|
Post by H. İhsan Erkoç on Jan 17, 2009 0:02:02 GMT 3
Thanx a lot my dear Yabġu!
|
|
|
Post by Alanus on Apr 26, 2010 8:51:23 GMT 3
I have Jeannine Davis-Kimball's "Warrior Women" book and she talks a little bit about the Issyk Gold "Man" in it. That find is generally accepted as being Saka. Apparently the gold ornaments are in the "Pazyryk style". Of the headwear, the symbols on it are indicative of fertility symbols, birds perched in trees of life sprouting from mountains. The "arrows" are believed to depict cattails or some other vegetation since arrows of the time were tri-lobed. Davis-Kimball says she saw similar designs on felt carpet from Pazyryk. The jewelry found with the Gold "Man" has never been found in a male burial. Other artifacts in the burial were a gilded bronze mirror, a silver sthingy with a bird's head handle, and a koumiss beater. It's beginning to look like the "Golden Man" is the biggest archaeological pubah of all time! We should never wholly trust anyone with a prepositioned agenda, like Dr. Davis-Kimball [she sees women warriors under every rock], BUT!-- she's probably correct. The whole "reconstruction" of good old Golden Man has been done at least twice. The bones disappeared, conveniently tossed away. All the gold from one boot magically wandered off to the steppes. And to create enough gold plaques for the "bared" boot, the team took them from the tunic, which makes it about a foot shorter than it should be. There's more! The so-called Turkic interpretation about the 23-three-year old on the silver cup is also in question. Why would the Saka/Massagetae speak and write in a Turkic language? Duh! The interpretation of the ritual meal [wine, butter, etc] by Dr. Janos Harmatta is more like the truth. There's more! This tentative warrior priestess had two sets of earrings and an intaglio signet ring of the type used to seal correspondance with wax. Hardy used by the illiterate! The intaglio was that of a shaman wearing a typical feathered head-dress. Again, priestly. More! Herododus tells us that the priestly class used silver ritual vessals, not gold which was for the ruling class. Even more d**ning, Ammianus Marcellinus tells us that the Alans [directly related to the Massagetae] followed only leaders-rulers who were well-seasoned warriors/generals... not green-eared youths like the mis-gendered "Golden Man." Interesting-- she wears a balderic. The Saka never wore one. The sword should be belted to the left hip. The weapon, by the way, is either a Warring States Period sword or a Saka copy of one. I think its Chinese. They did get the hat correct. A similar one is on a Pazyrak belt placque in the Hermitage. And the akinakes is also correct, hanging at the right thigh and strapped to it. And so the "Golden Man" toured Europe not long ago, brandishing his koumiss beater in his left hand, but sitting when he had to GO... as they say. Alanus
|
|
|
Post by H. İhsan Erkoç on Apr 26, 2010 11:43:26 GMT 3
Why would the Saka/Massagetae speak and write in a Turkic language? Why not?
|
|
|
Post by Alanus on Apr 26, 2010 17:15:28 GMT 3
Why would the Saka/Massagetae speak and write in a Turkic language? Why not? Some of them may have spoken Turkic as a second language, but the major Saka/Massagetae tongue was Northeastern Iranian. The linguistic foundation of their personal names, plus the work done by Harmatta, indicate the language as coming from the Iranian branch of Indo-European.
|
|
|
Post by H. İhsan Erkoç on Apr 27, 2010 18:18:28 GMT 3
Because my main area of study is the early medieval eastern-central steppe, I haven't read that much studies regarding the western steppe, therefore I'm mostly unaware of the linguistic studies made on the language of the Scythians-Saka, Massagetai, Sarmatians, etc. Which work of Harmatta are those located? I would like to read it.
|
|
|
Post by Alanus on Apr 27, 2010 22:28:39 GMT 3
Because my main area of study is the early medieval eastern-central steppe, I haven't read that much studies regarding the western steppe, therefore I'm mostly unaware of the linguistic studies made on the language of the Scythians-Saka, Massagetai, Sarmatians, etc. Which work of Harmatta are those located? I would like to read it. The language of the Saka-Massagetae-Alani-Ossetes was and still remains Indo-Iranian. It might be helpful if we look at Harmatta's studies and even beyond him. Rather than have the subject buried in this thread, I'll start a new one if I might.
|
|
|
Post by sarmat on Apr 27, 2010 22:41:30 GMT 3
The language of the Saka-Massagetae-Alani-Ossetes was and still remains Indo-Iranian. It might be helpful if we look at Harmatta's studies and even beyond him. Rather than have the subject buried in this thread, I'll start a new one if I might. Sorry, but there are no any definite proofs for that. We, simply, don't know with enough certainty which language Saka-Massagetae spoke at all. And regarding Ossetian language. It's, actually, still disputable whether it's Iranic language at all...
