Posted by abdussalam on August 17, 2006, 1:24 pm The origin of the term is not agreed on by everyone, however, those who subscribe to the "Arab" origin of the name agree that it was ultimately applied to those Iranian-speaking Central Asians who adopted Islam. However, the existence of a similar term for the Iranian-speaking people of Azerbaijan, the Tats, leads other linguists and scholars to believe that this is a term used to denote the non-Turkic peoples of the region who were Iranian speaking. I would challenge you to provide a single source documenting that the Tajiks are the descendants of people that moved from Persia - not once have I ever encountered this theory, although I must say that I tend not to read Uzbek accounts of history, because they tend to be quite ridiculous. To act as if there is no physical difference between Tajiks and Uzbeks is not only ridiculous, it defies all reality. You can also say that the sky is green, but it will continue to be blue in reality - Tajiks appear generally Caucasian (I don't think I can be confused for Mongol), while Uzbeks appear generally Asiatic/Mongol. Whatever fantasies the Uzbek government and Uzbek nationalists may cherish, unfortunately they will be at odds with reality. There is no shame in being a Turk, or the descendant of later migrants from Mongolia, but it's unfortunate that you and others feel this way about your origins. It is also clear that you do not speak either Tajik or Iranian Farsi, because you don't seem to know anything about the linguistic structure or lexicography of either one - I would suggest that before making sweeping statements or comments about either dialect, you should probably know how to speak it. The Persian element in Uzbek exists because Persian was the primary literary language of the area, and thus all the other regional languages, such as Uzbek, Pashto, Turkish, etc. borrowed extensively from it. Further, the Russian words are obviously from recent origin and in part the result of efforts by the Soviets to Russify the languages of Central Asia. Thus, this analogy is entirely irrelevant. Just as Uzbeks fantasize about being the area's original inhabitants, or descendants of Sogdians, or any number of nonsensical theories, Kazakhs may well fantasize about being European. Both groups need to simply accept reality - they are Altaic-speaking, and Asiatic-looking, and any scholarly publication will tell you that both are the descendants of a wave of Altaic, Turkic migrants from the east. This blog is about Tajiks primarily, and will not become subordinate to Uzbek national myths - you and your people may be able to perpetuate both oppression and a nationalist fantasy in Bukhara and other Tajik places wrongly given to Uzbekistan for now, but fortunately I am free in the United States to say the truth. If you can't handle it, please refrain from reading this blog - also, please be advised that any further continuation of this nonsense will be deleted from the blog comments. I am not going to be sidetracked by the exact sort of mentality that led us to have to leave our beloved home, the TAJIK city of Bukhara. You can say that your ancestors came at the same time, but it will continue to be based purely in the fantasies of you and other Uzbek nationalists. Please propagate your pan-Turkic nonsense elsewhere - thank you! "Tojikistonam Samarqand, Tojikistonam Bukhoro" :-) Post a Comment
Link: From Sogdiana to Boston
130.95.128.51
here i've found an interesting blog written by a Tajiki migrant from USA: 
Message Thread:
« Back to thread