person judge if they fall into a certain shade range and call them either "black" or "white".
Below I will demonstrate the two categories of race.
Lioness, out of the depths of your stupidity, you do occasionally come up with a topic worth discussing.
The concept of "Race" is an invention of Albino Europeans. Though they are the least numerous Human group, because of their "New-found" international power, they were seeking a way to differentiate themselves from "Normal" Humans.
As you may recall, the Albinos created three races of Humans: Black, White and Yellow. These categories exclusively represent a range of skin tones, as there is no opportunity to represent phenotype in the words Black, White and Yellow. So right away, we see the lie and hypocrisy in the positions of people like you.
To complicate things even further for the Albino, within the range of Black, there are White and yellow phenotypes. And within the range of yellow there are Black and White phenotypes.
And to really screw things up: As we all know, Yellow Humans occur when Black and Albino White humans admix!
So right away, we can distill Human beings into two groups: "Normal" humans (pure Blacks) and Black Albinos. Exclusive of the mix of "Normal" humans and Black Albinos - Yellow Humans. Because a hybrid is NOT a true "Race". Thus that leaves only Blacks (Pure Humans) and Black Albinos (Whites).
Later Albinos came to realize these obvious shortcomings, and the stupidity of their classifications, and they have been backtracking ever since.
Quotes from Wiki: Race refers to the classification of humans into populations or groups based on various factors such as culture, language, social practice or heritable characteristics. Conceptions and groupings of races vary over time and reflect societal customs in defining essential types of individuals based on perceived sets of traits.
As a biological term, race describes genetically divergent populations of humans that can be marked by common phenotypic and genotypic traits. Race, however, has no official biological taxonomic significance — all humans belong to the same hominid subspecies, Homo sapiens sapiens. Nor is there scientific basis for any racial or ethnic hierarchy.
In 1950, the UNESCO statement, "The Race Question", signed by some of the internationally renowned scholars of the time (including Ashley Montagu, Claude Lévi-Strauss, Gunnar Myrdal, Julian Huxley, etc.), suggested that: "National, religious, geographic, linguistic and cultural groups do not necessarily coincide with racial groups: and the cultural traits of such groups have no demonstrated genetic connection with racial traits. Because serious errors of this kind are habitually committed when the term 'race' is used in popular parlance, it would be better when speaking of human races to drop the term 'race' altogether and speak of 'ethnic groups'."
In 1982, American cultural anthropologists, summing up forty years of ethnographic research, argued that racial and ethnic categories are symbolic markers for different ways that people from different parts of the world have been incorporated into a global economy:
Thus, in the West, the notion of ethnicity, like race and nation, developed in the context of European colonial expansion, when mercantilism and capitalism were promoting global movements of populations at the same time that state boundaries were being more clearly and rigidly defined. In the nineteenth century, modern states generally sought legitimacy through their claim to represent "nations." Nation-states, however, invariably include populations that have been excluded from national life for one reason or another.
An ethnic group (or ethnicity) is a group of people whose members identify with each other, through a common heritage, consisting of a common language, a common culture (often including a shared religion) and a tradition of common ancestry (corresponding to a history of endogamy).
Members of an ethnic group are conscious of belonging to an ethnic group; moreover ethnic identity is further marked by the recognition from others of a group's distinctiveness.
Processes that result in the emergence of such identification are called ethnogenesis.
Ethnogenesis (from the Greek) is the process by which a group of human beings comes to be understood or to understand themselves as ethnically distinct from the wider social landscape from which their grouping emerges. By self-invention, ethnic groups are "present at their own creation", in the phrase of E. P. Thompson.
Hamites
Ethnic definitions are subject to change over time, both within and outside groups. For example, 19th-century Europeans classified Jews and Arabs as one 'ethnic' bloc, the Semites or Hamites. Later the term Hamites came to be associated with Sub-Saharan Africans instead.
The Goths
Herwig Wolfram offers "a radically new explanation of the circumstances under which the Goths were settled in Gaul, Spain and Italy". Since "they dissolved at their downfall into a myth accessible to everyone" at the head of a long history of attempts to lay claim to a "Gothic" tradition, the ethnogenesis by which disparate bands came to self-identify as "Goths" is of wide interest and application. The problem is in extracting a historical ethnography from sources that are resolutely Latin and Roman-oriented.
quote: Example of Albino Fantasy:
GAULS!
.
GOTHS!
{For the ignorant: the French and Spanish derive from Visigoths.}
Spanish Woman >>>> French Man
.
I can see no relationship between the two groups!
Proponents of ethnogenesis may claim it is the only alternative to the sort of ethnocentric and nationalist scholarship that is commonly seen in disputes over the origins of many ancient peoples such as the Franks, Goths, and Huns. It has also been used as an alternative to the Near East's "race history" that had supported Phoenicianism and claims to the antiquity of the variously called Assyrian/Chaldean/Syriac peoples.
Phoenicianism is a form of Lebanese nationalism, especially popular from the 1920s through the 1950s. It promotes the theory that Lebanese people are not Arabs and that the Lebanese speak a distinct language and have their own culture, separate from that of the surrounding Middle Eastern countries. Supporters of this theory of Lebanese ethnogenesis maintain that the Lebanese are descended from Phoenicians and are not Arab. Some also maintain that Lebanese Arabic is not an Arabic dialect, but has become a distinctly separate language.
Professional historians have a consensus summed up by Lebanon's most prominent historian, Kamal Salibi: "between ancient Phoenicia and the Lebanon of medieval and modern times, there is no demonstrable historical connection". Phoenicianism embraces Phoenicia as an alternative cultural foundation by overlooking 850 years of Arabisation.
The earliest sense of a modern Lebanese identity is to be found in the writings of historians in the early nineteenth century, when, under the emirate of the Shihabs, a Lebanese identity emerged, "separate and distinct from the rest of Syria, bringing the Maronites and Druzes, along with its other Christian and Moslem sects, under one government." The first coherent history of Mount Lebanon was written by Tannus al-Shidyaq (died 1861) who depicted the country as a feudal association of Maronites, Druzes, Melchites, Sunni and Shi'ites under the leadership of the Shihab emirs. "Most Christian Lebanese, anxious to dissociate themselves from Arabism and its Islamic connections, were pleased to be told that their country was the legitimate heir to the Phoenician tradition," Kamil Salibi observes, instancing Christian writers like Charles Corm (died 1963), writing in French, and Said Aql, who urged the abandonment of literary Arabic, together with its script, and attempted to write in the Lebanese vernacular, using the Roman alphabet.
Phoenician origins have additional appeal for the Christian middle class, as it presents the Phoenicians as traders, and the Lebanese emigrant as a modern-day Phoenician adventurer, whereas for the Sunni it merely veiled French imperialist ambitions, intent on subverting pan-Arabism.
quote: Example of Sand Nigger Fantasy:
.
PHOENICIANS!
.
MODERN LEBANESE!
I can see no relationship between the two groups!
Posted by Mike111 (Member # 9361) on :
Just to demonstrate how very "RIGHT" the intelligent few here at ES are!
.
What is the difference between these two old Chinese men?
Answer: One is "Fully" pigmented, the other is NOT!
. .
What is the difference between these two Bearded men?
Answer: One is "Fully" pigmented, the other is NOT!
. .
What is the difference between these two Girls?
.
Answer: One is "Fully" pigmented, the other is NOT!
.
So as you can see, there REALLY is only TWO Races:
"Normal" Black people, and the Albinos of Black people - regardless of Phenotype! Posted by MelaninKing (Member # 17444) on :
And Mike, the visual pigment is only the beginning of the delta between the two. Under the skin (and synapses) there is a "hidden" difference that displays itself by other obvious and not so flattering means in Character, disposition, and world-view.
Due to the absence of melanin and calcified Peneal glands in the un-pigmented, stem cell, brain, and nervous system dysfunctions manifest into creation of an defective sub-species that is literally wired differently then normal Huemans.
This difference in basic wiring and impaired functioning organs (Peneal Gland) results in a mental psychosis that is totally destructive and lacks the basic safe guards put in place to inhibit maniac criminal behavior.
