What did Ancient Persian Achaemenids and Sassanids look like?

Is that an Assyrian relief? Is that man Assyrian or Iranian?

thicc

...

Damn that nose is magnificent.
>mfw got stuck with a shitty english button nose

He's not the Messiah! He's a very naughty boy!

(Sorry)

Fairly sure I've seen this picture before and the dude's in Persepolis

Ethnic Persians all over Iran look different depending on geographic location, climate, and so on; there are many variables. Yes, some look like that like , I have fair skin, brown hair and hazel eyes since both my parents are from Mazandaran and Mashhad. We come in different shades.

...

...

...

...

...

...

...

...

:3

That nose is shit, Kenshiro/Greek nose like in your pic is the best

What are you trying to prove? That many ancient people like the Persians had artists and artisans who took poetic license with their works? Everyone does that.

Your hair is quite black tho

Yeah it is for most, I was just kinda lucky with brown hair.

I had brown hair until i was 10. Then it got black. I miss my brown hair ;_;

This

>mfw have greek nose
>mfw slight bump on one side make it look only slightly aquiline but not ugly or jewish
>mfw Greco-Roman mustard race

pic semi related

Nah man that iranian nose looks lie an eagle beak. But greco-roman ones are also quite nice.

Mine was blondish for a couple years after I was born.

Don't sweat your looks, you can also marry a hottie and live vicariously through your better looking son.

I was born blond with green eyes, which all went to brown, and im glad, blond hair is fucking effeminate as fuck. Only insecure brown people care about their hair and eye color. Mediterranean master race reporting.

>Mediterranean
>Not brown

I'm a pale Jew white, not the good white.

Well i dont care about blond hair either i just wished it would have stayed brown since i like the color more. But im also ok with my black hair. I mean its still a dark tone and its also lush and good shaped. And i think mediterranean counts as "brown" dont they? Additionaly one of my aunts and one of my uncles have blond hair so maybe i got kind of lucky there?

My uncle has blue eyes, in it's either West Asian DNA or Indo European rape baby DNA.

According to autistic race maps, i technically belong to the "alpine" race. But still love me some Mediterranean qts. My hands are tanned as fuck, the rest of me is pale fucking white. I know a few brits and they are mad jelly that i tan easily.

>Well i dont care about blond hair either i just wished it would have stayed brown since i like the color more. But im also ok with my black hair. I mean its still a dark tone and its also lush and good shaped. And i think mediterranean counts as "brown" dont they? Additionaly one of my aunts and one of my uncles have blond hair so maybe i got kind of lucky there?

Well mediterraneans are just more tanned imo, they're not gypsy brown. My hair is that kind of brown that when wet it looks jet black. And my eyes are regular brown, but when under light have a slight greenish tint, which i don't like.

Looks like shit

Greek nose is almost completely straight, Roman nose is more aquiline

I met a Persian girl that had the most amazing golden-brown skin tone I've ever seen, with a kind of brown-blonde hair tone as well. She was a Persian Christian iirc.

Southern European girls and Turkish models are the hottest. Northern Europeans look too different to what I'm used to but Mediterraneans are a nice mix.

Well im quite hairy and have pitch black hair but i have really white skin. Dont know what happened there desu

no, they looked like this

it's funny because it's true

>Jew white

Most likely North Caucasus.

Interesting, I've fallen in love with Georgia after a couple YouTube documentaries. It's absolutely gorgeous but their alphabet scares me.

Has this board really become such a fetid pile of trash that you can't even comprehend somebody just posting some relevant images or information in a thread without trying to push an agenda? OP asked what ancient Persians looked like so I posted some pictures of ancient/medieval Persians. Jesus Christ I fucking hate this place.

I asked specifically what Achaemenid and Sassanid Persians looked like. You posted stuff from various time periods, such as a Seljuq bowl.

I posted Achaemenid and Sassanid stuff and then included a few later ones because I felt like it. So fucking what?

