Yeah, but these are Iranian people that came from ancient Iranian tribes, and spoke ancient Iranian languages. This is for us Iranians to have pride in ourselves, and be united. We have amazing history, culture, and languages.
Me too, my mother is Kurdish from Iran, and Kurds are a Iranian ethnicity came from the Medes, but when I tell Kurds we are a Iranian people, they get so angry, except the ones in Iran never get offended.
@@agostocobain2729 That's so true, we are iranic ethnic groups like other ethnic groups such as nordic, germanic, slavic, hellenic, latin , turkic ..... btw so your father is persian?
@@agostocobain2729 your ethnicity is just like Cyrus the great, his mother was Median ( kurdish ) and his father was persian, l am fully kurdish from Soran city but my parents came from a village
It breaks my heart every time to realise almost entire middle east is torn apart with war. The rest of the world miss out on experiencing the beautiful culture and people of the middle east
@HOLY KNIGHT VICTORIUS ohh bro we are brother we have to unite Just like Europeans I myself from Kashmir ❤️❤️❤️ My language Dogri and Kashmiri ( From Dardic languages)
i make a resume, the people of the carpathian mountains the hutsuls are descendants of iranic median-sigynian colonists who came to west-romania (sometime between 640-520 BC) and who later mixed with the surrounding dacian population and vlahian shepherds in the transilvania & maramures regions forming the proto-hutsuls with a later slavic component that mixed in their ethnos in the bordering ivano-frankivsk/chirnivcy region. that until today the hutsul language got still some words (including also the ethnonym) of median origin(=comparable with leki,luri,gilaki,kurdi,yazdi-behdinani,bashkardi-garmsiri,balochi,semnani) i explained to proof the thesis and i continue to proof some more of the thesis with the following: when the sigunians lived 2000 years ago or earlier in transilvania they had surely 2 median identities (besides that one as generally being median colonists): the word siguni has to be the same as the name shuhani (what means one of the main dialects of the lurs) so it's showed their median subbranch language-identity, but the other identity was the tribe-identity the word that would later become the ethnicon hucul that means they had seen themselfes as belonging to the husa/huza/huca tribe (some rare variationforms of hutsuls are also huzalei and hutan) what is a dialectical changing of the word bhusa (it's proven that some languages or dialects of iran had in earlier times a dialectical changing of the sound bh changing to h) = busa
So, do Azeris know that situation..? Do you ask it them? Remember Natioanalizm is a catastrophe for a nation, plus, fundamental nationalizm is a double catastrophe.
@@marcusanthony6933The name “Azerbaijan” is Persian, and Azeri people spoke an Iranian language first, and have same genes as Kurds. Iranian Azeris are proud Iranians
Aryan/Iranian Plateau consists of vast lands extending to 1000+ kilometers beyond today's Iran borders, consisting of dozens of antient, and non-ancient migrant, tribes most of which have maintained their ethnic dialects/lanuages. Persians were just one of those many tribes, but today's Persian language is very different from its antient origin, which is probably still spoken by Zoroastrians, in Iran, and outside Iran.
They are all descendants of the nomads from the steppes. They all mingled and intermixed during the ages and fed from the same milk and drunk from the same rivers. Turks and Iranian people are very much similar. Some demented people call each others names but at the end I consider Turks and Iranians a very similar people in culture and ethnicity. Turkmen are great people.
i continue into another related topic that is the westiranic people medes with connection to the fifth "newly discovered or proofed" people of iranic descent (the other four newly proofed as iranic-descended peoples are bulgarians, tatars, chuvashes, balkarians their original roots are iranic bactrian-balkharian) & the nextfollowing people have roots that are iranic median-sigynian: i consider the leks, the lurs, the kurds & the gilaks all four as the descendants of the medes + there is an update with some newly made proofs that make a fifth ethnicy/people as descendants of the medes too, exactly said the sigynian subbranch of the medes, these are the carpathian hutsul/ghucul people of bordering north-romania/southwest-ukraine made them being genetically in first case a mixture of dacians/vlahs+slavs but from their origin(the old substrat) an iranic median sigynnian people (that means generally to a lesser degrees median than dacian or vlahian or slavic but anyway enough genetically and lexicaly median percentage to be considered as a people of iranic/median origin). the first proofs for that are antique historians herodotus, strabo & apollonios, they wrote about the median tribe the siginians how it's written they travelled from media and settled maybe 100-200 years before herodotus' time in west-romania or northwest-romania and herodotus the historian lived around 450 BC so there were two options when the date were when that median sigynian tribe left their homeland and moved via armenia/turkey to transilvania, the first would be around 640 BC (the following years after phraortes death when the things get bad for 28 years for the median kingdom because the assyrian-scythian mixed king made phraortes' son kyaxares for this time to a vassal in his own kingdom) or in the time around 540 BC (when the median kingdom collapsed and the persians took over) however it is said that the sigynnes wear median clothing and had many median customs and the sigynnians themselve said (to herodotus) that they were median colonists or descendants of the medes while the historican strabo (who lived 63BC-23AD) wrote about siginians who lived near the south caspian sea (southwest caspia region like gilan & mazandaran & azerbaijani north talysh mountains until the beginning of tabaristan that means the areas where today gilaks, mazandaranis, talishs live) these siginians were the ones who stayed in media and didn't leave like herodot's sigynnes. strabo said about these siginians that in general they practise persians customs and he mentioned like herodot their small horses race which were shaggy long haired flat-nosed/short-snooted ponies that pulled a chariot or cart in a four-horse-team also often driven by women, maybe that small horse race is related to the north-romania carpathian hutul-horses/ponies (but as a newer mixed breeding that possibly originated from the sigynnian horses). so where is the connection of the median subbranch of the sigynnes (apollonios wrote them also as sigunnes with u) and the luri people? you see can it in the name of the shughani dialect speakers of the lurs. somewhere i also read that sigynians where described as living alongside with an unknown gaulaki tribe (possibly the gilaks are meant to be them but the source of that statement looks not so proven no idea about that). but i want go back to the topic with proofs that the hutsuls of the carpathian mountains were in fact of iranic median sigynian origin, the ethnicon itself for example has 4 theories of it's meaning and etymoligical roots (until today nobody could say or proof what the ethnonym ghucul really means) the 4 theories what it means are all iranic median = luri/leki/kurd/gilaki/garmsiri/behdinani/balochi cognates: 1. it comes from the gilaki word for "mountain"="qukh"(but in a median dialectical way is more possible cuz there was in earlier times a between-sound of the letter k & g (like kg) so like gkukh' that leads to ghukh'+ul/ol(adjective ending) so the proto-huculian(sigynian-orientated) word/ethnonym would mean "the people from the mountains/mountainous people"(meant are sure the carpathian mountains rather than elburz or talishs mountains in my opinion)=ghukhuls=ghuculs. 