|
|
|
Post by Alanus on Apr 28, 2010 0:02:26 GMT 3
Sorry, but there are no any definite proofs for that. We, simply, don't know with enough certainty which language Saka-Massagetae spoke at all. And regarding Ossetian language. It's, actually, still disputable whether it's Iranic language at all... Really? I don't want to offend anyone, but could you please show me the "no definite proofs" part by including actual quotes from recognized linguistic experts. The same for Ossetian. This would help enlighten me. Since it really has little to do with the Mystery of Issyk Artifacts, let's continue on the new thread, What Language Did the Saka Speak?
|
|
|
Post by ancalimon on Jan 11, 2011 18:58:48 GMT 3
As far as I know the bones were taken by the Russians and they were lost when they were testing the bones. Wasn't it the Russians who told that Scythians were Iranic people? According to what I read regarding this subject, any Turkologist who tried to link Scythians to Turks were persecuted by Russian authorities.
|
|
|
Post by Ardavarz on Jan 12, 2011 3:45:54 GMT 3
Even as early as 5th century B.C.E. Herodotus wrote that Scythians have spoken with the people in the Steppe in "seven languages" and through the medium of "seven interpreters". So, despite of scarcity of linguistic data today, it's obvious that there have been many languages in the Steppe even in the earliest times.
Those theories trying to explain everything as if there was only one language (or linguistic family) everywhere in the Steppe and through all the time always have seemed to me too artificial to say the least.
Anyway, I don't believe in unity and "oneness" of anything. In my view diversity is the source of creation and every development. Uniformity is a result of entropy - it's not the beginning, but the end of the process.
|
|
|
Post by jamyangnorbu on Jan 12, 2011 4:45:48 GMT 3
Hi Sarmat,
Would you mind sharing any sources you've seen arguing that Ossetic is not genetically an Iranian language?
All the best, JN
|
|
|
Post by ancalimon on Jan 12, 2011 5:28:56 GMT 3
Even as early as 5th century B.C.E. Herodotus wrote that Scythians have spoken with the people in the Steppe in "seven languages" and through the medium of "seven interpreters". So, despite of scarcity of linguistic data today, it's obvious that there have been many languages in the Steppe even in the earliest times. Those theories trying to explain everything as if there was only one language (or linguistic family) everywhere in the Steppe and through all the time always have seemed to me too artificial to say the least. Anyway, I don't believe in unity and "oneness" of anything. In my view diversity is the source of creation and every development. Uniformity is a result of entropy - it's not the beginning, but the end of the process. Regardless of what people may say, Scythians today are accepted as "Iranian" people belonging to "Greater Iran". People who don't call Scythians "Iranian" are regarded as "pseudo-scientific".
|
|
|
Post by jamyangnorbu on Jan 12, 2011 5:55:47 GMT 3
Do you want to back up the "Greater Iran" comment?
|
|
|
Post by sarmat on Jan 12, 2011 6:20:35 GMT 3
As far as I know the bones were taken by the Russians and they were lost when they were testing the bones. Wasn't it the Russians who told that Scythians were Iranic people? According to what I read regarding this subject, any Turkologist who tried to link Scythians to Turks were persecuted by Russian authorities. Please, stop disseminate that BS information. Russian Turkologists always have been among the first in the world and there never has been any "Pan-Iranian" conspiracy from the part of the Russian scholars. I also don't understand how Pan-Iranian is better than Pan-Turkic from the Russian perspective? That is just nonsense.
|
|
|
Post by ancalimon on Jan 12, 2011 6:30:09 GMT 3
Do you want to back up the "Greater Iran" comment? I made a mistake there. It's usually my Iranian friends that keep telling me that. As far as I know the bones were taken by the Russians and they were lost when they were testing the bones. Wasn't it the Russians who told that Scythians were Iranic people? According to what I read regarding this subject, any Turkologist who tried to link Scythians to Turks were persecuted by Russian authorities. Please, stop disseminate that BS information. Russian Turkologists always have been among the first in the world and there never has been any "Pan-Iranian" conspiracy from the part of the Russian scholars. I also don't understand how Pan-Iranian is better than Pan-Turkic from the Russian perspective? That is just nonsense. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turkology#Persecution_in_Soviet_RussiaI don't care about any Pan-xxx. I don't care about politics either. I just stated my observations. On 9 August 1944 the Central Committee VKP(b), the ruling party of the former USSR, published an edict prohibiting "ancientization" of Turkic history. The edict was followed by a consecutive wave of mass arrests, imprisoning and killing of the erudite layer of society, massive creation of replacement "scientists", and re-writing of history pages on an industrial scale.
|
|