Some symptoms of those afflicted with this Albino-like psychotic (Maniac depression, Bipolar disorders) ailmenst are;
- Extreme Mood swings (Psychological instability) - Heightened energy, restlessness (Frantic) - irritability - Very fast thoughts with the mind shifting from random thought to another - Aggressive, intrusive, or provocative behavior - lack Of need for much sleep - Thoughts of suicide or murder - Use of large quantity of alcohol or drugs to induce sleep - Inability to concentrate well - Grandiose notion overestimating or overstating one's own abilities or powers - Extreme denial that anything is wrong
In extreme cases of this ailment, the afflicted by way of insomnia and resulting sleep deprivation exists in a psychopathic state which is unable to distinguish between reality and dreams, or right and wrong. Their "civilized" inhibition control is disabled and they lack the fundamental inhibitors that normally are intact to limit a person's ability to step outside of what is considered "civilized" behavior.
Studies CONFIRM that over 75% of whites fix into the above description while approximately 10% of people of color (admixed) also display the symptoms.
There is only ONE (1) race of people on the planet, and they are; Huemans or, melanated People Of Color.
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
more examples of white people:
WHITE PEOPLE
Posted by MelaninKing (Member # 17444) on :
Lioness, you still stupid as a rock.
Posted by awlaadberry (Member # 17426) on :
The Prophet Mohamed (pbuh) said:
"I was sent to all mankind - the black and the red".
بعثت إلى الناس كافة الأحمر والأسود
Ibn Al-Athir said:
"The hadith says: 'I was sent to the black and the red (white/light-skinned)' - meaning the non-Arabs (Persians, etc) and the Arabs; because most non-Arabs (Persians etc) are red and white (light-skinned) and most Arabs are very dark-skinned and dark-skinned."
قال ابن الأثير: فيه "بعثت إلى الأحمر والأسود" أي العجم والعرب ؛ لأن الغالب على ألوان العجم الحُمْرة والبياض ، وعلى ألوان العرب الأُدْمَة والسُمرة
Posted by Mike111 (Member # 9361) on :
quote:Originally posted by MelaninKing: Lioness, you still stupid as a rock.
Yes MK, he/she is just about that stupid.
Lioness, I clearly accounted for hybrid people in my first post. If you were not satisfied with how I handled these people, you should have taken that issue up with me.
But to indiscriminately call these people White is inaccurate, and only shows your pathetic attempt to obscure facts that make your pink Albino Ass uncomfortable.
Posted by Mike111 (Member # 9361) on :
quote:Originally posted by awlaadberry: The Prophet Mohamed (pbuh) said:
"I was sent to all mankind - the black and the red".
بعثت إلى الناس كافة الأحمر والأسود
Ibn Al-Athir said:
"The hadith says: 'I was sent to the black and the red (white/light-skinned)' - meaning the non-Arabs (Persians, etc) and the Arabs; because most non-Arabs (Persians etc) are red and white (light-skinned) and most Arabs are very dark-skinned and dark-skinned."
قال ابن الأثير: فيه "بعثت إلى الأحمر والأسود" أي العجم والعرب ؛ لأن الغالب على ألوان العجم الحُمْرة والبياض ، وعلى ألوان العرب الأُدْمَة والسُمرة
.
From Wiki Abu al-Hassan Ali ibn Muhammad ibn Muhammad, better known as Ali 'Izz al-Din Ibn al-Athir al-Jazari. He was a Kurd, therefore for a time he was with Saladin's army in Syria and later lived in Aleppo and Damascus.
.
awlaadberry - You seem like a decent enough person, but Ibn Al-Athir, like most hadith writers, was just another lying "Piece-of-Sh1t" Turk. Why anyone would want to pay any attention to what they say is beyond me.
BTW - I don't see anything "Light-skinned" about these people.
quote:
Oh I know, Ibn Al-Athir was talking about THESE people!
But he is still a liar, they are Turks like himself, not Persians.
Posted by awlaadberry (Member # 17426) on :
quote:Originally posted by Mike111:
quote:Originally posted by awlaadberry: The Prophet Mohamed (pbuh) said:
"I was sent to all mankind - the black and the red".
بعثت إلى الناس كافة الأحمر والأسود
Ibn Al-Athir said:
"The hadith says: 'I was sent to the black and the red (white/light-skinned)' - meaning the non-Arabs (Persians, etc) and the Arabs; because most non-Arabs (Persians etc) are red and white (light-skinned) and most Arabs are very dark-skinned and dark-skinned."
قال ابن الأثير: فيه "بعثت إلى الأحمر والأسود" أي العجم والعرب ؛ لأن الغالب على ألوان العجم الحُمْرة والبياض ، وعلى ألوان العرب الأُدْمَة والسُمرة
.
From Wiki Abu al-Hassan Ali ibn Muhammad ibn Muhammad, better known as Ali 'Izz al-Din Ibn al-Athir al-Jazari. He was a Kurd, therefore for a time he was with Saladin's army in Syria and later lived in Aleppo and Damascus.
.
awlaadberry - You seem like a decent enough person, but Ibn Al-Athir, like most hadith writers, was just another lying "Piece-of-Sh1t" Turk. Why anyone would want to pay any attention to what they say is beyond me.
BTW - I don't see anything "Light-skinned" about these people.
quote:
Oh I know, Ibn Al-Athir was talking about THESE people!
But he is still a liar, they are Turks like himself, not Persians.
Mike why do you call Ibn Athir by those names? Turk or not Turk - Kurd or not Kurd, he was an Islamic scholar and if we disagree with something that he said, we need to simply give proof that what he said was wrong.
You posted pictures of the Elamites and no one said that the Elamites were light-skinned. The Elamites are the descendants of Elam the son of Sam the son of Noah. Elam is the granduncle of the extinct Arab tribes of Ad and Thamud. The Elamites are not the Persians that the Arabs called "The Red People".
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by Mike111:
quote:Originally posted by MelaninKing: Lioness, you still stupid as a rock.
Yes MK, he/she is just about that stupid.
Lioness, I clearly accounted for hybrid people in my first post. If you were not satisfied with how I handled these people, you should have taken that issue up with me.
But to indiscriminately call these people White is inaccurate, and only shows your pathetic attempt to obscure facts that make your pink Albino Ass uncomfortable.
This is my post I wasn't keeping track of how you "handled" people
"hybrid" "mixed" "mulatto"
is irrelevant to this definition. Those words describe a combination process not outcome.
I have stated clear categories how a given person came about is irrelevant to whether they are BLACK or WHITE.
In dealing with given person, they either have a certain amount of melanin or they do not have certain melanin. The parents do not change the fact that the baby is white:
The baby here is white. The geographical ancestry of that baby is a separate item: Africa in this case. A white baby of African ancestry
So these terms "hybrid" "mixed" or "mulatto" maybe be how the person came about but is irrelevant because you could have a black person who also happened to be mulatto or a white person who happens to be mulatto.
Look at the two words The describe a color or in this case a range of shades
BLACK
WHITE
"Mixed" just describes how a particular shade came about.
Then you are still left with is the person BLACK or is the person WHITE.
You try to obscure a simple concept
Posted by Mike111 (Member # 9361) on :
awlaadberry - Knowing that you are not a student of history, I should have explained the above. I hope this will salve your confusion.
All aggrieved parties found an opportunity for social reform in 1905–06 when a series of demonstrations, held in protest over the government beating of several merchants, escalated into strikes that soon adjourned to a shrine near Tehran, which the demonstrators claimed as a bast (Persian: “sanctuary”). While under this traditional Persian form of sanctuary, the government was unable to arrest or otherwise molest the demonstrators, and a series of such sanctuary protests over subsequent months, combined with wide-scale general strikes of craftsmen and merchants, forced the ailing shah to grant a constitution in 1906. The first National Consultative Assembly (the Majles) was opened in October of that year. The new constitution provided a framework for secular legislation, a new judicial code, and a free press. All these reduced the power of the royal court and religious authorities and placed more authority in the hands of the Majles, which, in turn, took a strong stand against European intervention.
