Armenians And Their Opinions

[Armat]

Tigran G whatever happens tgas don't leave this forum.We need people like you-seriously.You got passion and chrisma now start saying little just a touch less and listen more.Remember smart one knows how llittle he really knows. :DI am little drunk and to be honest I love all honest Armenians regardless what their opinon is. To be frank bro who really cares what we are geographically.What's important how you feel about being Armenian. Edited September 27, 2005 by Armat

[gamavor]

they have heavely intermixed with non-Aryans,

 

Who told you this? Uncle Mehmet, or chicho Pesho?

 

SORRY, the closest armenian people will be to white/european,is the small % of their Aryan ancestors which swims in a pool of other ancestors such as Urartian and semitic ones that mixed with them...

 

That is too amateurish to answer, but as far as we continue to talk about it let it be clear that there were no evidence of Semitic people in Anatolia and Southern Caucasus until the forceful migration of few thousand Jews from Judea by Tigran the Great. NONE! As far as assimilation goes...yes they were assimilated though not fully. The Jews presently living in Caucasus (unlike Jews from the Balkans) are not Semitic (Sephardim) but direct descendants of the Khazars who were close kin of yours ethnically.

 

Urartians were not Semitic people. They were not Indo - European either. Just like Assyrians and Phoenicians.

[karakash]

My friends from college used to argue with me about this issue all the time. They claimed I was Asian like some of them who were Chinese or Korean. I claimed I was white, I guess like a European.

 

For what it's worth, certain courts in the US have held that Armenians are Caucasian/white.

 

Doesn't it make sense. Armenia is in the Caucasas, Armenians are Caucasian...

[phantom22]

At the end of the AGBU video about Stalin called "Enemy of the People," is a display of the faces of hundreds of Armenians. You would be surprised, while seeing so many faces in close succession, how many of these faces are the faces of East Asians.

[mamigon]

What an absurd and tedious argument this is. It brings out the pseudo-scholar in everybody. Shall we all submit a blood sample and be done with it? Race, ethnicity, all of these things are constructed by people who think they have some inherent meaning. It's all mythology -- which doesn't mean it means nothing, just that it only means what you make it mean.

 

Who told you this? Uncle Mehmet, or chicho Pesho?

That is too amateurish to answer, but as far as we continue to talk about it let it be clear that there were no evidence of Semitic people in Anatolia and Southern Caucasus until the forceful migration of few thousand Jews from Judea by Tigran the Great. NONE! As far as assimilation goes...yes they were assimilated though not fully. The Jews presently living in Caucasus (unlike Jews from the Balkans) are not Semitic (Sephardim) but direct descendants of the Khazars who were close kin of yours ethnically.

 

Urartians were not Semitic people. They were not Indo - European either. Just like Assyrians and Phoenicians.

style_images/master/snapback.png

[phantom22]

Technology has advanced to the level where these kinds of discussions will be moot. Anyone can go, and for a small fee, discover exactly where his/her ancestors originated. Armenia is not some isolated island near the North Pole, it is on the major routes of antiquity.

[TigranG]

Listen, technology doesn't tell the whole history of the people, because for example if you have an african ancestor in your family but after him your family tree continued to mate with non-african people over time genetics will show very few african markers, thus the anthropologists decline to acknowledge them, which to me doesnt make sense... As for the Proto-Europeans being from Africa, read the modern "out of Africa theory". I dont know who is right and who is wrong because genes and origin are very difficult and almost unsolvable...As far as the DNA tests go, north african arabs/jews, saudi arabs, and Indian people are considered white/caucasian yet they have a lot of African and no- white genes, but according to the white anthropologists that doesn't matter they still label them as white even if they look non white... So as long as the Europeans (white) people keep making the rules, they will advance to attribute as many civilizations to their own race to be more superior... Mexicans are considured to be a white race according to anthropologists & American law makers (INS), yet they are a mixture of native american indians and spaniards... So tell me where is the justice in this white washed world... Plus the label caucasian is just a theory no one can prove that white people are from the caucus region, even the anthropology professors teach that... Mongoloid race is just a theory as well who knows maybe Chinese existed before the mongols, and the name mongolia, but yet they label them as mongoloid race... To be honest there is only ONE RACE, the human race... I believe there is not enough evidence to divide people into theoretical races... But if there is such a thing as race,then middle east is a mixture of races, and thus cannot be considered as just one, same goes for racially mixed Mexico, Australlia, India, Afghanistan, Central Asia, North Africa, and South Eastern Asia... The world is not BLACK and WHITE, its full of grey areas... Person who is half white half black cannot be concluded to be only white or only black... I've seen so many armenians with mongol, semitic, european, indian features... How can you say that Armenians are a pure race... The pure races are on the extreme opposites of levels with profound phenotypes... Such as Chinese look pure and most likely are pure, north europeans look pure, deep inside africa people look pure... But please dont include parts of the world such as I mentioned and say that they are mono-racial, thats BS...