>I'm retarded

What do you even want you fucking faggot?

They looked like Persians today

Stop being so touchy.

Some Iranians look very very European. Arab admixture fucking up the gene pool a bit and gave some Iranians the fucking awful nose and black hair colouring of the >1708506 guy

That guy look like a glorious hero.

English people aren't supposed to have button noses you've just got shit genetics mate. Also that nose is fucking disgusting it's so hooked.

please stop with this psuedo science.

the region of Iran is literally the middle of the silk road. People were traveling up and down it and intermixing for thousands of years before the Arabs came along.

>button noses
you mean nigger nose right ?

Is that fucking iranian sean connery peaking out behind the vlad looking guy with the party hat?

No, not until you explain what the fuck your problem is. You asked what ancient Iranians looked like so I posted images of ancient Iranians made by ancient Iranians. All you've posted are ugly Roman-made mosaics and modern reconstructions. I'm fucking sick of this shit. I'll leave when you thank me and apologize for your ingratitude.

It's a modern nationalist sculpture for fuck's sake, of course he does.

I mean, I think you should be careful to assume people are the same here.

Also, the issue is, some of these sculptures and artwork look drastically different from each other: the Sassanid mosaics I gave here look different from this and the Persepolis reliefs seem to portray the old Mesopotamian Persian .

>I think you should be careful to assume people are the same here
I don't care who's who. Everyone here should thank me and apologize for their transgression. Kowtow and kiss the dirt I walk on.

>Also, the issue is, some of these sculptures and artwork look drastically different from each other
How is that an issue? People look different and dress different in different places at different times. Is that a problem or something? Did you expect every ancient Persian to look like the exact same person?

>Arab admixture
Arabs never had ANY impact on Iranian genes.

Khosrow I is a nationalist hero though.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khosrow_I

Are you arguing Ancient Persians were heterogeneous? If so, I'd agree. Ancient Persians always seem to have been a mix of North Caucasians, Elamites, and Central Asians in varying degrees.

Elamites never constituted any signifigant portion of Persia after the Indo-Iranians showed up and overthrew them prior to even the Medes becoming sedentary. And Central Asias? If by Central Asians you mean other explicitly Iranic people, then possibly though unlikely.

They didnt contribute language wise maybe but they did so genetic wise. They were fr more numerous than the iranian invaders and got completely assimilated making up the majority of iranians

>Elamites
They were a small urban society that was assimilated and absorbed by Iranian peoples by the time the Aryan invaders showed up on the Iranian plateau. I don't think they ever constituted much, after the mid-5th century, their language disappears from historical records completely going by the last attested fortification tablets and cylinders in Persepolis. Friezes of darker skinned Persians and Iranians who served as the Companions (who Herodotus erroneously labeled the "Immortals"), doesn't mean they were black or whatever but its important to remember that Persepolis is near Shiraz, in the Pars/Fars province, in Southwest Iran.

And it is fucking hot as shit there and people tan very quickly and very heavily.

There isn't really any genetic impact the Elamites had. Its the same shit with people claiming Turkic or Arabic genes diluted Iranian ones, there's really no record or proof of it.

>They were more numerous than the Iranian invaders
Considering the majority of Iranians cluster closer with Caucasus peoples and Southern Europeans, that's incredibly unlikely. The Elamites were absorbed, assimilated, and culturally indistinct after the Indo-Iranians showed up.

One of the success of Indo-European peoples in general were that they completely displaced and typically outbreed the lands of peoples they invaded.

That's not really what I was arguing (people of the same ethnicity can look and dress different) but you're definitely right.

You're full of shit. Iranians didn't displace the native Elamites, they were just tribal nomads who became the new ruling class. Their whole civilization was adopted from the Elamites. If anything, the Iranians were just doing in Elam what the Turks would later do in places like Azerbaijan; imposing language and assimilating the sedentary population.