Although the Majles was suppressed in 1908 under Mohammad 'Ali Shah (ruled 1907–09) by the officers of the Persian Cossack Brigade—the shah's bodyguard and the most effective military force in the country at the time—democracy was revived the following year under the second Majles, and Mohammad 'Ali fled to Russia. Constitutionalists also executed the country's highest-ranking cleric, Sheikh Fazlullah Nuri, who had been found guilty by a reformist tribunal of plotting to overthrow the new order—an indication that not all of Persia's religious elite were proponents of reform. In addition, as part of the secular reforms introduced by the Majles, a variety of secular schools were established during that time, including some for girls, causing significant tension between sections of the clergy that had previously advocated reform and their erstwhile intellectual allies.
Cossacks are a group of predominately East Slavic martial people living in the southern steppe regions of Eastern Europe and Asian Russia, presently numbering up to 7 million people.
True origins are disputed, and many theories exist on their formation, however during the 15th century two Cossack hosts emerged: one on the Don river and the other on the lower Dnieper river. These were fuelled by many migrants who left the adjacent northern states of Moscow and Lithuania due to social and religious pressures. By the start of the 16th century, they swelled into large militant states.}
Okay, so the Shah and many Iranians are Slavs too. Turks-Slavs, what's the difference, they're NOT Persians!
The end of the Majles, however, did not come as a result of internal strife. In an attempt to come to grips with Persia's ongoing financial problems, the Majles in 1911 hired another foreign financial adviser, this time an American, William Morgan Shuster, who advocated bold moves to collect revenue throughout the country. This action angered both the Russians and British, who claimed limited sovereignty in the respective spheres of influence the two powers had carved out of Persia in 1907 (the Russians in northern Persia and the Caucasus and the British along the Persian Gulf). The Russians issued an ultimatum demanding Shuster's dismissal. When the Majles refused, Russian troops advanced toward Tehran, and the regent of the young Ahmad Shah (reigned 1909–25) hastily dismissed Shuster and dissolved the Majles in December 1911.
Rise of Reza Khan
Until the beginning of World War I, Russia effectively ruled Persia, but, with the outbreak of hostilities, Russian troops withdrew from the north of the country, and Persians convened the third Majles. Jubilation was short-lived, however, as the country quickly turned into a battlefield between British, German, Russian, and Turkish forces. The landed elite hoped to find in Germany a foil for the British and Russians, but change eventually was to come from the north.
Following the Russian Bolshevik Revolution in 1917, the new Soviet government unilaterally canceled the tsarist concessions in Persia, an action that created tremendous goodwill toward the new Soviet Union and, after the Central Powers were defeated, left Britain the sole Great Power in Persia. In 1919 the Majles, after much internal wrangling, refused a British offer of military and financial aid that effectively would have made Persia into a protectorate of Britain. The British were initially loath to withdraw from Persia but caved to international pressure and removed their advisers by 1921. In that same year British diplomats lent their support to an Persian officer of the Persian Cossack Brigade, Reza Khan, who in the previous year had been instrumental in putting down a rebellion led by Mirza Kuchak Khan, who had sought to form an independent Soviet-style republic in Persia's northern province of Gilan. In collaboration with a political writer, Sayyid Ziya al-Din Tabataba'i, Reza Khan staged a coup in 1921 and took control of all military forces in Persia. Between 1921 and 1925 Reza Khan—first as war minister and later as prime minister under Ahmad Shah—built an army that was loyal solely to him. He also managed to forge political order in a country that for years had known nothing but turmoil. Initially Reza Khan wished to declare himself president in the style of Turkey's secular nationalist president, Mustafa Kemal Atatürk—a move fiercely opposed by the Shi'ite 'ulama'—but instead he deposed the weak Ahmad Shah in 1925 and had himself crowned Reza Shah Pahlavi.
Reza Shah's need to expand trade, his fear of Soviet control over Persia's overland routes to Europe, and his apprehension at renewed Soviet and continued British presence in Persia drove him to expand trade with Nazi Germany in the 1930s. His refusal to abandon what he considered to be obligations to numerous Germans in Persia served as a pretext for an Anglo-Soviet invasion of his country in 1941. Intent on ensuring the safe passage of U.S. war matériel to the Soviet Union through Persia, the Allies forced Reza Shah to abdicate, placing his young son Mohammad Reza Shah Pahlavi on the throne.
The Name Change
In 1935 the Iranian government requested those countries with which it had diplomatic relations, to call Persia "Iran". The suggestion for the change is said to have come from the Iranian ambassador to Germany, who came under the influence of the Nazis. At the time Germany was in the grip of racial fever and cultivated good relations with nations of "Arian" blood. It is said that some German friends of the ambassador persuaded him that, as with the advent of Reza Shah, Persia had turned a new leaf in its history. It was only fitting that the country be called "Iran." This would not only signal a new beginning, and bring home to the world, the new era in history, but would also signify the NOW Arian race of its population, as "Iran" is a cognate of "Arian" and derived from it.
Posted by Mike111 (Member # 9361) on :
quote:Originally posted by awlaadberry: Mike You posted pictures of the Elamites and no one said that the Elamites were light-skinned. The Elamites are the descendants of Elam the son of Sam the son of Noah. Elam is the granduncle of the extinct Arab tribes of Ad and Thamud. The Elamites are not the Persians that the Arabs called "The Red People".
awlaadberry - I have a simple question for you.
Are those YOUR thoughts, or is that what you were TAUGHT in School?
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
Mike why do you post with one lone wall painting what appears to be a dark skinned Persian soldier other images of Persians which are stone sculpture which have no indication of skin lightness or darkness. The latter have no bearing they could be white or black Persians.
That's like putting up some painting from Hellenistic Greece where the person is colored dark and then putting up statues with to color on them. It makes no sense
secondly assuming based on one given artifact alone that all the Persian people who conquered Egypt were black.
Posted by Mike111 (Member # 9361) on :
quote:Originally posted by the lioness: Mike why do you post with one lone wall painting what appears to be a dark skinned Persian soldier other images of Persians which are stone sculpture which have no indication of skin lightness or darkness. The latter have no bearing they could be white or black Persians.
That's like putting up some painting from Hellenistic Greece where the person is colored dark and then putting up statues with to color on them. It makes no sense
secondly assuming based on one given artifact alone that all the Persian people who conquered Egypt were black.
Lioness - The conversation has turned to serious subjects. Time for you to take your dumb ass somewhere else.
Posted by Mike111 (Member # 9361) on :
awlaadberry - I am not trying to make fun of you. I would appreciate an answer.
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by Mike111: Lioness - The conversation has turned to serious subjects. Time for you to take your dumb ass somewhere else. [/QB]
you seem to think you are in a serious conversation when in fact awlaadberry has left the building due to your famous disrespectfulness.
Posted by awlaadberry (Member # 17426) on :
Mike, when I say Persians, I'm talking about the people that the Arabs called The Red Ones or the Ajam.
"Ajam" as referring to "Persians"
According to Encyclopćdia Iranica, the name "ajam", while "given to the non-Arabs of the Islamic empire" in general, was "applied especially to Persians" by the Arabs. The verb ʿaǰama originally meant "to mumble, and speak indistinctly", which is the opposite of ʿaraba, “to speak clearly”. Accordingly, the noun ʿoǰma, of the same root, is the opposite of foṣḥa, which means "chaste, correct, Arabic language".[6] In general, ajam was a pejorative term used by Arabs conscious of their social and political superiority, in early Islam. However, the distinction between Arab and Ajam is discernible in pre-Islamic poetry.[6]
According to Clifford Edmund Bosworth, "by the 3rd/9th century, the non-Arabs, and above all the Persians, were asserting their social and cultural equality (taswīa) with the Arabs, if not their superiority (tafżīl) over them (a process seen in the literary movement of the Šoʿūbīya). In any case, there was always in some minds a current of admiration for the ʿAǰam as heirs of an ancient, cultured tradition of life. Even the great proponent of the Arab cause, Jāḥeẓ, wrote a Ketāb al-taswīa bayn al-ʿArab wa’l-ʿAǰam. After these controversies had died down, and the Persians had achieved a position of power in the Islamic world comparable to their numbers and capabilities, "ʿAjam" became a simple ethnic and geographical designation."[7]. Thus by the 9th century, the term was being used by Persians themselves as an ethnic term, and examples can be given by Asadi Tusi in his poem comparing the superiority of Persians and Arabs.[8] Accordingly: "territorial notions of “Iran,” are reflected in such terms as irānšahr, irānzamin, or Fors, the arabicized form of Pārs/Fārs (Persia). The ethnic notion of “Iranian” is denoted by the Persian words Pārsi or Irāni, and the Arabic term ahl al-fors (inhabitants of Persia) or ʿAjam, referring to non-Arabs, but primarily to Persians as in molk-e ʿAjam (Persian kingdom) or moluk-e ʿAjam (Persian kings)."[9].