 

By the way Armat, funny pinguine pic...

And yes Gamavor they are close to my kin, because besides being part armenian I am also part semitic and turko-mongolian, and I am damn proud of both of those ancestry lines as well...

Edited September 27, 2005 by TigranG

[Vanetsi]

they still label them as white even if they look non white

 

Define what you mean by "to look white."

Also, expand on your idea of "pure."

 

By the way, I'll teach you how to take a fly and turn it into an elephant right after I teach you how to spell.

Edited September 28, 2005 by Vanetsi

[TigranG]

White to me means white skin,skinny pointy nose,thin lips, light eyes (light brown,blue,green), light hair (brown,blond,red), I dont believe that jet curly black hair (such as a fro = african like hair), dark brown almost black eyes, wide nose, and thick lips are of white origin, NO WAY... Spainiards, greeks, and Italians have some of those features only because the Phoenicians who where semitic in their origin, colonized the Mediterranean coasts... In case you dont know the semitic origin, their language is known as Afro-Asiatic, and originated in Africa, modern day ethiopia, linguistic scientists found over one hundred semitic languages that are native to Africa and that never existed in the middle east...

I was watching the history of the Greeks on the History Channel, and they were showing a ancient painting depicting a dark skin proto-Greek man with black curly hair and dark eyes, hairy too, sitting on the rock with a white skin woman whose hair was blondish and blue eyed, they were explaining how the original proto-greeks had very dark skin and were very middle eastern in appearance, in fact the greek word to "chat with some one" is "BABLE", which derives from the word Babylone... Pretty interesting, I thought... And I have done some reading on Greek,Italian, Spanish, and even French DNA, which showed a good amount of African (black) genetical markers, thus explaining their darker look... Even the ancient Greek cave pictures depicted people of different skin colors, white, brown, and black, mingling with each other and being part of the same society... Plus the DNA researchers explained that the African genes in Greek people are traced to Ethiopians... You dont have to believe this, I am not writing this for a debate, I am simply recounting what I have read and seen on the history channel...

 

Dear Va-nazi

When a person types his thoughts very fast he doesn't notice every little detail... Knowing 3 different languages (russian,english, and chinese) can do that to a person... ooops mispelled your name, sorry!

Edited September 28, 2005 by TigranG

[Armat]

I was watching some news about Lebanon and the locals looked very Armenian.I think most Lebanese don't consider themselves Arabs.I don't know why it is important to put a box around who we are as Armenians.

[Vanetsi]

The thing with the Lebanese is that they're a mix of Arabs and Phoenicians.

 

Tigran, akhperus, its quite ridiculous to call an Armenian a Nazi.

 

You must be very good at writing fiction

Changing the topic, you'll be glad to know that I'm currently working on my next work of fiction, "TigranG Knows What He's Talking About."

 

Anyhow, I'm not too sure about the idea of Southern Europeans attributing their dark features to Africans...Maybe you could cite a source, other than the History Channel (a book, a web site perhaps). I want to read up on this.

 

By the way, the locals could have looked Armenian because maybe they were Armenian. There's a large Armenian population in Lebanon after all.

Edited September 28, 2005 by Vanetsi

[Boghos]

I was watching some news about Lebanon and the locals looked very Armenian.I think most Lebanese don't consider themselves Arabs.I don't know why it is important to put a box around who we are as Armenians.

style_images/master/snapback.png

 

 

Maybe they were broadcasting from Bourj Hammoud .

 

Gentlemen, ladies, you probably did not notice but I have been away. Please, when you find out whether Armenias are Europeans let me know. A private message with just the heading Armenians are this or that will suffice and be greatly appreciated.

[Arpa]

Maybe they were broadcasting from Bourj Hammoud .

 

Gentlemen, ladies, you probably did not notice but I have been away. Please, when you find out whether Armenias are Europeans let me know. A private message with just the heading Armenians are this or that will suffice and be greatly appreciated.

style_images/master/snapback.png

 

They could have very well been Armenians.