2. gilaki word "houz" for "lake" so hutsuls would mean " people who live by the lake" (speculative said maybe it could even be the caspian who counts as the biggest lake of the word or maybe the east-part of urmia lake or just one of the smaller lakes in the carpathian mountains) 3. garmsiri word (if the zarandi dialect counts as garmsiri but anyway it's very close related to garmsirian jirofti or kahnuji or marzigal-bashkerdi dialects' words) "guch"="ram/ibex/capricorn/battering-ram)mountain-goat" that means guculs are "people associated with rams/got something to do with rams (of the mountains)" 4. gilaki word "ghut" for "immersion" that would mean ghutsul mean "(water)diver/aquanaut". that leads to another interessting exclusive huculian word (that is not to be found in ucrainian language) that word has also etymological ties to median(luri/kurd/laki/gilaki) cause it sounds related to these two gilaki words by meaning "hooz"(lake/pond) & "ghuth"(immersion/diving) that huculian word is "ghuk" and means "waterfall" so connected with watermasses/lake/diving somehow. another interessting exclusive huculian word (not found in ukrainian language) is "kootüga" and means "dog" while in the luri language "katu" is "dog" these words are really close and belong to median dialects in origin, besides that word for dog, in the luri and in the median language there is a second word for dog it's median "spak" but if you think again about the dialectical typicalness of earlier times with the k/g between-sound you can say "sphagk" shows you the dialectical changing in the luri word "sag"(also meaning dog) where the p was fallen away but still you can consider it as of median origin. a huculian word (not in ukrainian language again) for "farm-animals/domesto-animals/livestock-animals" is "marga" what you can compare to the luri & gilaki word "morg" for "chicken/hen/rooster" what sure is etymologicaly related with the hutsulian marga. a typical ukrainian word what means untypical for the other slavic languages (what could really possibly be borrowed by ukrainians from the carpatian regions where hutsuls live) is the word "gharny"="great" which can be compared to the garmsirian bashkardi word "gohrt"="big" but not so sure about that one, better would be to see the balochi word "shar"="good" as of same origin/roots with the ukrainian "harny/gharny"="great/good/amazing", and there is another word that is only typical for ukraine "khata"="house" what shares the same origin/meaning like the yazdi-behdinani word "khäda/khda"="house". one last word is huculian "bardka" for "axe" while in the "modern-zoroastrian" behdinani/gabri language (spoken by the behdinan people in yazdi dialect) "barda" is translated as "spade"(maybe including spade-chissel and trenching-spade) these two words are surely related, also in the luri language exists the word "bard" but it means "stone" but it could be anyway etymologically connected to these behdanian and huculian words and even to the word "bronze". the proto-hutsul ethos was surely formed in the maramures region and some bordering north-transilvania areas of northwest-romania where the sigynians sometime between 100-500 AD mixed with dacians & vlahian shepherd and a bit later came the slavic component(tiverians & whitecroats) in their ethnogenesis but it was either so that they stretched out their territory more wider out to the north namely ivano-frankivsk, zakarpatie, chirnivcy regions of southern-west ukraine or these 2 slavic tribes came down after 600 AD and mixed with the daco-vlaho-sigynian proto-huculs in the bordering areas (south)ivanofrankivsk/chirnivtsy, at that time proto-hutsuls were possibly already romanized or i would better said nearly/not complete romanized by language. the last thing i wanna say about the sigynians what herodot thought about what their ethnonym could be, he used to detonate the name as "spear" or in the other side to associate it with "traders"(or "hucksters") but he just speculated and didn't know for sure.
still some peoples until today are not officially recognized being of iranic descent, i count 5 of such people, first i wanna mention the 4 peoples who are (today mixed but) direct descendants of the proto-bolgars=originally got 0% to do with turks or huns or ugrians or uralofinns or slavs or elsewhat but the original proto-bolgars who made a first migration-wave after 300 BC came from bactria (north afghanistan) were iranic bactrians=balkh people=balkhars/balkars/bolkars/bolhars, their chief oxyartes and his daughter roxana died already, also her husband alexander died, a part of bactria was even been given to the murya kingdom, so bactrians lose every last influence/control to the greeks at that time so a part of them left bactria and went via north iran to north-caucasus so that's already proven that in the time of georgian king mirvan (160 BC) and the king of armenia vaharshak the first (since 150 BC) the bolkars were mentioned. in the time of kolchi-georgia's king mirvan (reigned since 162 BC) the proto-bolgars/balkars were already well known as northern neighbours of georgia's kingdom in north-ossetia, they were rather been seen as kinda troublemakers for the georgian state and also were mentioned in the texts that at the west-part of the terek river not far away from malka river (by the way the name originally was called balka river before karachai people changed it with their b to m dialect-accent) the proto-bolkhars met the scythians there but they went away from them, so you can see that the georgian chronicle text say the earliest bolgars did not belong to the scythian group like some people try to think, so in that time you can say the main areas of the bolghars were kabardino-balkaria & karachai-cherkessia/adygeya. in the following years a chieftain or king of the proto-bolgars is known according to armenian sources he was called vund (that name is an iranic word that can be translated as the main one/basic/base or sometimes winner) so you see around this time 150-140 BC when the bolkars were definetely already well documented by georgians and also armenians for their chronicles no one ever heared of turks i mean definetely not in the north-caucasus region there were no turkic language (the first people with definitly turkic language who came to the west=wolga region were the göktürks=turquts 550 AD or so). proto-bolgarian chief vund allied with the king of armenia and a part of the proto-bolgars moved to armenia and builded settlements there and stayed there (this region would became known as vanand region and vanando is also a bactrian word and by the way in the pamiric languages especially munji and sanglechi which are together with pashto the descendant-languages of bactrian the word for ceramic vessels is similar with the bulgarian and balkarian words for it: kunar kundor kondar or so). in a roman source king vund were later killed in armenia by a roman man who saw in the bolkharian chieftain vund an enemy to rome (also there can be an interpretation that it was not him but already his son or even grandson especially in the possible case that vund could be a title=main one/basic one like leader/chief/head/mainman). the other part of bolhars stayed in north-caucasus. there was later a second migration-wave from bactria/oxus that is archeologically proven it's connected with an archeologic culture of settlements of similar type that existed from BC times to the time 100-200 AD when these settlements (which were generally near the oxus river) were left and these people then moved to the north-caspian region and after they went further to azov region and adygean-cherkessian region and north-dagestan region and surely also to balkaria. so i count around 6 sources that falls in the pre-hunnic time where proto-bolgars were mentioned by other peoples and that's what's interessting cuz it was before that time of atilla etc. since then they start mixing more and more and also their language and culture etc. so it's annoying that a lot of people wanna start proto-bolgars' history from the time upwards of atilla and the hunns (since 370 AD or so) when the hunns somehow forced some people to get in their confederation and intermixing the cultures and language and genetic, for example did the roxolans prefered to leave that area and went to the west while alans and ostrogoths and bolgars get in the confederation of atilla. but for me is of course interessting the time of bolgars before 370 AD when they had not so much foreign elements or influence or intermixing like in 370-700 AD. they had before that time already shared with other people(s) the same area or i would better said a part of the bolgars who for example lived somewhere more in the east areas (i think that area that is more near to kalmykia or maybe chechen or nogai today's territoy) i read about an archaeological culture somewhere there where alans and bolgars lived together (that was maybe 350 AD or so i think before atilla but i don't remember for sure the dating of that culture). but the other people in the pre-atilla's times (100 years before) with whom the proto-bolgars allied in north-kaukasus in a battle against (if i remember well) the georgians in 250-270 AD were the kacirs/katzirs (the question is were these allied people the proto-khazars or the akatsirs? the akatsirs lived normally somewhere in the east-balkans or north-romania and are sometimes described as being descendants of the agathyrsians but without a sure proof), but also here is important to see that the (bolgar but in that source the name was surely written with an r bargars what happened 3 times or so that some sources called the bolgars with r borgars) leader/chief