In the Persian Gulf region today, people usually refer to Persian as Ajami as they refer to Persian carpet (Ajami carpet or Sajjad al Ajami), Persian cat (Ajami cat), and Persian emperors (Ajami kings).
The Persian community in Bahrain calls itself Ajami. See: Ajam (Bahrain)
-wishes he was black but not enough melanin to get over
Posted by awlaadberry (Member # 17426) on :
Mike. Can you give me an example, in history, of the Elamites calling themselves Persians?
Posted by Mike111 (Member # 9361) on :
awlaadberry From your link:
Ajam
A Persian folk etymology derives the word from the name of an ancient Persian king, Jamshid, though this is linguistically dubious. The folk etymology would have "Ajam" as an arabized.
Jamshēd, or Jam in Middle- and New Persian, or Yima in Avestan is a mythological figure of Greater Iranian culture and tradition.
In tradition and folklore, Jamshid is described as having been the fourth and greatest king of the epigraphically unattested Pishdadian dynasty ( before Kayanian dynasty). This role is already alluded to in Zoroastrian scripture (e.g. Yasht 19, Vendidad 2), where the figure appears as Avestan language Yima(-Kshaeta) "(radiant) Yima," and from which the name 'Jamshid' then derives.
Epigraphy, literally "on-writing", "inscription" is the study of inscriptions or epigraphs as writing; that is, the science of identifying the graphemes.
Kayanians The Kayanians (also Kays or Kayanids or Kaianids) are a semi-mythological dynasty of Greater Iranian tradition and folklore. Considered collectively, the Kayanian kings are the heroes of the Avesta, the sacred texts of Zoroastrianism, and of the Shahnameh, Iran's national epic.
As an epithet of kings and the reason why the dynasty is so called, Middle- and New Persian "Kay(an)" is a continuation of Avestan kavi (or kauui) "king" and also "poet-sacrificer" or "poet-priest." The word is also etymologically related to the Avestan notion of kavaēm kharēno, the "divine royal glory" that the Kayanian kings were said to hold. The Kiani Crown is a physical manifestation of that belief.
awlaadberry, just one more thing, I have never heard of the Pishdadian dynasty or the Kayanian dynasty, can you give me the dates for these please? Posted by Mike111 (Member # 9361) on :
quote:Originally posted by awlaadberry: Mike. Can you give me an example, in history, of the Elamites calling themselves Persians?
awlaadberry, I greatly appreciate your responses. And I will put everything together after I get your response on the unknown dynasties.
Posted by awlaadberry (Member # 17426) on :
quote:Originally posted by Mike111: awlaadberry From your link:
Ajam
A Persian folk etymology derives the word from the name of an ancient Persian king, Jamshid, though this is linguistically dubious. The folk etymology would have "Ajam" as an arabized.
Jamshēd, or Jam in Middle- and New Persian, or Yima in Avestan is a mythological figure of Greater Iranian culture and tradition.
In tradition and folklore, Jamshid is described as having been the fourth and greatest king of the epigraphically unattested Pishdadian dynasty ( before Kayanian dynasty). This role is already alluded to in Zoroastrian scripture (e.g. Yasht 19, Vendidad 2), where the figure appears as Avestan language Yima(-Kshaeta) "(radiant) Yima," and from which the name 'Jamshid' then derives.
Epigraphy, literally "on-writing", "inscription" is the study of inscriptions or epigraphs as writing; that is, the science of identifying the graphemes.
Kayanians The Kayanians (also Kays or Kayanids or Kaianids) are a semi-mythological dynasty of Greater Iranian tradition and folklore. Considered collectively, the Kayanian kings are the heroes of the Avesta, the sacred texts of Zoroastrianism, and of the Shahnameh, Iran's national epic.
As an epithet of kings and the reason why the dynasty is so called, Middle- and New Persian "Kay(an)" is a continuation of Avestan kavi (or kauui) "king" and also "poet-sacrificer" or "poet-priest." The word is also etymologically related to the Avestan notion of kavaēm kharēno, the "divine royal glory" that the Kayanian kings were said to hold. The Kiani Crown is a physical manifestation of that belief.
awlaadberry, just one more thing, I have never heard of the Pishdadian dynasty or the Kayanian dynasty, can you give me the dates for these please?
I sent you that link just to show you the use of the terms Ajam and Persian.
Posted by Just call me Jari (Member # 14451) on :
quote:Originally posted by awlaadberry: The Prophet Mohamed (pbuh) said:
"I was sent to all mankind - the black and the red".
بعثت إلى الناس كافة الأحمر والأسود
Ibn Al-Athir said:
"The hadith says: 'I was sent to the black and the red (white/light-skinned)' - meaning the non-Arabs (Persians, etc) and the Arabs; because most non-Arabs (Persians etc) are red and white (light-skinned) and most Arabs are very dark-skinned and dark-skinned."
قال ابن الأثير: فيه "بعثت إلى الأحمر والأسود" أي العجم والعرب ؛ لأن الغالب على ألوان العجم الحُمْرة والبياض ، وعلى ألوان العرب الأُدْمَة والسُمرة
Alwaadberry I have pointed this out to Mike that the Persians were seen as white by scholars such as Al-Jahiz back in the 9th century, again this goes over Mike111's feeble mind..
Posted by awlaadberry (Member # 17426) on :
quote:Originally posted by Mike111:
quote:Originally posted by awlaadberry: Mike You posted pictures of the Elamites and no one said that the Elamites were light-skinned. The Elamites are the descendants of Elam the son of Sam the son of Noah. Elam is the granduncle of the extinct Arab tribes of Ad and Thamud. The Elamites are not the Persians that the Arabs called "The Red People".
awlaadberry - I have a simple question for you.
Are those YOUR thoughts, or is that what you were TAUGHT in School?
These aren't my thoughts. This is history.
Posted by awlaadberry (Member # 17426) on :
quote:Originally posted by Just call me Jari:
quote:Originally posted by awlaadberry: The Prophet Mohamed (pbuh) said:
"I was sent to all mankind - the black and the red".
بعثت إلى الناس كافة الأحمر والأسود
Ibn Al-Athir said:
"The hadith says: 'I was sent to the black and the red (white/light-skinned)' - meaning the non-Arabs (Persians, etc) and the Arabs; because most non-Arabs (Persians etc) are red and white (light-skinned) and most Arabs are very dark-skinned and dark-skinned."
قال ابن الأثير: فيه "بعثت إلى الأحمر والأسود" أي العجم والعرب ؛ لأن الغالب على ألوان العجم الحُمْرة والبياض ، وعلى ألوان العرب الأُدْمَة والسُمرة
Alwaadberry I have pointed this out to Mike that the Persians were seen as white by scholars such as Al-Jahiz back in the 9th century, again this goes over Mike111's feeble mind..
He's confusing the Persians with the Elamites.
Posted by Just call me Jari (Member # 14451) on :
quote:Originally posted by awlaadberry:
quote:Originally posted by Mike111:
quote:Originally posted by awlaadberry: Mike You posted pictures of the Elamites and no one said that the Elamites were light-skinned. The Elamites are the descendants of Elam the son of Sam the son of Noah. Elam is the granduncle of the extinct Arab tribes of Ad and Thamud. The Elamites are not the Persians that the Arabs called "The Red People".
awlaadberry - I have a simple question for you.
Are those YOUR thoughts, or is that what you were TAUGHT in School?
These aren't my thoughts. This is history.
