are the Azeris , "Kurd" ?

[dyaoko]

my Persian professor said that , when mingols came to today's azerbaijan they mixed with ppl and made them speak turkish...

so we can say today's azeris have a lot of kurdish blood !
it isnt logical to say that mingols came to kurdistan and Deleted every human in Azerbaijan and replaced them with Turks (ha ha Life is not Windows ! )


so I guess some of the Azeris are Kurd who speak turkish ! Actualy their girls are so beautifull that makes me think they can not be turk ! ha ha (Joking)

what do you think ? I am seeking for a scientific historic RIGHT answer , please guide me.

[Piling]

I would not say that they were all entirely "Kurds" but certainly very near cousins. That is right, before the 14th century, most of the population in Azerbaydjan spoke a language very similar to Kurdish, or "gilanî". They were Iranian people, and slowly they have been turkicized. And not because of Moghul but of Turkmens tribes. Moghul and Turks are not the same people, they are different as Persians are different of Kurds. Azeri is nearer of Turkish. But that is right that Moghul invasion was a benefit for Turkmen tribes which dominated many areas after the fall of Ilkanid (moghol) dynasties : Ak-Koyunlu and Kara koyyunlu empires, for example.

But in Caucasian area, there was much Kurds with many other Iranian populations, and atfer the 14th 15th century Turkish language spred.

For example, Shah Ismaïl the Safavi was probably Kurd, but wrote in Turkish.

Moreover, I remembered the Iranian movie "Basho", where an Arab boy from Khuzistan ? feld the war and came in Northern Iran. I watched the movie and when I heard the people talking, I understood much words, it was like Kurdish ! And when a school in Beslan was taken in hostage by Chechens, I heard some Ossets talking : it was near of Kurdish.

Western Iran has common roots for scientists : their languages are closed each others, like Kurdish, as Persian is closer than Southern Iranian dialects. Some scholars says that it is because Western Iranian are originated from Median/Scyths tribes (I suppose that this theory will rejoice you Dyaoko !:)

[simore]

Azeri language seems to be so close to turkish. As a non turkish I could not find any differences in these languages.

[Piling]

Current "azeri" is a Turkish language now. But before the 14th 15th century they spoke an Iranian dialect probably near of Gilanî or Kurdish or Ossetian, because they belonged to the same group of Western Iranian people. But of course, now they are "Azeri" and they had never been Kurds, just cousins.

[tomjez]

It's as close to Turkish as Quebecquois is close to french...Same with a weird accent! And a lot more of farsi words as well...

When I look at Aztv (azeri) I can hear they speak turkish, but it's really hard to understand because of the accent. I think it is no problem for a native turk

[simore]

But if look into history 100 years ago then we see that whole Azeri territories belongs to Persia and later soviets annexed 1/3 of their territory.

[Piling]

Since the more ancient periods, the empire of Iran had always been an empire with various nations with different ethnies, Iranians, Turks, Arabs, Armenians...

[dyaoko]

by my idea azeris are so much diffrent with Turks in DNA .

if you compare their DNA you will find major diffrence I am sure.

Azeri's skin is not the same color as turks (which is almost Yellow)
Azeris Hair color is not Black always. [while turks are always Black head unless they have some kurdish DNA]

[Piling]

You could have some surprising discovery with DNA... External "colour" is not the main criterion. For example some people in Scandinavia are near to Asiatic population in Northern Japan, and so on...

In our DNA we are all Homo Sapiens Sapiens. Lucy and Tumai are different from us. Homo Neanderthalisis too. A Turk and a Kurd belong to the same specy, they can make children each others, you know !.

[dyaoko]

[quote=\"Piling\"]In our DNA we are all Homo Sapiens Sapiens. Lucy and Tumai are different from us. Homo Neanderthalisis too. A Turk and a Kurd belong to the same specy, they can make children each others, you know !.[/quote]

in Sine , there is a saying that says \"please speak for diplomes too !\"

means what you said is too hard for me , ! I would need a Bachelor..

what are Homo Sapiens Sapiens , LucyTumai Homo Neanderthalisi specy and what is can make children each others ?