of the battle against the georgians(?) that leaded the proto-bolgars and kacirs around 270 BC had a real iranic name, his name was surkhap, what can be compared with the name of thr surkhab river in afghanistan or the southernmost uzbekistan region surkhan-daryo (iranic name not turkic) or with the malename from tajikistan sukhrob, that "surkh" means "red" in first case but in second case "south" and "ap" would actually means "water" (maybe it could also be an adjective-ending? or also possible is that the name shows an identity to the surkhab river area in afghanistan?). so in other sources in the time shortly before atilla's huns arrived but in the area north-ossetia & balkaria & adygeya (i think also bordering parts of abkhazia) is documented the burka land or burgant in this area which has again in the name the r dialect but meant are surely the bolgars as the people who gave that land the name. around 350 AD bulgars are mentioned by the byzantines or romans as "vulgares". around 600 AD the bolgars already lived in a wide stretched areal from the don & wolga region to the dagestan region where from these people, who came originally from two migration waves from bactria & other oxus near areas (northwest and northeast to bactria bordering areas), in the time around 650 AD were already mentioned bolgaric sub-groups: the kupi-bolkars, duchi-bolkars, olghondor-bolkars, khadar-bolkars, azov-bolkars. until the time around 200-300 AD you can say they were still unmixed iranic bactrians but later came the foreign infuence or intermixing and language-shift to onoguric language or oguric or saviric or proto-hungarian & early-turkic or huno-turkic alike language(s) or whatever they call it that was spread around in that time 400-600 AD but it was for sure not the original language of the early proto-bolgars but the language with roots in bactria. around 630 AD (probably even years earlier but in the south like adygeya and balkaria region later in the azov region) bolgars startet their independent state, 40 years later the khazars took over, so in the next years a lot of bolgars searched for new lands to settle so a part of them came to balkan under asparukh (that is also an iranic name=aspar means horse-rider or aspa=horse and rukhs=shining & there is a tajik name that has a cognate in the name-building to aspa-rux/asparukh that is shah-rux/shakhrukh) and they estabilished the independend danube bulgaria kingdom in 681AD, another part of bolgars went to the wolga tatarstan & chuvashia region and established the wolga bolgaria kingdom in 700 AD. i read also that in bulgaria archeologists found a (zoroastrian) firetemple, i don't know the exact source i only read that they talked of an evidence that it's a firetemple (like an iranic one) what they found in bulgaria. we have four peoples who are descendants of proto-bolgars (in earlier times/from origin real iranic people from bactria and some partly from bordering khoresmia and sogdia) these are: bulgarians, (generally south) chuvashes, wolga/kazan-tatars (partly also mishar-tatars), (generally cherek region) balkarians. we know these four peoples are genetically heavy mixed with other different peoples: the tatars are mixed with kipchaks, tataro-mongols, finno-ugrians and slavs (for example i saw once a picture of a tatar boy maybe 7 years old he had really a similar phenotype/face like me when i was 7 so he was like me not of turko-mongol or finno-ugric or slavic phenotype but of irano-tatar phenotype). the chuvashes are also as mayority heavy mixed with finno-ugrics and slavs and turks. the danube bulgarians are mixed with thracians and slavs and a bit greco-romans. balkarians are mixed with autochthon caucasian people (adygeans & kabardinians) & kumano-kipchaks/karachai people. even before these four people (descendants of proto-bolgars) settled in their today's "homeland" and mixed with the native people, they were at the time around 650 AD already mixed to some degrees so the bolgars had 650 AD some percental mixed blood with barsils, savirs, onogors, kutrigurs, alans, esegels and some others.
Tajiks are purely blood Persians, they are still spoken by northern Iranians and most scientists like Rudaki who are called the father of the Persian peoples was Tajik Khayyam, Sino, Jomi, al-Bukhari, Almuslim, al-Farabi and many others who lived in the north, they were all Tajiks ❤🇹🇯
@@robertomassa731 What are you saying all indo europeans originated from one place weather they are italians, Spanish , germen, Russian or even North indians all orignated from steppes
@@albintorso6107 That's what I said: they entered Europe from the steppes, but Europe, like India, it was not empty, the Indo-European nomads mixed with the local people where they settled... I hope I have been clear this time. Thank you for answer me.
Iran has always been Iran The case of Azerbaijan : Actually people of republic of Azerbaijan and Iranian Azerbaijan are not the same people, that's a political illusion by some that hold political aspirations most likely funded by western institutions to divide and conquer. These institutions have spent billions upon billions to divide and conquer Iran yet to no avail. Iran is actually the oldest nation state known to modern man. They have always been Iran, Persia is a name the Greeks called Iran because of Persepolis. Now Republic of Azerbaijan was founded 1918 and before Russia ceded Caucasia from Iran during the Turkmenchay treaty the region (republic of Azerbaijan in particular), used to be called Shirvan or Arran and it's people used to be called Caucasian Turks, although it is a fact that majority of people who live in The country called Azerbaijan are ethnically Iranic people not Turks. As for Iranian Azeris, they used to speak "Old Azeri" which was an Iranian language that became Turkified since the 12th century due to Oghuz Turkic invasion. Turks like Arabs empires are known to annihilate the culture, language of the lands they conquered. Ex what Arabs did to ancient Egypt, what Turks tried to do to Armenians etc. Iran on the other hand is the only empire that respected other cultures and it’s people, only empire against slavery (Persepolis was built by paid labor), women were treated equally, religious freedom etc. (Of course everything changed for the worse after the Arab Muslim conquest of Iran).Yet because anglos saxons control History the glory and achievements of Iran has been hidden and concealed. But in Iran it has not, hence why the Iranians (this includes all the Iranic tribes: Azeri, Persians, Baluchs, Kurds etc.) are proud of their country and it is impossible to divide them. Actually in Iran everyone is Iranian all these ethnicities are western made, to further divide and conquer. But in Iran everyone is Iranian. Their ancestors created one of the greatest empires ever. Iran has always been Iran. Current regime: Iran was a democracy but after operation Ajax, the shah was put in power, he was a mere puppet of USA/UK, during his reign the communists worked hard to stage a revolution, and the shah was already acting independently, USA became afraid so they sent in the mullahs, yes the mullahs, the current Islamic regime were brought to power with western support, the Iran-contra affair is further proof of this.
The minerals in the soil, water, food, bath, natures weather and season decides the colour of skin. Can be black, brown, yellow, white, red. Put all under the sun and sea for 10 years, all will be same.
This video is doesn’t represent any culture actually only racism and this people are not iraninic people they are indo-European the only group was real ironic people was the Medes and them language it’s continued by Kurds there is no such 100% Iranian or indo European accept the language every one is mixed with tons nationality how can you call them people from 3000-4000 years ago
Why the hatred of different ethnic groups ? We all come from the same ultimate parents and yet each branched off and gained their own identity. This identity is then joined with others or is protected through isolation and is more enduring. The anti racist trope is silly. Some are white, others are black, others somewhere in between. We can be glad of who we are for God created each individual. Black, white, in between, healthy, sick, rich poor, Male, Female, God decides. Those who have a fantasy that we are all identical do from a political point of view that conflict comes from difference. Yet difference enriches the world and can not be eradicated. One person likes apples and another likes pears. One person likes non representational art and another likes representational art. One person is a Socialist and another is a believer in free market capitalism. Difference can destroy societies when mismanaged but in the world some difference is inevitable.
