01-13-2006, 04:34 AM
<!--QuoteBegin-Ashok Kumar+Jan 13 2006, 09:29 AM-->QUOTE(Ashok Kumar @ Jan 13 2006, 09:29 AM)<!--QuoteEBegin-->I did a search on the Vendidad for "airya". There is no occurence of word "airya" by itself.[right][snapback]44734[/snapback][/right]<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->Interesting. But they could have used the word more often in regular speech as opposed to its scanty appearance in religious literature. Even in the Avesta, Airya need not occur as a word with a space before and after it, separating it from the enclosing words. Think of how in Samskrt separate words are often glued together (no space between them).
Here's Elst's statement relating to Iranian use and non-use of Airya at koenraadelst.bharatvani.org/books/ait/ch14.htm<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Iranian Avesta uses Airya in referring to a specific community, the cultivators in the Oxus river basin, contrasting it with nomadic barbarians who were similar in race and equally Iranian-speaking (generically known as Shakas/Scythians), but who were not part of the sedentary Mazdean âAiryaâ world.111<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->Note: he's apparently referring to the language Avesta, not the sacred book of the same name.
<b>More on Zoller's discovery that Bangani was a Kentum IE language, and the resistance the results of his research met with</b>can be found in Talageri's RgVeda book at http://www.voi.org/books/rig/ch7.htm
Search for the word Zoller. It's quite instructive to know that there were people who opposed the existence of a Kentum IE language in India.
Mitradena,
The Zoroastrian Iranians in Yazd (I think that's the place) have always been of that faith. Their ancestors had never converted. Therefore, they must be Iranian. Likewise, pockets of the religion survived in other parts of Iran, though heavily persecuted both in the past and still facing trouble today. Add to this that history records large numbers of Iranians being converted through force, through laws of inheritance (only Muslim family members could inherit), kidnapping. This happened for ages in Iran. Most Iranians are Iranian in ethnicity, small numbers among these are thought to be Parthian, etc.
It's a new <b>rumour </b>spread by Muslim groups who're afraid about the Iranian revival, that the <b>only</b> ethnic Iranians had fled long ago to India and were the Parsees. Just a hundred years ago or so, more Iranian Zoroastrians got refuge in India: called "Irani Zarathushtis" I think. They came in quite small numbers (only 10,000 or so I think). This proves that those frightened Muslim groups are lying.
Here's Elst's statement relating to Iranian use and non-use of Airya at koenraadelst.bharatvani.org/books/ait/ch14.htm<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Iranian Avesta uses Airya in referring to a specific community, the cultivators in the Oxus river basin, contrasting it with nomadic barbarians who were similar in race and equally Iranian-speaking (generically known as Shakas/Scythians), but who were not part of the sedentary Mazdean âAiryaâ world.111<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->Note: he's apparently referring to the language Avesta, not the sacred book of the same name.
<b>More on Zoller's discovery that Bangani was a Kentum IE language, and the resistance the results of his research met with</b>can be found in Talageri's RgVeda book at http://www.voi.org/books/rig/ch7.htm
Search for the word Zoller. It's quite instructive to know that there were people who opposed the existence of a Kentum IE language in India.
Mitradena,
The Zoroastrian Iranians in Yazd (I think that's the place) have always been of that faith. Their ancestors had never converted. Therefore, they must be Iranian. Likewise, pockets of the religion survived in other parts of Iran, though heavily persecuted both in the past and still facing trouble today. Add to this that history records large numbers of Iranians being converted through force, through laws of inheritance (only Muslim family members could inherit), kidnapping. This happened for ages in Iran. Most Iranians are Iranian in ethnicity, small numbers among these are thought to be Parthian, etc.
It's a new <b>rumour </b>spread by Muslim groups who're afraid about the Iranian revival, that the <b>only</b> ethnic Iranians had fled long ago to India and were the Parsees. Just a hundred years ago or so, more Iranian Zoroastrians got refuge in India: called "Irani Zarathushtis" I think. They came in quite small numbers (only 10,000 or so I think). This proves that those frightened Muslim groups are lying.