[Piling]

Lucy and Tumai are the most ancient hominids who walked on their bothlegs (and not with their hands too, like monkeys). They have been found in Eastern Africa. They are grand-grand cousins/uncles ? of humans and some great monkeys, but not humans.

There were after many ligneages of hominids, who had diseappeared, but who, gradually, became nearer and nearer of our own Human specy : Australopithecus, etc.

Homo Neanderthalis is very recent. He is very near of us, he is a human in fact but not of the same "race". He was the man who lived in caves, built wooden houses, used fire, had beautiful arts (carving, painting, etc). But that human "breed" (like "race" it is not a scientific term but better to understand) had disappeared too, gradually, while our own "race" Homo Sapiens Sapiens (Latin word meaning : very wise and clever human, lol) spred in all the world. Both sorts coexisted a long time, but scienfics who analysed DNA of both groups think that they are too different for making children each others; a bit like donkeys and horses, or lions and tigers : they can sometime reproduced each other, but mules and "tigrons" or "ligrons" (don't know the English term, mixed tiger/lions babies) are sterile so they could not make a new race.

It was the case for Neanderthalis : Homo Sapiens Sapiens replaced them, we don't know why. So all the current humans are Homo Sapiens Sapiens, with the same DNA, Turks, Africans, Chinese, etc. They could make children each others so it means that they are of the SAME BREED or RACE, so "human races don't exist , or if you rather, there is only one.

BTW, DNA is not a very good tool for distinguish populations : blood, chromosoms are easier... For we share 99% of similar DNA with great monkey (like Cheetah), and according to our DNA (but only with it), we are very similar to mouse and pigs !

I am not a biologist nor an anthropologue so if someone better in sciences than me could explain it in a more precise way and even correct some mistakes, welcome !

[dyaoko]

wow pilling , thank you ! I must confess this is the first time I hear such things....

even though I am anerd and I have been in best schools of this country...they never told me such things..
[may be it is in contradict with islam and they removed it from our books]

(oops I just remembered Iraq constitituion....in which it says nothing can bein contradict with islam...so poor iraqis cant also learn that we humans are from monkeies...)


thanks again for your typing that much usfullinfromation

[Piling]

Sure that in an islamic school you will never heard of such things , for some religions are against that "concept of evolution" issued from Darwin's theory which is not a theory now, but scientifically proved (only conditions and reasons of evolution within species could be debated). Some American religious schools forbid to teach it because it is against Bible.

[dyaoko]

but pilling you information might be old , if you have read my blog , I had a post about GenoGrahpic , there is a project that was started last year.

in that project named GenoGrpahic they ask ppl of the world to send them their DNA and just by giving $100 they can tell you where your annsectors were from...

cant that method be used for kurds and azeries?

I am not sure...for more information about GenoGrpahic go to this site
http://www5.nationalgeographic.com/genographic/

or read my blog's post about it http://blog.medyadaily.com/2005/04/geno ... d-dna.html

[Piling]

Some researches like that exist since 1960 with analysis of Human blood. In certains regions, groups of rhesus A or B or AB are more numerous, etc. But it could determine only the region where some of your ancestors probably came from. Not the linguistic group to which you belonged, except for very isolated groups (like Inuits) who only reproduced each others. There were in most of the parts of the world, inter-marriages. A Kurd could have in his own blood Armenian, Turkish, Arab, Persian, and formerly, Medes, Babylonian, Aramean, because ME, like Europe was a melting-pot of population. Especially in urban environnement, or in region which had been many and many times invaded, like ME !

A current Turk, from Ankara, for example, had probably a bunch of Greek, or Armenians or Arameans ancestors besides his Turkish ascendants. So genetic could not say that he is a Turk or a Greek or an Armenian.

An example : in Southern region of France, people could have some similar characters in their DNA or blood than Arabs, just because some Arabs groups had invaded this country. So it doesn't mean that this French is an Arab, nor than Arab came from France.

So that criterions only showed that some or your grand grand fathers (but not all) could be originated at a geographical area. But it could not prove anything concerning your self-identity. Azeri have Iranian ancestors, of course, with many other Caucasian's, perhaps Georgian, and Turks and Mongols, etc. So I guess that if we make a genetic analysis of all a country, they seem to be very various people !