No alwaadberry Ive been through this with Mike111, He's not confusing he advocates the Elamites ARE Persians and the Persians were black. HE forgets that the Persians conquered the Elamites..
Posted by awlaadberry (Member # 17426) on :
quote:Originally posted by Just call me Jari:
quote:Originally posted by awlaadberry:
quote:Originally posted by Mike111:
quote:Originally posted by awlaadberry: Mike You posted pictures of the Elamites and no one said that the Elamites were light-skinned. The Elamites are the descendants of Elam the son of Sam the son of Noah. Elam is the granduncle of the extinct Arab tribes of Ad and Thamud. The Elamites are not the Persians that the Arabs called "The Red People".
awlaadberry - I have a simple question for you.
Are those YOUR thoughts, or is that what you were TAUGHT in School?
These aren't my thoughts. This is history.
No alwaadberry Ive been through this with Mike111, He's not confusing he advocates the Elamites ARE Persians and the Persians were black. HE forgets that the Persians conquered the Elamites..
Oh. I thought he was confusing the two.
Posted by Mike111 (Member # 9361) on :
alwaadberry, you prefer a conversation with Jari rather than answer my question regarding the Pishdadian dynasty and the Kayanian dynasty? I thought that you were a serious person. I am still waiting for the dates for these dynasties.
Posted by awlaadberry (Member # 17426) on :
quote:Originally posted by Mike111: alwaadberry, you prefer a conversation with Jari rather than answer my question regarding the Pishdadian dynasty and the Kayanian dynasty? I thought that you were a serious person. I am still waiting for the dates for these dynasties.
Oh. You were waiting for me? I answered you. I said that I sent you that link just to show you the use of the terms Ajam and Persian. I have no information about the Pishdadian or Kayanian Dynasties. Can you explain to me the relevance?
Posted by Mike111 (Member # 9361) on :
quote:Originally posted by awlaadberry:
quote:Originally posted by Mike111: [qb] alwaadberry, you prefer a conversation with Jari rather than answer my question regarding the Pishdadian dynasty and the Kayanian dynasty? I thought that you were a serious person. I am still waiting for the dates for these dynasties.
Oh. You were waiting for me? I answered you. I said that I sent you that link just to show you the use of the terms Ajami and Persian. I have no information about the Pishdadian or Kayanian Dynasties. Can you explain to me the relevance?
awlaadberry - YOU said that when I say Persians, I'm talking about the people that the Arabs called The Red Ones or the Ajam.
So according to YOUR link, the source of these Ajam is the Pishdadian and Kayanian Dynasties. So I am asking you when these dynasties existed.
BTW - didn't you read your own links?
Ajam
A Persian folk etymology derives the word from the name of an ancient Persian king, Jamshid, though this is linguistically dubious. The folk etymology would have "Ajam" as an arabized.
Jamshēd, or Jam in Middle- and New Persian, or Yima in Avestan is a mythological figure of Greater Iranian culture and tradition.
In tradition and folklore, Jamshid is described as having been the fourth and greatest king of the epigraphically unattested Pishdadian dynasty ( before Kayanian dynasty). This role is already alluded to in Zoroastrian scripture (e.g. Yasht 19, Vendidad 2), where the figure appears as Avestan language Yima(-Kshaeta) "(radiant) Yima," and from which the name 'Jamshid' then derives.
Posted by awlaadberry (Member # 17426) on :
quote:Originally posted by Mike111:
quote:Originally posted by awlaadberry:
quote:Originally posted by Mike111: [qb] alwaadberry, you prefer a conversation with Jari rather than answer my question regarding the Pishdadian dynasty and the Kayanian dynasty? I thought that you were a serious person. I am still waiting for the dates for these dynasties.
Oh. You were waiting for me? I answered you. I said that I sent you that link just to show you the use of the terms Ajami and Persian. I have no information about the Pishdadian or Kayanian Dynasties. Can you explain to me the relevance?
awlaadberry - YOU said that when I say Persians, I'm talking about the people that the Arabs called The Red Ones or the Ajam.
So according to YOUR link, the source of these Ajam is the Pishdadian and Kayanian Dynasties. So I am asking you when these dynasties existed.
BTW - didn't you read your own links?
Ajam
A Persian folk etymology derives the word from the name of an ancient Persian king, Jamshid, though this is linguistically dubious. The folk etymology would have "Ajam" as an arabized.
Jamshēd, or Jam in Middle- and New Persian, or Yima in Avestan is a mythological figure of Greater Iranian culture and tradition.
In tradition and folklore, Jamshid is described as having been the fourth and greatest king of the epigraphically unattested Pishdadian dynasty ( before Kayanian dynasty). This role is already alluded to in Zoroastrian scripture (e.g. Yasht 19, Vendidad 2), where the figure appears as Avestan language Yima(-Kshaeta) "(radiant) Yima," and from which the name 'Jamshid' then derives.
As you can see, they are Aryans.
Posted by Mike111 (Member # 9361) on :
awlaadberry - From YOUR link.
The Missing Years Gap in Aryan History Until the Start of Median / Persian History
The end of the Kayanian dynasty appears to coincide with the closing of the Avestan canon. Some disruption appears to have put an end to ancient Aryan history, especially Zoroastrian history in Central Asia. After a significant gap in time the missing years of Zoroastrian history - the next we hear of the Zoroastrian Aryans is not through legend or scripture, but with the emergence of the Medes and Persians a thousand kilometres to the west. In our pages on Aryan Religions we examine the possible reasons for the gap in Zoroastrian Aryan history - the war of religions - where the Zoroastrians (and perhaps even the Aryans) may have lost their claim to power in Central Asia. They could very well have continued to live and be part of the Central Asian kingdoms, but without a Zoroastrian king on the throne, until that is, the rise of the Medes and the Persians.
After the hiatus, the Medes and the Persians reasserted the tradition of Zoroastrian-Aryan kingship, and once they had consolidated their power, they brought back into their domain, the traditional Zoroastrian-Aryan eastern (Central Asian) lands as well. The one change was that the seat of power of the federation of Aryan kingdoms had now shifted westward.
This section brings our examination of Aryan prehistory - the first, Eastern, phase of Aryan history - to a close. The reader can continue to follow the sequence of pages under our History menu listings, or proceed to the page on Ranghaya which introduces the reader to the second, Western, phase of Zoroastrian-Aryan history.
Though the above is actually a religious/mythical presentation and not REAL history. But it does seem a plausible and even an honest attempt at Central Asian history.
But that is NOT what YOU were saying, and it makes NO attempt to identify the Persians and Medes AS Aryans, only that they shared the religion, which we already knew.
Aside from that, there is a wealth of REAL history, supported by artifacts and written material generated by the Persians themselves, to draw from concerning their history. But yet you choose to present myth as Persian history. And even "Boldly" told me that it "Is History".
But this is good! I think there are people who felt that I was unnecessarily insulting to people of your persuasion.
But the fact is that like the others, you knew that you were presenting a made-up lie as history, yet you did it anyway. Just as the Whites in Europe and all over the world do.
I know of no place on Earth, where liars are due or given respect. Therefore I give your folks none. Posted by awlaadberry (Member # 17426) on :
quote:Originally posted by Mike111: awlaadberry - From YOUR link.
The Missing Years Gap in Aryan History Until the Start of Median / Persian History
The end of the Kayanian dynasty appears to coincide with the closing of the Avestan canon. Some disruption appears to have put an end to ancient Aryan history, especially Zoroastrian history in Central Asia. After a significant gap in time the missing years of Zoroastrian history - the next we hear of the Zoroastrian Aryans is not through legend or scripture, but with the emergence of the Medes and Persians a thousand kilometres to the west. In our pages on Aryan Religions we examine the possible reasons for the gap in Zoroastrian Aryan history - the war of religions - where the Zoroastrians (and perhaps even the Aryans) may have lost their claim to power in Central Asia. They could very well have continued to live and be part of the Central Asian kingdoms, but without a Zoroastrian king on the throne, until that is, the rise of the Medes and the Persians.