@@ingridlinbohm7682 Parvaneh is right. She knows what she's talking about. Ra cism and discr imination against ethnic and religious minorities in Iran has been going on for decades and it's well documented. Now maybe things are changing, a bit, and that due to the heroic struggle of all main ethnic groups: Kurds, Azeris, Ahwazi Arabs and Lurs and Bakhtiaris, Balochis, Turkmen along with the progressive Persian political groups. Iran before the revolution had been ruled by absolute monarchy and now is by fascist Islamic regime. Iran can only be ruled with the participation of all Iranians of all ethnic groups under a pluralist and democratic system. And just so you know the Persians who've always been the dominant group in government form only just above 50% of the population. Finally, this channel name Indo Aryan is as much laughable as it is rac ist.
@@humanrights4all425Persians are 70% of Iran also real iran is country for Persians people they always They are the ones who protected the country, spread their scholars and government all over the world, helped everyone, and welcomed races into their country called Persia. So you are an oppressed person. For your information, Kurds have often referred to themselves as a nomadic Persian race but they separated due to their migration. I have a lot to say but I will keep it short for you.(Persia/iran)ans iran is Persia forever❤🇮🇷🦁👍Persian>>>every iranic ethnic
Actually luri are Persian not Kurd but But the sound of their language is very similar to Kurdish and I hope you look that up because the Lurs are actually Persians.
The whole of Central Asia was inhabited by Iranian peoples, mostly Tajik and other tribes. Turkic peoples only came in the region after the 4th and 5th century AD and started supplanting or mixing with the Iranians. You can see Iranic and Turkic features in many of the peoples of the Central Asian countries. Tajik speak an Iranian language but have mixed with the Turkic peoples living around them, so do the other peoples. They all have a beautiful mix of the two cultures. Lots of Turkic loan words in Iranian language and many Iranian loan words in the Turkish language.
@@gusanoworms6267 no there where scythians who leaves in central Asia before Turkish invasion of central before yeah this are mix of both race but they culture is more Turk than Aryans
Most of them look like Europeans before the Arabs enslaved these people in the name of Allah. The "Iranians" that I know also call themselves Persians.
oh pls. why do you think all iranics hate islam and arabs? stop this you know next to nothing about us and only embarrass yourself with this anti-arab/islamic thing.
من از تاجیکستان🇹🇯
مردومی ایرانیتبار زیباترین مردمی جهان هستم !!!! 🧡🌹
Iranians are very beautiful people....Greece and Iran 2 historic civilizations.. 🇬🇷🇮🇷
🇹🇯💚🇬🇷
bro iranians dont mean only the people of iran its mean the people of iran Afghanistan tajikistan and kurdistan
@@jumasemit2533 I like very much the green eyes.. My family in Greece have same green eyes...
@@JohnGrig but you have to agree that gilaks are the best
l am Kurdish, iranic and hellenic we both have a great history
All humans are the same, our ancestors are common. Our blood is red, our mouths smile the same.
Yeah, but these are Iranian people that came from ancient Iranian tribes, and spoke ancient Iranian languages. This is for us Iranians to have pride in ourselves, and be united. We have amazing history, culture, and languages.
It is without doubt Iranians are beautiful people because of many ethnics...brave and having good culture
Don't forget Azari, we are Iranian.
I know dear.
Then maybe you're not beautiful
Azerbaijanis are turke
Azeris are more Aryan but then they are made to believe they are turks which is a lie
Yasha my dearest Iranian people.
here is the complete list of really all modern iranic peoples:
1. pamirians (subgroups or branches: munji, sanglechi, zebaki, ishkashimi, yidgha, shughni, rushani, bartangi, ravmedi, bajuwi, darmarakhti, gunti, roshorvi, khufi, shakhdarai, barvozi, wakhi, yazgulami, sarikoli)
2. yaghnobi
3. kurds (kurmanji, sorani, kalhori, kermanshahi, fayli, kordali, zangana, bayray, kolyai, jafi, silemani, gawraki, garrusi, kojuri)
4. zaza
5. lurs (shuhani, hinimini, minjai, mamasani, kohgiluyehi, khoramabadi, aligodarzi, bakhtiyari, borujerdi, yasuji)
6. mazandarani/mazani
7. gilaks (galeshi, fumani, rashti, langerudi, alamouti, lahijani, rudesari)
8. persians
9. ormur/burki (kanigurami, logari-baraki)
10. baloch
11. pashtuns
12. ossetians
13. semnani/komiseni (lasgerdi, sangesari, sorkhei, biabunaki, aftari)
14. aymaks (jamshedi, firuzkuhi, taimani, mismast, galmani, siamusa, taheri, changezi, zainal, zuri)
15. koochi
16. talishs
17. hewrami/gorani (difficult to say if they belong to kurds or not so they are possibly of mainly proto-kurdish origin but today rather considered as an own ethnicity mostly calling themselfes hewrami and never gorani while kurds call them gorani)
18. khunsari
19. parachi
20. garmsiri (kahnuji, jirofti, bashkardi, minabi, manujani, evazi, rudani, hormozi, halilrudi, mohmedi, laraki, korta, banzarki, shahrichi, galangi, rukhanei, surui, khamiri, kongi, chahvazi, jazirati)
21. kumzars
22. rudbari (those from rudbare shahrestan & zanjan they are whether an own group or a hybrid mix of talishi and tati and gilaki?)
23. leks
24. tajiks
25. sohi
26. kavir (khuri, favri, garmai, iraji)
27. tats
28. behdinans (zoroastrian gabri/yazdi)
29. achomi
30. sivandi
31. dezfuli
32. shahmirzadi (random caspian language possibly a variation sort of mazandarani?)
33. kalarestaqi (can't be properly classified as either a transition between gilaki and mazandarani or as a separate language)
peoples that are considered beeing "halfway-iranic":
34. nuristani
35. qashqai
peoples that are unofficialy but proven beeing of irano-origin:
36. bulgarians (earliest roots: bactria=balkh/iranic proto-bolgars=balkhars)
37. tatars (earliest roots: bactria=balkh/iranic proto-bolgars=balkhars)
38. balkarians (earliest roots: bactria=balkh/iranic proto-bolgars=balkhars)
39. chuvashes (earliest roots: bactria=balkh/iranic proto-bolgars=balkhars)
40. carpathian hutsuls (earliest roots: media/iranic median branch sigynians)
our great eranshahr
Арийские народы - самые красивые. Привет из Осетии 🤍❤💛
И вам привет с Таджикистана 🤍❤💛 💓 🇹🇯
Only I , Afghans , Indians, Pakistani , Iranian , Kurdish , people of South caucuses are real Aryans not Russians or any other European
IRANIAN = CROAT = ARYAN = SWASTIKA
@@shsumant126 russians and indo iranians are cousins
Hello my iranian brother🇮🇷♥️
pashtoon ❤❤❤
Kurdish here, proud iranic
Me too, my mother is Kurdish from Iran, and Kurds are a Iranian ethnicity came from the Medes, but when I tell Kurds we are a Iranian people, they get so angry, except the ones in Iran never get offended.