In Beirut Armenians are all over i.e when I was there I lived several miles south of Bourj Hammoud,, even if the majority of them still concentrate there.

How does one tell Armenians from the Lebanese, except that the original Lebanese are a little darker and more robust?

Some elements in Lebanon prefer to call themselves “Finiqi“, the arabicized version of Phoenician. Note that the Phoenicians are one and the same what that “Book of History-Schmistory According to Moshe Ben Avram” calls Canaanites.**

 

I had aired this story from the National Geographic on Oct. 22, 2004 under the heading - “History? Says Who?” -in the history section of HF. I dare not quote that particular URL as I have found out that when I do that it, for some reason, defaults to the HF index. A simple click on the “history” will take you what I had said on that day on Oct.22, 2004.

In the meantime here is what prompted that post.

 

http://205.188.130.53/ngm/0410/feature2/

 

** In Syria and Lebanon there are prominent families with the surname of “Kan’an/Can‘an”. I had a professor of Syrian heritage, Kano Kan’an who looked just like the president of Syria, Bashar Assad.

[kakachik77]

Ok TigranG you are right if you want the approval of to be proven right, but you are not Armenian and what I mean is that you don't think and feel Armenian. It's apparent from your writings. You might have an Armenian parent, just like we Armenians have tons of African bloods according to you, but it does not make you an Armenian. I want to see you post in sections like Armenian Economy, Diaspora, Genocide. You are here to put us down through your racist comments so I will advice you to get the hell out. Anybody who knows and feels what an Armenian is, the hardship that are ancestors had to go through in the hands of Turks will not waste his/her time on nonesense like this. We are a small nation, it is easier to attack us and put us down with vulgar comments, try this same mentality with Chinese, russian and Turkish ancestors that you have. Leave us alone!

 

 

one more thing, I see you watch a lot of history channel and have read few popular genetic history books. Firstly, history writing is marketing - always question who is writing this history and why are they writing. History channel is even worse - Ameircan propaganda machine. Genetics studies also has political agendas. In other words, you are still young and have to learn to use critical thinking when you read something. I would like to ask you a question.

 

1. Why would Russia or Turkey not want to see Armenians joining EU? (disregard race argument).

 

2. Why would Russian historians would want to describe Armenians as an inferior race?

 

3. Why would Persian historians always desribe Armenians as closely kinned to them?

Edited September 28, 2005 by kakachik77

[Armat]

Ok TigranG you are right if you want the approval of to be proven right, but you are not Armenian and what I mean is that you don't think and feel Armenian. It's apparent from your writings. You might have an Armenian parent, just like we Armenians have tons of African bloods according to you, but it does not make you an Armenian. I want to see you post in sections like Armenian Economy, Diaspora, Genocide. You are here to put us down through your racist comments so I will advice you to get the hell out. Anybody who knows and feels what an Armenian is, the hardship that are ancestors had to go through in the hands of Turks will not waste his/her time on nonesense like this. We are a small nation, it is easier to attack us and put us down with vulgar comments, try this same mentality with Chinese, russian and Turkish ancestors that you have. Leave us alone!

one more thing, I see you watch a lot of history channel and have read few popular genetic history books. Firstly, history writing is marketing - always question who is writing this history and why are they writing. History channel is even worse - Ameircan propaganda machine. Genetics studies also has political agendas. In other words, you are still young and have to learn to use critical thinking when you read something. I would like to ask you a question.

 

1. Why would Russia or Turkey not want to see Armenians joining EU? (disregard race argument).

 

2. Why would Russian historians would want to describe Armenians as an inferior race?

 

3. Why would Persian historians always desribe Armenians as closely kinned to them?

style_images/master/snapback.png

 

I don't understand how you arrived "racist comment"

Tigran is just brainstorming and in the process may be we might learned something.Please we are confident enough to explore opinions.

 

I believe we are both European=Indo European, Arian migration perspective mentioned by Gamavor and Asian by Geography metioned by Tigran since Armenia is considered Asia Minor. So we are either depending what perspective you take

Edited September 28, 2005 by Armat

[Armat]

Tigran have you read anything about this?

The present-day nation of Armenia is located south of the Caucasus Mountains, roughly halfway between the Black Sea and the Caspian. The genetic makeup of the Armenians is similar to that of the people of Turkey, including those two distinctive European Y haplotypes. And the language of the Armenians is an eccentric but recognizable form of Indo-European. No one doubts that the Armenians' ancestors came to their present location from Europe -- the only question is just when and how.