After the hiatus, the Medes and the Persians reasserted the tradition of Zoroastrian-Aryan kingship, and once they had consolidated their power, they brought back into their domain, the traditional Zoroastrian-Aryan eastern (Central Asian) lands as well. The one change was that the seat of power of the federation of Aryan kingdoms had now shifted westward.
This section brings our examination of Aryan prehistory - the first, Eastern, phase of Aryan history - to a close. The reader can continue to follow the sequence of pages under our History menu listings, or proceed to the page on Ranghaya which introduces the reader to the second, Western, phase of Zoroastrian-Aryan history.
Though the above is actually a religious/mythical presentation and not REAL history. But it does seem a plausible and even an honest attempt at Central Asian history.
But that is NOT what YOU were saying, and it makes NO attempt to identify the Persians and Medes AS Aryans, only that they shared the religion, which we already knew.
Aside from that, there is a wealth of REAL history, supported by artifacts and written material generated by the Persians themselves, to draw from concerning their history. But yet you choose to present myth as Persian history. And even "Boldly" told me that it "Is History".
But this is good! I think there are people who felt that I was unnecessarily insulting to people of your persuasion.
But the fact is that like the others, you knew that you were presenting a made-up lie as history, yet you did it anyway. Just as the Whites in Europe and all over the world do.
I know of no place on Earth, where liars are due or given respect. Therefore I give your folks none.
Mike. I have no idea of what you are talking about. Anyway, WHATEVER.
Posted by Mike111 (Member # 9361) on :
^No not whatever, read YOUR own SOURCES!
Posted by awlaadberry (Member # 17426) on :
quote:Originally posted by Mike111: ^No not whatever, read YOUR own SOURCES!
What source are you referring to?
Posted by dana marniche (Member # 13149) on :
quote:Originally posted by Mike111:
quote:Originally posted by awlaadberry: The Prophet Mohamed (pbuh) said:
"I was sent to all mankind - the black and the red".
بعثت إلى الناس كافة الأحمر والأسود
Ibn Al-Athir said:
"The hadith says: 'I was sent to the black and the red (white/light-skinned)' - meaning the non-Arabs (Persians, etc) and the Arabs; because most non-Arabs (Persians etc) are red and white (light-skinned) and most Arabs are very dark-skinned and dark-skinned."
قال ابن الأثير: فيه "بعثت إلى الأحمر والأسود" أي العجم والعرب ؛ لأن الغالب على ألوان العجم الحُمْرة والبياض ، وعلى ألوان العرب الأُدْمَة والسُمرة
.
From Wiki Abu al-Hassan Ali ibn Muhammad ibn Muhammad, better known as Ali 'Izz al-Din Ibn al-Athir al-Jazari. He was a Kurd, therefore for a time he was with Saladin's army in Syria and later lived in Aleppo and Damascus.
.
awlaadberry - You seem like a decent enough person, but Ibn Al-Athir, like most hadith writers, was just another lying "Piece-of-Sh1t" Turk. Why anyone would want to pay any attention to what they say is beyond me.
BTW - I don't see anything "Light-skinned" about these people.
quote:
Oh I know, Ibn Al-Athir was talking about THESE people!
But he is still a liar, they are Turks like himself, not Persians.
MICHAEL - please stop talking to Awladberry if you can not distinguish between anicient Perisans and the ones in the 90th century or even the Sassanid period!. Why should Tariq answer that nonsense question when most of the Iranian people were like they are today NOT BLACK!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Are you on something?!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Posted by Mike111 (Member # 9361) on :
dana marniche - If you are on this thread. What do you make of the material on that link?
Re, our discussion on the demographics of ancient Central Asia.
I am not blowing it off, there may be something to that myth. After all, conventional history does say that shortly after the Medes (Mada) and the Persians (Parsua) showed up, a group known for their wine making, called Aryans by White historians, did also show up. (Persians didn't use the word in quite the same context all the time).
Darius the Great's, Behistun Inscription
70. (4.88-92.) Darius the King says: By the favor of Ahuramazda this is the inscription which I made. Besides, it was in Aryan, and on clay tablets and on parchment it was composed.
.
THE INSCRIPTIONS OF NAQSH-I-RUSTAM. Inscriptions on south face of steep ridge north of Persepolis.
2. (8-15.) I am Darius the Great King, King of Kings, King of countries containing all kinds of men, King in this great earth far and wide, son of Hystaspes, an Achaemenian, a Persian, son of a Persian, an Aryan, having Aryan lineage. Posted by Mike111 (Member # 9361) on :
dana marniche - I don't get the joke.
Posted by Mike111 (Member # 9361) on :
quote:Originally posted by dana marniche: MICHAEL - please stop talking to Awladberry if you can not distinguish between anicient Perisans and the ones in the 90th century or even the Sassanid period!. Why should Tariq answer that nonsense question when most of the Iranian people were like they are today NOT BLACK!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Are you on something?!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
dana marniche - if this is a joke, I don't get it.
Posted by Mike111 (Member # 9361) on :
dana marniche - Don't tell me you are one of THEM!
Geez - I didn't figure you for one of those people clinging to a made-up history - how sad you all are.
Posted by awlaadberry (Member # 17426) on :
quote:Originally posted by awlaadberry:
quote:Originally posted by Mike111: ^No not whatever, read YOUR own SOURCES!
What source are you referring to?
Mike. I don't know what you consider this person, but the Arabs of the 7th century considered him and his people The Red (White) People
Yazdgard
Posted by anguishofbeing (Member # 16736) on :
quote:Originally posted by Mike111: dana marniche - I don't get the joke.
you are the focking joke.
Posted by awlaadberry (Member # 17426) on :
That's all I have to say to you Mike.
Posted by Mike111 (Member # 9361) on :
awlaadberry - You people are pathetic. Here, learn something.
British Museum
Wiki
Shapur II
King Chosroes
Silver coin of Ardashir I with a fire altar on its verso (British Museum London).
Coin of Bahram I.
Sassanian Persian King List
Ardashir I from 224 to 241. Shapur I from 241 to 272 Hormizd I from 272 to 273. Bahram I from 273 to 276. Bahram II from 276 to 293. Bahram III year 293. Narseh from 293 to 302. Hormizd II from 302 to 310. Shapur II from 310 to 379 Ardashir II from 379 to 383. Shapur III from 383 to 388. Bahram IV from 388 to 399. Yazdegerd I from 399 to 420. Bahram V from 420 to 438. Yazdegerd II from 438 to 457. Hormizd III from 457 to 459. Peroz I from 457 to 484. Balash from 484 to 488. Kavadh I from 488 to 531. Djamasp from 496 to 498. Khosrau I from 531 to 579. Hormizd IV from 579 to 590. Khosrau II from 590 to 628. Bahram VI from 590 to 591. Bistam from 591 to 592. Hormizd V year 593. Kavadh II year 628. Ardashir III from 628 to 630. Peroz II year 629. Shahrbaraz year 630. Boran and others from 630 to 631. Hormizd VI (or V) from 631 to 632. Yazdegerd III from 632 to 651
This is the FAKE sh1t you people believe in! Revival of ancient Iranian history and culture Limestone relief panel, showing Kai Khosrau From Iran, aroundAD 1850
Like I said, you people are sad.
Posted by Just call me Jari (Member # 14451) on :
AHAHAHAHAHAH
YES...YESSS
First Brada, Truth & Rights, Now Dana and Alwaadberry see the Fraudulent baffonery of Mike111...
AAHHH HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA EVERYONE From Lioness to Akoben and now Alwaadberry see what Mike really is..A FRAUD!!!!
AHAHAAHHA
Posted by Just call me Jari (Member # 14451) on :
quote:Originally posted by Mike111: awlaadberry - You people are pathetic. Here, learn something.
British Museum
Wiki
Shapur II
King Chosroes
Silver coin of Ardashir I with a fire altar on its verso (British Museum London).
Coin of Bahram I.