@@agostocobain2729 That's so true, we are iranic ethnic groups like other ethnic groups such as nordic, germanic, slavic, hellenic, latin , turkic .....
btw so your father is persian?
@@sazgarmuhammad8364 Yeah, he is. My moms family are from Bukan
@@agostocobain2729 your ethnicity is just like Cyrus the great, his mother was Median ( kurdish ) and his father was persian, l am fully kurdish from Soran city but my parents came from a village
It breaks my heart every time to realise almost entire middle east is torn apart with war. The rest of the world miss out on experiencing the beautiful culture and people of the middle east
My maternal side is kurdish persian Pashtun 🩸💜🇮🇷🇦🇫
@HOLY KNIGHT VICTORIUS pashtuns are our brothers, hello from Tajikistan👋
Only Iranians , Indians , Afghans , Pakistan , Kurdish , Georgian and South Caucasus people are real Aryans
Europeans are not Aryans
@HOLY KNIGHT VICTORIUS ohh bro we are brother we have to unite Just like Europeans I myself from Kashmir ❤️❤️❤️
My language Dogri and Kashmiri ( From Dardic languages)
@HOLY KNIGHT VICTORIUS I am Kashmiri But I think I have kailash ancestry due to my amber eyes and light skin
@HOLY KNIGHT VICTORIUS yea we must unite like many Europeans are united to each other
We must unite too.
❤️❤️❤️
Make a video about kashmiri Bhatt dardik people .we all are Shem bramhin or Muslim ..
i make a resume, the people of the carpathian mountains the hutsuls are descendants of iranic median-sigynian colonists who came to west-romania (sometime between 640-520 BC) and who later mixed with the surrounding dacian population and vlahian shepherds in the transilvania & maramures regions forming the proto-hutsuls with a later slavic component that mixed in their ethnos in the bordering ivano-frankivsk/chirnivcy region. that until today the hutsul language got still some words (including also the ethnonym) of median origin(=comparable with leki,luri,gilaki,kurdi,yazdi-behdinani,bashkardi-garmsiri,balochi,semnani) i explained to proof the thesis and i continue to proof some more of the thesis with the following: when the sigunians lived 2000 years ago or earlier in transilvania they had surely 2 median identities (besides that one as generally being median colonists): the word siguni has to be the same as the name shuhani (what means one of the main dialects of the lurs) so it's showed their median subbranch language-identity, but the other identity was the tribe-identity the word that would later become the ethnicon hucul that means they had seen themselfes as belonging to the husa/huza/huca tribe (some rare variationforms of hutsuls are also huzalei and hutan) what is a dialectical changing of the word bhusa (it's proven that some languages or dialects of iran had in earlier times a dialectical changing of the sound bh changing to h) = busa
Azeris Are Iranian Too
Yes brother🇮🇷♥️
South Azerbaijan is İranian, but not ethnic. They speaks Turkish, naturally they are Turks.
@@marcusanthony6933
They are Iranian Genetically
So, do Azeris know that situation..? Do you ask it them?
Remember Natioanalizm is a catastrophe for a nation, plus, fundamental nationalizm is a double catastrophe.
@@marcusanthony6933The name “Azerbaijan” is Persian, and Azeri people spoke an Iranian language first, and have same genes as Kurds. Iranian Azeris are proud Iranians
Aryan/Iranian Plateau consists of vast lands extending to 1000+ kilometers beyond today's Iran borders, consisting of dozens of antient, and non-ancient migrant, tribes most of which have maintained their ethnic dialects/lanuages. Persians were just one of those many tribes, but today's Persian language is very different from its antient origin, which is probably still spoken by Zoroastrians, in Iran, and outside Iran.
Very interesting...where do Yamnaya tribe belong... 🤔
Steppe/Central Asia.
That was our ancestors, and they migrated to the Iranian plateau where all the ancient Iranian tribes formed
Viva kurdistan viva baluchistan 💕💕💕
I have a question.Is 'Turkmen' Irani or Turkic?
Turki
mostly turkic
They are all descendants of the nomads from the steppes. They all mingled and intermixed during the ages and fed from the same milk and drunk from the same rivers. Turks and Iranian people are very much similar. Some demented people call each others names but at the end I consider Turks and Iranians a very similar people in culture and ethnicity. Turkmen are great people.
@@zaliakbari8547 There is no such thing as Turkish DNA. Turkey is a mixed bag.
😂Turk-men is naturally Turk. Anatolian Turks are origin of Turkmen mostly.
Thanks buddy for my request iranic people are the most beautiful indo europoen ethinic group
i continue into another related topic that is the westiranic people medes with connection to the fifth "newly discovered or proofed" people of iranic descent (the other four newly proofed as iranic-descended peoples are bulgarians, tatars, chuvashes, balkarians their original roots are iranic bactrian-balkharian) & the nextfollowing people have roots that are iranic median-sigynian:
i consider the leks, the lurs, the kurds & the gilaks all four as the descendants of the medes + there is an update with some newly made proofs that make a fifth ethnicy/people as descendants of the medes too, exactly said the sigynian subbranch of the medes, these are the carpathian hutsul/ghucul people of bordering north-romania/southwest-ukraine made them being genetically in first case a mixture of dacians/vlahs+slavs but from their origin(the old substrat) an iranic median sigynnian people (that means generally to a lesser degrees median than dacian or vlahian or slavic but anyway enough genetically and lexicaly median percentage to be considered as a people of iranic/median origin). the first proofs for that are antique historians herodotus, strabo & apollonios, they wrote about the median tribe the siginians how it's written they travelled from media and settled maybe 100-200 years before herodotus' time in west-romania or northwest-romania and herodotus the historian lived around 450 BC so there were two options when the date were when that median sigynian tribe left their homeland and moved via armenia/turkey to transilvania, the first would be around 640 BC (the following years after phraortes death when the things get bad for 28 years for the median kingdom because the assyrian-scythian mixed king made phraortes' son kyaxares for this time to a vassal in his own kingdom) or in the time around 540 BC (when the median kingdom collapsed and the persians took over) however it is said that the sigynnes wear median clothing and had many median customs and the sigynnians themselve said (to herodotus) that they were median colonists or descendants of the medes while the historican strabo (who lived 63BC-23AD) wrote about siginians who lived near the south caspian sea (southwest caspia region like gilan & mazandaran & azerbaijani north talysh mountains until the beginning of tabaristan that means the areas where today gilaks, mazandaranis, talishs live) these siginians were the ones who stayed in media and didn't leave like herodot's sigynnes. strabo said about these siginians that in general they practise persians customs and he mentioned like herodot their small horses race which were shaggy long haired flat-nosed/short-snooted ponies that pulled a chariot or cart in a four-horse-team also often driven by women, maybe that small horse race is related to the north-romania carpathian hutul-horses/ponies (but as a newer mixed breeding that possibly originated from the sigynnian horses). so where is the connection of the median subbranch of the sigynnes (apollonios wrote them also as sigunnes with u) and the luri people? you see can it in the name of the shughani dialect speakers of the lurs. somewhere i also read that sigynians where described as living alongside with an unknown gaulaki tribe (possibly the gilaks are meant to be them but the source of that statement looks not so proven no idea about that). but i want go back to the topic with proofs that the hutsuls of the carpathian mountains were in fact of iranic median sigynian origin, the ethnicon itself for example has 4 theories of it's meaning and etymoligical roots (until today nobody could say or proof what the ethnonym ghucul really means) the 4 theories what it means are all iranic median = luri/leki/kurd/gilaki/garmsiri/behdinani/balochi cognates: 1. it comes from the gilaki word for "mountain"="qukh"(but in a median dialectical way is more possible cuz there was in earlier times a between-sound of the letter k & g (like kg) so like gkukh' that leads to ghukh'+ul/ol(adjective ending) so the proto-huculian(sigynian-orientated) word/ethnonym would mean "the people from the mountains/mountainous people"(meant are sure the carpathian mountains rather than elburz or talishs mountains in my opinion)=ghukhuls=ghuculs. 