 

Because Armenian has undergone a satem-style shift from "c" to "s," it was once assumed to be closely related to Balto-Slavic and Indo-Iranian. However, this assumption has proved untenable for a variety of reasons. Both genetics and archaology indicate that the Armenians could not have arrived in their present location from either the north or the northeast. Linguistically also, Armenian is not especially close to the satem languages. In fact, it is extremely remote from all other Indo-European languages, including Hittite.

 

These various considerations suggest that the proto-Armenians might have reached Anatolia from the Balkans at the same time as the proto-Hittites, but separated from them almost immediately. Perhaps the proto-Hittites turned south and then east along the Mediterranean coast while the proto-Armenians went due east along the southern shore of the Black Sea. If so, they would probably have lingered there throughout the Glacial Maximum, moving further to the east around 15,000 BP, when the area south of the Caucasus became moist and fertile.

I have a Serbian Friend.May be I should tell him that he might be Armenian after all.

Edited September 28, 2005 by Armat

[Harut]

Tigran have you read anything about this?

The present-day nation of Armenia is located south of the Caucasus Mountains, roughly halfway between the Black Sea and the Caspian.  The genetic makeup of the Armenians is similar to that of the people of Turkey, including those two distinctive European Y haplotypes.  And the language of the Armenians is an eccentric but recognizable form of Indo-European.  No one doubts that the Armenians' ancestors came to their present location from Europe -- the only question is just when and how.

 

Because Armenian has undergone a satem-style shift from "c" to "s," it was once assumed to be closely related to Balto-Slavic and Indo-Iranian.  However, this assumption has proved untenable for a variety of reasons.  Both genetics and archaology indicate that the Armenians could not have arrived in their present location from either the north or the northeast.  Linguistically also, Armenian is not especially close to the satem languages.  In fact, it is extremely remote from all other Indo-European languages, including Hittite.

 

These various considerations suggest that the proto-Armenians might have reached Anatolia from the Balkans at the same time as the proto-Hittites, but separated from them almost immediately.  Perhaps the proto-Hittites turned south and then east along the Mediterranean coast while the proto-Armenians went due east along the southern shore of the Black Sea.  If so, they would probably have lingered there throughout the Glacial Maximum, moving further to the east around 15,000 BP, when the area south of the Caucasus became moist and fertile.

I have a Serbian Friend.May be I should tell him that he might be Armenian after all.

style_images/master/snapback.png

 

first of all, too much assumptions, perhapses, and probablies... it's just frustrating...

 

second, why is it that there is no doubt

that the Armenians' ancestors came to their present location from Europe

, when there is no proof of it whatsoever... only assumptions...

[Anoushik]

I know that this discussion didn't start out about this, but since you're discussing races:

 

My Geography professor was making a point the other day and he used an example of racially dividing the students in the classroom. He mentioned four races: Caucasian (white), African-American (African?), Latinos, Asian-American (Asian?). It seems that if one wants to further divide the homo sapiens into categories you can only come up with three races, White, Black, Asian. Native Americans resemble Asians. And I guess Latinos could be people who have both European and Native American heritage. This is all meaningless talk, really. But since you started, looking at this we can see that Armenians are white, not Asian. The problem here is that you further divide the Caucasians into categories, and you can't do that. Not that it matters really. What matters is who we are culturally, and culturally we have always been European.

[TigranG]

OK, first of all, the NAZI thing was just a stupid joke, dont read much in to it... Second of all, I am not turkish,russian or chinese, I can speak the languages thats about it, I already mentioned that Im part Armenian,Semitic, and turko-mongolian... I sympathize with the armenian nation in morning for the genocide victims, but I dont have interest in armenian political or economic views, I am too mixed to get into that, I would have to care about a lot of different perspectives...

I KEEP HEARING PEOPLE SAY THAT ARMENIANS ARE CULTURALY EUROPEAN, PLEASE I REALLY WANT TO KNOW HOW SOME OF YOU ARE COMING UP WITH THAT STATEMENT, since before the christian religion came to armenia, armenian culture was identical to persian, even now our music sounds middle eastern, most of our food resembles arabic and persian food, and even now our culture resembles our neighbors... I CANT BELIEVE that an armenian would say that their culture is european, thats beyond my capacity to grasp something as ridiculous as that statement...

By the way I never mentioned that armenians have african blood, they dont, I said that semitic people do, and thats a proven fact...