Sassanian Persian King List
Ardashir I from 224 to 241. Shapur I from 241 to 272 Hormizd I from 272 to 273. Bahram I from 273 to 276. Bahram II from 276 to 293. Bahram III year 293. Narseh from 293 to 302. Hormizd II from 302 to 310. Shapur II from 310 to 379 Ardashir II from 379 to 383. Shapur III from 383 to 388. Bahram IV from 388 to 399. Yazdegerd I from 399 to 420. Bahram V from 420 to 438. Yazdegerd II from 438 to 457. Hormizd III from 457 to 459. Peroz I from 457 to 484. Balash from 484 to 488. Kavadh I from 488 to 531. Djamasp from 496 to 498. Khosrau I from 531 to 579. Hormizd IV from 579 to 590. Khosrau II from 590 to 628. Bahram VI from 590 to 591. Bistam from 591 to 592. Hormizd V year 593. Kavadh II year 628. Ardashir III from 628 to 630. Peroz II year 629. Shahrbaraz year 630. Boran and others from 630 to 631. Hormizd VI (or V) from 631 to 632. Yazdegerd III from 632 to 651
This is the FAKE sh1t you people believe in! Revival of ancient Iranian history and culture Limestone relief panel, showing Kai Khosrau From Iran, aroundAD 1850
Like I said, you people are sad.
Honestly Dude, I kinda feel sorry for you. You actually believe your delusions. You actually get a mental high from your picture spams. You are such a Joke that I PITY you...
Posted by Mike111 (Member # 9361) on :
Sassanian Coins
Silver Drachm of Narseh. 293-303 CE
Silver Drachm of Hormizd II. 303-309 CE
Silver Drachm of Hormizd II. 303-309 CE
Silver Drachm of Valkash. 484-488 CE.
Silver Drachm of Khusru II. 590 CE
Silver Drachm of Vistahm. 591-597 CE
Silver Drachm of Khusro II. 591 - 628 CE
Silver Drachm of Hormizd V. 630-632 CE.
.
Where are your White people? Posted by Mike111 (Member # 9361) on :
Jari - The truth and facts, just takes everything out of you Sand Niggers, doesn't it.
That's what happens when you try to live a lie.
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by Mike111: Sassanian Coins
Silver Drachm of Narseh. 293-303 CE
Silver Drachm of Hormizd II. 303-309 CE
Silver Drachm of Hormizd II. 303-309 CE
Silver Drachm of Valkash. 484-488 CE.
Silver Drachm of Khusru II. 590 CE
Silver Drachm of Vistahm. 591-597 CE
Silver Drachm of Khusro II. 591 - 628 CE
Silver Drachm of Hormizd V. 630-632 CE.
.
Where are your White people?
Mike why are you such a block head? You continually post, this time coins, unpainted objects.
They aren't painted so the color or shade of their skin is not apparant whatsoever. It proves absolutely nothing one way or the other. Why do you keep doing this?
Posted by MelaninKing (Member # 17444) on :
Hahahaha, Lionese needs her crayons. You and Jari are both brain-locked. LMBAO @ you white fools!
Posted by Mike111 (Member # 9361) on :
^When the question "Who are you gonna believe, me or your own lying eyes" is asked by Jari and lioness. It is indicative of their delusional state, that they expect someone to believe THEM!
What a bunch of Sickos.
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by Mike111: ^When the question "Who are you gonna believe, me or your own lying eyes" is asked by Jari and lioness. It is indicative of their delusional state, that they expect someone to believe THEM!
quote:Originally posted by MelaninKing: Hahahaha, Lionese needs her crayons. You and Jari are both brain-locked. LMBAO @ you white fools!
Damn Nigga can you go one thread where you don't suck Mike111's dick?? Be your own man for once and stop following in the shadows...or in your case the shadows of the New Age movement created by what you call Albinos..LMAO..Where's your Pride fool??
You unoriginal, pathetic, **** smelling, Nigger-Moor, Ali baba Genie..LMAO
Go Astroproject somewhere Alladin..
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
(albinoist burnt to a crisp)
Posted by Just call me Jari (Member # 14451) on :
quote:Originally posted by Mike111: ^When the question "Who are you gonna believe, me or your own lying eyes" is asked by Jari and lioness. It is indicative of their delusional state, that they expect someone to believe THEM!
What a bunch of Sickos.
LMAO Mike here is a list of folks who "DONT SEE WHAT YOU SEE" in your various Picture spams..
Me Lioness Afronut Brada Alwaadberry Akoben Djhuti Al-Takruri
People who adhere to you
Melaninking Clyde Winters Edmund Crofied
LMAO, you are a fringe nut case dude, No one buys your B.S revionism, even the more Afrocentric folks realize your inferiority complex issiues.
Like I said I kinda feel bad for you, you are soo pitiful.
Posted by dana marniche (Member # 13149) on :
quote:Originally posted by Mike111: dana marniche - If you are on this thread. What do you make of the material on that link?
Re, our discussion on the demographics of ancient Central Asia.
I am not blowing it off, there may be something to that myth. After all, conventional history does say that shortly after the Medes (Mada) and the Persians (Parsua) showed up, a group known for their wine making, called Aryans by White historians, did also show up. (Persians didn't use the word in quite the same context all the time).
Darius the Great's, Behistun Inscription
70. (4.88-92.) Darius the King says: By the favor of Ahuramazda this is the inscription which I made. Besides, it was in Aryan, and on clay tablets and on parchment it was composed.
.
THE INSCRIPTIONS OF NAQSH-I-RUSTAM. Inscriptions on south face of steep ridge north of Persepolis.
2. (8-15.) I am Darius the Great King, King of Kings, King of countries containing all kinds of men, King in this great earth far and wide, son of Hystaspes, an Achaemenian, a Persian, son of a Persian, an Aryan, having Aryan lineage.
MICHAEL - I have said many times that the early Medes and their Achaemenid relatives to me look more Ethiopic than they do like the Shah of Iran. This is also shown in the skeletal evidence of the affiliated Namazgha levels. The same CAN NOT be said of the later Scythic usurpers who make up the Sassanid rulers you posted.
So why do you keep confusing the Sassanids and other white Scythians and people of 9th century Iran with these Ethiopian people whose mythologies claim and origin in southern Arabia with othe "blacks" Dahakk, Afrasiab, Farouz, Saudah, Raudah, Kai Kush, Sjavarkush and other ancestors of Rustam and early Iranian i.e. real Persian heroes.
9th century Iranians for the most part as more than one person has said on this forum were described in texts as "hook-nosed" and near white in color and liked the way they look. These Iranians are those that first entered Arabia in the Sassanid and later periods.
Why are you trying to pretend that Tariq is saying something wrong in separating these people from early Arabians who described them as red having complexion of slaves. you are going against your own posts of What do REAL ARABS LOOK LIKE.
Furthermore who is "you people"! He is a black man who happens to be descended from the original Afro-Arabians and has a right to not want to have his ancestors confused with the non-Arab people such as the 9th century IRANIANS or later Arabicized Syrians who look like them now also present in the peninsula of Arabia - the same people that you are on this site constantly denigrating as "sand niggers".
And furthermore i doubt that the Sauma or Hauma of the conical hat wearing Scytho-Haumavarga (whom Herodotus says adopted the name Arya from the Medes) was wine - probably more likely beer - judging from whom they were related to.
PS - I'm also not interested in confusing the small flared nosed Dravidian-type people of early Elam with early Ethiopic Indic-Aryan speaking Medes and Persians either, from whom the late fair-skinned Scythic peoples ADOPTED much of their lore.
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
now watch, a flurry of
picture
coming soon to a theater near you
Posted by dana marniche (Member # 13149) on :
quote:Originally posted by Mike111: Sassanian Coins
Silver Drachm of Narseh. 293-303 CE
Silver Drachm of Hormizd II. 303-309 CE
Silver Drachm of Hormizd II. 303-309 CE
Silver Drachm of Valkash. 484-488 CE.
Silver Drachm of Khusru II. 590 CE
[IMG]
Silver Drachm of Vistahm. 591-597 CE
Silver Drachm of Khusro II. 591 - 628 CE
Silver Drachm of Hormizd V. 630-632 CE.
.
Where are your White people?