2. gilaki word "houz" for "lake" so hutsuls would mean " people who live by the lake" (speculative said maybe it could even be the caspian who counts as the biggest lake of the word or maybe the east-part of urmia lake or just one of the smaller lakes in the carpathian mountains) 3. garmsiri word (if the zarandi dialect counts as garmsiri but anyway it's very close related to garmsirian jirofti or kahnuji or marzigal-bashkerdi dialects' words) "guch"="ram/ibex/capricorn/battering-ram)mountain-goat" that means guculs are "people associated with rams/got something to do with rams (of the mountains)" 4. gilaki word "ghut" for "immersion" that would mean ghutsul mean "(water)diver/aquanaut". that leads to another interessting exclusive huculian word (that is not to be found in ucrainian language) that word has also etymological ties to median(luri/kurd/laki/gilaki) cause it sounds related to these two gilaki words by meaning "hooz"(lake/pond) & "ghuth"(immersion/diving) that huculian word is "ghuk" and means "waterfall" so connected with watermasses/lake/diving somehow. another interessting exclusive huculian word (not found in ukrainian language) is "kootüga" and means "dog" while in the luri language "katu" is "dog" these words are really close and belong to median dialects in origin, besides that word for dog, in the luri and in the median language there is a second word for dog it's median "spak" but if you think again about the dialectical typicalness of earlier times with the k/g between-sound you can say "sphagk" shows you the dialectical changing in the luri word "sag"(also meaning dog) where the p was fallen away but still you can consider it as of median origin. a huculian word (not in ukrainian language again) for "farm-animals/domesto-animals/livestock-animals" is "marga" what you can compare to the luri & gilaki word "morg" for "chicken/hen/rooster" what sure is etymologicaly related with the hutsulian marga. a typical ukrainian word what means untypical for the other slavic languages (what could really possibly be borrowed by ukrainians from the carpatian regions where hutsuls live) is the word "gharny"="great" which can be compared to the garmsirian bashkardi word "gohrt"="big" but not so sure about that one, better would be to see the balochi word "shar"="good" as of same origin/roots with the ukrainian "harny/gharny"="great/good/amazing", and there is another word that is only typical for ukraine "khata"="house" what shares the same origin/meaning like the yazdi-behdinani word "khäda/khda"="house". one last word is huculian "bardka" for "axe" while in the "modern-zoroastrian" behdinani/gabri language (spoken by the behdinan people in yazdi dialect) "barda" is translated as "spade"(maybe including spade-chissel and trenching-spade) these two words are surely related, also in the luri language exists the word "bard" but it means "stone" but it could be anyway etymologically connected to these behdanian and huculian words and even to the word "bronze". the proto-hutsul ethos was surely formed in the maramures region and some bordering north-transilvania areas of northwest-romania where the sigynians sometime between 100-500 AD mixed with dacians & vlahian shepherd and a bit later came the slavic component(tiverians & whitecroats) in their ethnogenesis but it was either so that they stretched out their territory more wider out to the north namely ivano-frankivsk, zakarpatie, chirnivcy regions of southern-west ukraine or these 2 slavic tribes came down after 600 AD and mixed with the daco-vlaho-sigynian proto-huculs in the bordering areas (south)ivanofrankivsk/chirnivtsy, at that time proto-hutsuls were possibly already romanized or i would better said nearly/not complete romanized by language. the last thing i wanna say about the sigynians what herodot thought about what their ethnonym could be, he used to detonate the name as "spear" or in the other side to associate it with "traders"(or "hucksters") but he just speculated and didn't know for sure.
Why baloch have similar to rajasthani costume
Punjabi and rajistani adopted iranic culture dress
@@sckshakex4308They are obsessed with Iranian people
Especially Pashtuns
Great. 30% of my dna is Balochi. I was born in South America.
Baloch means Ancient iranic I guess 🙄🙄
❤ love u brass
What? From what country that’s strange. There are no Baloch in South America
Which are you?
kurdish
North and West of India is almost all central Asian.
Cocasian with Dravidian😂
The thumbnail girl doesn't have ethnic characteristics.
There is a good majority of pashtuns who look like that i have a cousin with blonde hair and blue eyes and im pashtun
aswell
still some peoples until today are not officially recognized being of iranic descent, i count 5 of such people, first i wanna mention the 4 peoples who are (today mixed but) direct descendants of the proto-bolgars=originally got 0% to do with turks or huns or ugrians or uralofinns or slavs or elsewhat but the original proto-bolgars who made a first migration-wave after 300 BC came from bactria (north afghanistan) were iranic bactrians=balkh people=balkhars/balkars/bolkars/bolhars, their chief oxyartes and his daughter roxana died already, also her husband alexander died, a part of bactria was even been given to the murya kingdom, so bactrians lose every last influence/control to the greeks at that time so a part of them left bactria and went via north iran to north-caucasus so that's already proven that in the time of georgian king mirvan (160 BC) and the king of armenia vaharshak the first (since 150 BC) the bolkars were mentioned. in the time of kolchi-georgia's king mirvan (reigned since 162 BC) the proto-bolgars/balkars were already well known as northern neighbours of georgia's kingdom in north-ossetia, they were rather been seen as kinda troublemakers for the georgian state and also were mentioned in the texts that at the west-part of the terek river not far away from malka river (by the way the name originally was called balka river before karachai people changed it with their b to m dialect-accent) the proto-bolkhars met the scythians there but they went away from them, so you can see that the georgian chronicle text say the earliest bolgars did not belong to the scythian group like some people try to think, so in that time you can say the main areas of the bolghars were kabardino-balkaria & karachai-cherkessia/adygeya. in the following years a chieftain or king of the proto-bolgars is known according to armenian sources he was called vund (that name is an iranic word that can be translated as the main one/basic/base or sometimes winner) so you see around this time 150-140 BC when the bolkars were definetely already well documented by georgians and also armenians for their chronicles no one ever heared of turks i mean definetely not in the north-caucasus region there were no turkic language (the first people with definitly turkic language who came to the west=wolga region were the göktürks=turquts 550 AD or so). proto-bolgarian chief vund allied with the king of armenia and a part of the proto-bolgars moved to armenia and builded settlements there and stayed there (this region would became known as vanand region and vanando is also a bactrian word and by the way in the pamiric languages especially munji and sanglechi which are together with pashto the descendant-languages of bactrian the word for ceramic vessels is similar with the bulgarian and balkarian words for it: kunar kundor kondar or so). in a roman source king vund were later killed in armenia by a roman man who saw in the bolkharian chieftain vund an enemy to rome (also there can be an interpretation that it was not him but already his son or even grandson especially in the possible case that vund could be a title=main one/basic one like leader/chief/head/mainman). the