We could sit here and discuss who armenians are mixed or not mixed with, but logic speaks for itself, neighbors mix with other neighbors, so I am sure we have some Greek blood, Indian blood, Persian blood, and even the blood of the so called enemy, Turkish blood, who knows maybe a little bit of semitic too, that is the reason why I dont accept the statement that armenians are white, they are part white, but also other mixtures too.... Think about this, if Indian people are a mixture of non-white and white, persians being a mixture of indian & afghan, not to mention mongol genes that they have accuired from the mongols who settled there after chinggis past away, and Armenians used to intermarry with persians, then the non white genes are already introduced to armenians...

If a person is quarter "other" and 75 % white, he is not just white any more and not just "other" anymore, he is now racially mixed...

WHY IS THIS CONCEPT NOT ACCEPTED BY MOST OF PEOPLE ON THIS FORUM?

In my theory, Armenians believe that the European people are smarter than middle eastern so the Armenians cling on to them to be with the more smarter people, thus wanting to be much more white than they are...

 

LISTEN, other middle eastern people are multi-racial, but you dont see them claiming to be just one of their mixtures as the armenians claim to be, Arabs dont accept the label white when it comes to their ethnicity, nor do the north africans, nor Indian people, they are all proud to be multi-racial.... When I lived in russia as a little child, all the russian kids use to call me black-ass, why? because most armenians do not have white skin, but light brown sometimes really dark brown, most have jet-black hair, and dark eyes, if those features are white, then tell me why they are not common among the europeans? Its true that a good % of armenian children are at first born with european features, but they change in a short period of time to dark features, WHY? because MIDDLE EASTERN people are not just white, they are not pure to any race, but instead mutli-racial, appearently non-white features are more dominant and they end up taking over the white features...

 

Kakachik77, dont get mad, I am not picking on you or your people, I am just trying to understand the armenian drive towards europe and the claim to be as white as the europeans, when that is simply false...

 

Plain and simple, I dont believe that certain ethnicities or regoins of the world can be put in a mono-racial category, thats impossible, and not reallistic, even if one set of features are stronger than the other it still doesnt matter because the other blood still exists, forever... There was a genetic scientist, always forget his name, but he said that every type of blood thats introduced to the genetic stream stays in that stream and never leaves, instead it hides and shows up at random time in different generations, and that makes sense to me, thats logical.

 

I am sorry if I have offended anyone, I didnt mean to... God knows that I just like having a strong discussion, along with my strong opinion, and to ultimately gain an idea behind the thoughts that are coming from the other person's mind...

Edited September 29, 2005 by TigranG

[Sip]

I know that this discussion didn't start out about this, but since you're discussing races:

 

My Geography professor was making a point the other day and he used an example of racially dividing the students in the classroom. He mentioned four races: Caucasian (white), African-American (African?), Latinos, Asian-American (Asian?). ...

 

At UCLA, especially in computer science, that would typically split a 30 person class into groups of 1, 1, 1, and 27

 

Now if he said: Chinese/Taiwanese, Indian/Pakistani, Vietnamese/Philipino, and the rest, then there might be a more even split.

Edited September 29, 2005 by Sip

[TigranG]

your professor doesn't know what he is talking about, there are only three races, Latino is not a race, its a mixture of races...

[Harut]

your professor doesn't know what he is talking about, there are only three races, Latino is not a race, its a mixture of races...

style_images/master/snapback.png

 

who are the natives of australia?

[TigranG]

Well, they look to be African in their origin, but it is very interesting to note that a lot of them have kinky/curly blond/red hair, but all other features are African, including their black skin, wide nose, thick lips, high cheek bones, etc... For some unknown reason the anthropologists categorize them in the so called "caucasian" race... My personal belief concludes them to be a mixed race... MULTI-RACIAL, White/Black... They cannot be categorized in just one race, they are both! Edited September 29, 2005 by TigranG

[Vanetsi]

Just let me understand one thing; how do you know that the White race isn't a mixture of races? What makes them so pure? I'm not sure if your idea of this is due to propaganda that you've been fed or whatever, but why would you come to that conclusion? Is it because they have the lightest skin? This is your reasoning as I see it: racial composition is basically a color scale. You have the lightest of the light on one side, thus making them a pure race, and you have the darkest of the dark on the other, thus making them a pure race. Everyone in between is just a mixture. One must understand this: race isn't a painting.

[Harut]

what rgb do armenians belong to?