All these photos prove is that the Sassanid rulers had the blood of the previous rulers in them. The bulk of the people that entered southern Iran after the Achamenids were brachycephalic non-African related people. There are plenty of modern Iranians with long curly hair that are darker than other Iranians but not dark brown in color like the Achaemenid Dahae, Kerman, Derbikes etc. At the most these coins depict people who are the result of some Scythic and early Persian admixture. They figure more into Snaky's "mulatto dreams". Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by dana marniche: There are plenty of modern Iranians with long curly hair that are darker than other Iranians but not dark brown in color.
please post pictures of two or more modern Iranians with long curly hair that are darker than other Iranians but not dark brown in color.
thank you
Posted by dana marniche (Member # 13149) on :
quote:Originally posted by Mike111:
quote:Originally posted by awlaadberry: The Prophet Mohamed (pbuh) said:
"I was sent to all mankind - the black and the red".
بعثت إلى الناس كافة الأحمر والأسود
Ibn Al-Athir said:
"The hadith says: 'I was sent to the black and the red (white/light-skinned)' - meaning the non-Arabs (Persians, etc) and the Arabs; because most non-Arabs (Persians etc) are red and white (light-skinned) and most Arabs are very dark-skinned and dark-skinned."
قال ابن الأثير: فيه "بعثت إلى الأحمر والأسود" أي العجم والعرب ؛ لأن الغالب على ألوان العجم الحُمْرة والبياض ، وعلى ألوان العرب الأُدْمَة والسُمرة
.
From Wiki Abu al-Hassan Ali ibn Muhammad ibn Muhammad, better known as Ali 'Izz al-Din Ibn al-Athir al-Jazari. He was a Kurd, therefore for a time he was with Saladin's army in Syria and later lived in Aleppo and Damascus.
.
awlaadberry - You seem like a decent enough person, but Ibn Al-Athir, like most hadith writers, was just another lying "Piece-of-Sh1t" Turk. Why anyone would want to pay any attention to what they say is beyond me.
BTW - I don't see anything "Light-skinned" about these people.
quote:
Oh I know, Ibn Al-Athir was talking about THESE people!
But he is still a liar, they are Turks like himself, not Persians.
It is true the people often distorted things about the blacks MICHAEL. That doesn't mean everthing they said was a lie. Why would they want to make the Arabs who gave them their religion into black people. This is what I mean by nonsense.
Why would Kurds and the Iraqis say the Sulaym and tribes of the Quraysh were black - To denigrate their own prophet?!
Your so interested in making Tariq into one of your sand ni_ _ ggers so that you can insult him that you take leave of your SENSE.
Posted by dana marniche (Member # 13149) on :
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Mike111: [qb] [QUOTE]Originally posted by awlaadberry: [qb]
Posted by Mike111 (Member # 9361) on :
dana marniche - I suspected that ignorance was the cause of our disagreement. So please allow me to clarify things.
YOU SAID QUOTE: So why do you keep confusing the Sassanids and other white Scythians and people of 9th century Iran with these Ethiopian people?
Actually what is happening is that you are confusing "Parthians" who were indeed White, with Sassanian Persians.
After Alexanders Victory
With the end of the Achaemenian Empire, southern Mesopotamia and Persia were partitioned by Alexander into the satrapy of Babylonia in the south, while the northern part of Mesopotamia was joined with Syria into another satrapy. It is not known how long this division lasted, but by the death of Alexander the Great in 323 B.C, northern Mesopotamia was removed from Syria and made a separate satrapy. One of his generals, Seleucus (later Seleucus I Nicator), received the satrapy of Babylonia to rule. Seleucus thus became the ruler of a large empire, stretching from modern Afghanistan to the Mediterranean Sea. He founded a number of cities, the most important of which were Seleucia on the Tigris, and Antioch on the Orontes River in Syria.
The Parthian's
It was during the reign of a later Seleucid king "Antiochus III", that one of the Caucasian tribes, which had earlier migrated in from the northeast - the Parthians - under their king Mithradates I, conquered Seleucid territory in Persia, and entered the city of Seleucia in 141 B.C.
After the death of Parthian king Mithradates I in 138 B.C, Seleucid king "Antiochus VII" began a campaign to recover lost Seleucid territory in the east. This campaign was successful until Antiochus VII, lost his life in Persia in 129 B.C. His death ended Seleucid rule in Mesopotamia, and allowed for the establishment of small principalities in both south and north Mesopotamia.
Also with the death of Antiochus VII, the Parthians then went on to conquer what was left of Media, Babylonia, and Assyria, thus creating the Parthian empire. This Parthian Empire would last until 224 A.D. The Parthian empire was not centralized, there were several languages, ethnically several peoples, and several economic systems. Thus the Parthian monarch was the ruler of his own kingdom, plus some eighteen vassal kings, such as the rulers of the city-state of Hatra, the port of Characene and the kingdom of Armenia.
By now, Rome has become the great power in Europe, and they too are bent on conquest. The prize for them was what was left of the Seleucid Empire. The Parthians also wanted more of this territory. So in 69 B.C, the two enemies concluded a treaty in anticipation of taking the remnants of the Seleucid Empire and splitting it up amongst themselves. The Euphrates river would be their border, east of that would be Parthia's, west of the Euphrates would be Roman.
The Seleucid Empire was assaulted from two sides: the Parthians attacked from the east, the Romans from the west. Six years later, the Roman commander "Pompey the Great" conquered what was left of the empire of the Seleucids. However, ten years later in 53 B.C, the Roman general Crassus invades Parthia. This would be the beginning of a series of wars, that were to last for almost three hundred years.
The Parthian armies consisted of two types of cavalry: the heavily-armed and armored cataphracts, and the lightly armed brigades of mounted archers. To the Romans, who relied on heavy infantry, the Parthians were hard to pin-down and defeat. On the other hand, the Parthians could never occupy conquered territory; they had neither the infantry nor the skills, to hold ground. This explains why the Roman-Parthian wars lasted so long.
Also in these war years, the Romans have been divided between the supporters of Pompey and those of Julius Caesar. Because of this Roman civil war, there was no opportunity to concentrate on the Parthians. So in 41 B.C, Parthia invaded Roman territory in Syria, Cilicia, Caria, and then attacked the city of Phrygia. A second Parthian army invaded Judaea, and captured its king Hyrcanus II. The spoils from these victories were immense, and put to good use: king Phraates IV invested them in Ctesiphon, a new capital that he would built on the Tigris river.
The Sassanian's
The wars with Rome continued, back and forth, until Septimius Severus became king of the Roman empire. He attacked Parthia, and Ctesiphon was captured in 198 A.D. As a result of this victory, large spoils were brought to Rome. Parthia was now impoverished, while at the same time, there had also been internal revolts in Parthia.
And so in 224 A.D, the resurgent Persians, now under their king "Ardašir", culminated the war with Parthia that his father "Papak" had started. He defeated the last Parthian king "Artabanus V" in battle, and two years later, Ardašir took Ctesiphon. This meant the end of Parthia, and it also meant the beginning of the second Persian Empire, one ruled by the Sassanid kings.
The beginnings of the Sassanian dynasty (alternatively Sasanian or Sasanid) are found in the southwest Persian state of Pars, (its modern name is Fars). Sometime in the first decade of the 3rd century A.D, a king by the name of Papak seized the throne of Pars. After unifying the region under his command, Papak waged war against the central Parthian government, but died before the conflict was resolved. Papak's son Ardashir inherited the throne in 216 A.D, and continued the Persian campaign against the Parthian Empire.
BTW, your assertion that the Sassanian Persians were Mulattoes, ruling White people is quite incredible. Some might even say "Silly".
And I really don't see any signs of mixture here, perhaps you could point out these signs of admixture to me.
Sassanian plate and pitcher
Close-up Posted by Mike111 (Member # 9361) on :
^As I have often said to American and European Whites: You are as much a victim of the lies and bullsh1t of you scholars and academics as their intended victims - blacks. For their lies and bullsh1t has made you ignorant, and believing in myth and made-up history.
This also applies to religion: Just as the Greeks and Romans and Khazar Jews; once they had taken control of the Hebrew religion, filled the religious books with their own propaganda.
So too did the Turks, once they had taken control of the Arab religion. I have seen passages in Hadiths, which no Arab or any other Black man, would write or sanction.
_______________________
![[Confused]](confused.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