other part of bolhars stayed in north-caucasus. there was later a second migration-wave from bactria/oxus that is archeologically proven it's connected with an archeologic culture of settlements of similar type that existed from BC times to the time 100-200 AD when these settlements (which were generally near the oxus river) were left and these people then moved to the north-caspian region and after they went further to azov region and adygean-cherkessian region and north-dagestan region and surely also to balkaria. so i count around 6 sources that falls in the pre-hunnic time where proto-bolgars were mentioned by other peoples and that's what's interessting cuz it was before that time of atilla etc. since then they start mixing more and more and also their language and culture etc. so it's annoying that a lot of people wanna start proto-bolgars' history from the time upwards of atilla and the hunns (since 370 AD or so) when the hunns somehow forced some people to get in their confederation and intermixing the cultures and language and genetic, for example did the roxolans prefered to leave that area and went to the west while alans and ostrogoths and bolgars get in the confederation of atilla. but for me is of course interessting the time of bolgars before 370 AD when they had not so much foreign elements or influence or intermixing like in 370-700 AD. they had before that time already shared with other people(s) the same area or i would better said a part of the bolgars who for example lived somewhere more in the east areas (i think that area that is more near to kalmykia or maybe chechen or nogai today's territoy) i read about an archaeological culture somewhere there where alans and bolgars lived together (that was maybe 350 AD or so i think before atilla but i don't remember for sure the dating of that culture). but the other people in the pre-atilla's times (100 years before) with whom the proto-bolgars allied in north-kaukasus in a battle against (if i remember well) the georgians in 250-270 AD were the kacirs/katzirs (the question is were these allied people the proto-khazars or the akatsirs? the akatsirs lived normally somewhere in the east-balkans or north-romania and are sometimes described as being descendants of the agathyrsians but without a sure proof), but also here is important to see that the (bolgar but in that source the name was surely written with an r bargars what happened 3 times or so that some sources called the bolgars with r borgars) leader/chief of the battle against the georgians(?) that leaded the proto-bolgars and kacirs around 270 BC had a real iranic name, his name was surkhap, what can be compared with the name of thr surkhab river in afghanistan or the southernmost uzbekistan region surkhan-daryo (iranic name not turkic) or with the malename from tajikistan sukhrob, that "surkh" means "red" in first case but in second case "south" and "ap" would actually means "water" (maybe it could also be an adjective-ending? or also possible is that the name shows an identity to the surkhab river area in afghanistan?). so in other sources in the time shortly before atilla's huns arrived but in the area north-ossetia & balkaria & adygeya (i think also bordering parts of abkhazia) is documented the burka land or burgant in this area which has again in the name the r dialect but meant are surely the bolgars as the people who gave that land the name. around 350 AD bulgars are mentioned by the byzantines or romans as "vulgares". around 600 AD the bolgars already lived in a wide stretched areal from the don & wolga region to the dagestan region where from these people, who came originally from two migration waves from bactria & other oxus near areas (northwest and northeast to bactria bordering areas), in the time around 650 AD were already mentioned bolgaric sub-groups: the kupi-bolkars, duchi-bolkars, olghondor-bolkars, khadar-bolkars, azov-bolkars. until the time around 200-300 AD you can say they were still unmixed iranic bactrians but later came the foreign infuence or intermixing and language-shift to onoguric language or oguric or saviric or proto-hungarian & early-turkic or huno-turkic alike language(s) or whatever they call it that was spread around in that time 400-600 AD but it was for sure not the original language of the early proto-bolgars but the language with roots in bactria. around 630 AD (probably even years earlier but in the south like adygeya and balkaria region later in the azov region) bolgars startet their independent state, 40 years later the khazars took over, so in the next years a lot of bolgars searched for new lands to settle so a part of them came to balkan under asparukh (that is also an iranic name=aspar means horse-rider or aspa=horse and rukhs=shining & there is a tajik name that has a cognate in the name-building to aspa-rux/asparukh that is shah-rux/shakhrukh) and they estabilished the independend danube bulgaria kingdom in 681AD, another part of bolgars went to the wolga tatarstan & chuvashia region and established the wolga bolgaria kingdom in 700 AD. i read also that in bulgaria archeologists found a (zoroastrian) firetemple, i don't know the exact source i only read that they talked of an evidence that it's a firetemple (like an iranic one) what they found in bulgaria. we have four peoples who are descendants of proto-bolgars (in earlier times/from origin real iranic people from bactria and some partly from bordering khoresmia and sogdia) these are: bulgarians, (generally south) chuvashes, wolga/kazan-tatars (partly also mishar-tatars), (generally cherek region) balkarians. we know these four peoples are genetically heavy mixed with other different peoples: the tatars are mixed with kipchaks, tataro-mongols, finno-ugrians and slavs (for example i saw once a picture of a tatar boy maybe 7 years old he had really a similar phenotype/face like me when i was 7 so he was like me not of turko-mongol or finno-ugric or slavic phenotype but of irano-tatar phenotype). the chuvashes are also as mayority heavy mixed with finno-ugrics and slavs and turks. the danube bulgarians are mixed with thracians and slavs and a bit greco-romans. balkarians are mixed with autochthon caucasian people (adygeans & kabardinians) & kumano-kipchaks/karachai people. even before these four people (descendants of proto-bolgars) settled in their today's "homeland" and mixed with the native people, they were at the time around 650 AD already mixed to some degrees so the bolgars had 650 AD some percental mixed blood with barsils, savirs, onogors, kutrigurs, alans, esegels and some others.
You listed Pashtuns and Tajiks in Iranian ethnic groups, but not Azaris and Turks in our own country?
WTF is this?
Tajiks are purely blood Persians, they are still spoken by northern Iranians and most scientists like Rudaki who are called the father of the Persian peoples was Tajik Khayyam, Sino, Jomi, al-Bukhari, Almuslim, al-Farabi and many others who lived in the north, they were all Tajiks ❤🇹🇯
Azeris definitely Iranians especially in Iran, but Turkmens the name says it all they are Tursk
The video is about iranic people and the music is arabic🤦♂️
I know iranians CAN have blue eyes but why u only pick blue eyed people?
Yea background music kaha se liya
HRAVATSKI CROAT ZIP CODE IRANIAN
what ?
@@user-ll1no9vf5l тоже не понял?
@@_e7192 да
Croatian believe their ancestors came from Iran as it's written in their history
What about turkmens and turkic people of iran
Their turk
they are turks and related to mongol people they are not iranic people also their langauage is related to mongolian language
Turkmens of iran are mixed iranian people
Following foreign religion and foreign cultures !!
Even Hinduism is foreign 🤣🤣
@@RandomGuy-km8ke who told you??🤣🤣🤣🤣
@@rebelxyz2077 Hindu mixed of Central asian and dravidian religions
@@rebelxyz2077 Bihareeeeeee 🤮🤮
@@RandomGuy-km8ke mongol gene🤣🤣😆😆
0:31 pashtoon 0:34 pashtoon
Wtf bruh
Yeah pashtuns are iranic actually they are Eastern iranic
Make video about Latin People most of them look like Indian Peoplea.
Original latin people are from Europe and they don't look I indian.
The Southern Europeans, the Mediterraneans, look a little like northern Indians...
@@albintorso6107
The ancestors of the Latins entered Europe from the steppes.
Latins are not completeley native of Europe...
@@robertomassa731 What are you saying all indo europeans originated from one place weather they are italians, Spanish , germen, Russian or even North indians all orignated from steppes
@@albintorso6107
That's what I said: they entered Europe from the steppes, but Europe, like India, it was not empty, the Indo-European nomads mixed with the local people where they settled...
I hope I have been clear this time.
Thank you for answer me.
Why u hate me 😂
Whats going on?
Nobody hates you
I was thinking the same thing😂😂
@@parsa7249 oh you both are very beautiful , stoping trolling
Nadie te odia mi amor
Iran has always been Iran
The case of Azerbaijan :
Actually people of republic of Azerbaijan and Iranian Azerbaijan are not the same people, that's a political illusion by some that hold political aspirations most likely funded by western institutions to divide and conquer. These institutions have spent billions upon billions to divide and conquer Iran yet to no avail. Iran is actually the oldest nation state known to modern man. They have always been Iran, Persia is a name the Greeks called Iran because of Persepolis.
Now Republic of Azerbaijan was
founded 1918 and before Russia ceded Caucasia from Iran during the Turkmenchay treaty the region (republic of Azerbaijan in particular), used to be called Shirvan or Arran and it's people used to be called Caucasian Turks, although it is a fact that majority of people who live in The country called Azerbaijan are ethnically Iranic people not Turks. As for Iranian Azeris,
they used to speak "Old Azeri" which was an Iranian language that became Turkified since the 12th century due to Oghuz Turkic invasion. Turks like Arabs empires are known to annihilate the culture, language of the lands they conquered. Ex what Arabs did to ancient Egypt, what Turks tried to do to Armenians etc. Iran on the other hand is the only empire that respected other cultures and it’s people, only empire against slavery (Persepolis was built by paid labor), women were treated equally, religious freedom etc. (Of course everything changed for the worse after the Arab Muslim conquest of Iran).Yet because anglos saxons control History the glory and achievements of Iran has been hidden and concealed. But in Iran it has not, hence why the Iranians (this includes all the Iranic tribes: Azeri, Persians, Baluchs, Kurds etc.) are proud of their country and it is impossible to divide them. Actually in Iran everyone is Iranian all these ethnicities are western made, to further divide and conquer. But in Iran everyone is Iranian. Their ancestors created one of the greatest empires ever. Iran has always been Iran.
Current regime:
Iran was a democracy but after operation Ajax, the shah was put in power, he was a mere puppet of USA/UK, during his reign the communists worked hard to stage a revolution, and the shah was already acting independently, USA became afraid so they sent in the mullahs, yes the mullahs, the current Islamic regime were brought to power with western support, the Iran-contra affair is further proof of this.
I am from India. I agree with you.
The minerals in the soil, water, food, bath, natures weather and season decides the colour of skin. Can be black, brown, yellow, white, red. Put all under the sun and sea for 10 years, all will be same.
Cope black dravidian 🤣🤣
I never read a stupid text like that. I am second Generation born in brazil, my grand parents are from europe and i still look like a middle european.
lol Sri Lankan haha
Haplogroups determine you because genetics is iron clad law of nature
gilaks > all
Persian>>>all
We have great history and great people
Everyone said for iran (Persia)🇮🇷🦁
Henry licett 😂🤣🤣🤣
This video is doesn’t represent any culture actually only racism and this people are not iraninic people they are indo-European the only group was real ironic people was the Medes and them language it’s continued by Kurds there is no such 100% Iranian or indo European accept the language every one is mixed with tons nationality how can you call them people from 3000-4000 years ago
what racism?? 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
It represents Iranic ethnic groups lol. Your just a jealous Hindu nationalist.
Why the hatred of different ethnic groups ? We all come from the same ultimate parents and yet each branched off and gained their own identity. This identity is then joined with others or is protected through isolation and is more enduring. The anti racist trope is silly. Some are white, others are black, others somewhere in between. We can be glad of who we are for God created each individual. Black, white, in between, healthy, sick, rich poor, Male, Female, God decides. Those who have a fantasy that we are all identical do from a political point of view that conflict comes from difference. Yet difference enriches the world and can not be eradicated. One person likes apples and another likes pears. One person likes non representational art and another likes representational art. One person is a Socialist and another is a believer in free market capitalism. Difference can destroy societies when mismanaged but in the world some difference is inevitable.
@@ingridlinbohm7682 Parvaneh is right. She knows what she's talking about. Ra cism and discr imination against ethnic and religious minorities in Iran has been going on for decades and it's well documented. Now maybe things are changing, a bit, and that due to the heroic struggle of all main ethnic groups: Kurds, Azeris, Ahwazi Arabs and Lurs and Bakhtiaris, Balochis, Turkmen along with the progressive Persian political groups. Iran before the revolution had been ruled by absolute monarchy and now is by fascist Islamic regime. Iran can only be ruled with the participation of all Iranians of all ethnic groups under a pluralist and democratic system. And just so you know the Persians who've always been the dominant group in government form only just above 50% of the population. Finally, this channel name Indo Aryan is as much laughable as it is rac ist.
@@humanrights4all425
As a kurdish Iranian I would say all you said is total nonsense. You must be a troll
@@humanrights4all425Persians are 70% of Iran also real iran is country for Persians people they always They are the ones who protected the country, spread their scholars and government all over the world, helped everyone, and welcomed races into their country called Persia. So you are an oppressed person. For your information, Kurds have often referred to themselves as a nomadic Persian race but they separated due to their migration. I have a lot to say but I will keep it short for you.(Persia/iran)ans iran is Persia forever❤🇮🇷🦁👍Persian>>>every iranic ethnic
Zaza and luri are kurd
there is no luri but there is lurs. luri are the laguage of lurs poeple.
Actually luri are Persian not Kurd but But the sound of their language is very similar to Kurdish and I hope you look that up because the Lurs are actually Persians.
Tajik people are Turk not Aryans
They are Eastern Iranic people.
😂😂
The whole of Central Asia was inhabited by Iranian peoples, mostly Tajik and other tribes. Turkic peoples only came in the region after the 4th and 5th century AD and started supplanting or mixing with the Iranians. You can see Iranic and Turkic features in many of the peoples of the Central Asian countries. Tajik speak an Iranian language but have mixed with the Turkic peoples living around them, so do the other peoples. They all have a beautiful mix of the two cultures. Lots of Turkic loan words in Iranian language and many Iranian loan words in the Turkish language.
@@gusanoworms6267 no there where scythians who leaves in central Asia before Turkish invasion of central before yeah this are mix of both race but they culture is more Turk than Aryans
@@gusanoworms6267 where did the turks come from? The moon?
Describe central asia clearly we both have different mapping of central asia in out mind.
Cherrypicking, dude.
Most of them look like Europeans before the Arabs enslaved these people in the name of Allah. The "Iranians" that I know also call themselves Persians.
@Dardic Kashmir Go to North of Iran you can find blonde and ginger ,blue green eyed persians.orignal Persians who can from steppe looked white.
oh pls. why do you think all iranics hate islam and arabs? stop this you know next to nothing about us and only embarrass yourself with this anti-arab/islamic thing.
Kashmiris and Iranians look very similar I guess!
No bro not very just a little. yes I agree with you Kashmiri people have white skin but their faces more like Indian and banghladishi
FALTAN LOS ARIOS
Why?