>Cyrus II, the founder of the empire that came to be known as the Achaemenid Empire, himself is a great example of what the empire embodied and how it saw and defined itself. Cyrus was the local ruler of a city well-known in ancient history, the city of Ansan/Anzan, long famed as the "highland" capital of the Elamite state. It was from here that the Elamites often descended upon the Susiana Plain to form strong kingdoms and oppose the Babylonians and Assyrians, and to these same highlands they often retreated when their opponents gained the upper hand. Cyrus, in this sense, was the ruler of an ancient city with ancient traditions and well-established administrative and hierarchical systems. However, Cyrus was also the representative of a society of newcomers, the Persians, who as descendants of migrating Indo-Europeans, had arrived in the valleys and plains that later bore their name, Persis or Persia, only a few hundred years before. Despite being the ruler of an Elamite city, and maybe carrying an Elamite name (OP. Kaurush, perhaps a form of El. Kura-) it was to the Persians that he turned when his thoughts were fixated on conquest. So, Cyrus represented something old: the millennia old Elamite civilization, based on a sophisticated bureaucracy and sedentary agriculture, but he and his supporters also represented the new: the Persians, the tribal pastoralists.
>The Achaemenid Empire in the Context of World History, Touraj Daryaee and Khodadad Rezakhani

>Its the same shit with people claiming Turkic or Arabic genes diluted Iranian ones
But that's exactly what you're doing. The Elamites were the sedentary agricultural and urban majority, the Iranians were the pastoral nomadic elite. Later the Elamites were assimilated and started calling themselves Iranians too.

I'm not full of shit on anything, for one the Elamite language completely disappears after the mid-5th century and no people representing or resembling the Elamites exist as a separate distinct culture or race by Alexander's time.

You're completely barking against the orthodox and attested view here, put up proof because not a single Iranianologist would agree with you.

>assimilating sedentary population
The Iranians completely out-populated the Elamites. Do you know what an Elamite looks like? Let's go by Darius descriptions of them:

>rotound and oval faces
>wide heavy lipped eyes
>round and pudgy noses
>typically adopted beardless fashions
>described as a race of short people with extremely darkened skin
I don't think so pal. You can cherrypick what you want but there is zero evidence the Elamite population ever outnumbered or was larger then the Indo-Iranians who settled into the Iranian plateau.

You are full of shit.

>But that's exactly what you're doing.
Except he's not.
>Elamites were sedentary.
Elamites only compromised a small region in southern Iran you dong, the Indo-Iranians settled all of the Iranian plateau, Caucasus areas, and Eurasia into the western reaches of Central Asia.

They occupied a very specific and niche area stretching from Susa to the Persian Gulf near the Arab marshes of Iraq. They never had a huge urban population all over Iran, only a small specific area. There is a reason why Iranians do not look like them. Because they assimilated the Elamites, not the other way around.

>und and oval faces
>>wide heavy lipped eyes
>>round and pudgy noses
>>typically adopted beardless fashions
>>described

Lol the delusion is hard here

Short people with extremely dark skin is not unheard of in fucking Iran.

But besides that, you spastic mongoloid, just look at genetic clusters and you'll see how Iran clusters far away from the European cluster and is more near to pakistan and India, if they were Pure Indo Europeans they would cluster near Germanic people and Northen Slavs, thing is, they don't, they are a mix of native blood (Elamite) probably something like 60 to 80% at the very least, Elamited were Urbanized people, Urbanized since 3000 years before the "Indo-Aryans" came, the Iranians were a NOMADIC people, Nomadic people NEVER outnumber the settled, urbanized natives, hell not even Spanish people outnumbered the natives in Mexico despite all the diseases they brought and with far superior technology, I HIGHLY doubt the Persians would outnumber the Elamites even without having to look at Genetic clusters because it's just fucking common sense, you deluded fuck.

You're an Iranian in denial. Of course Arabs had an impact on Iranian gene pool.

I think short people with extremely dark sin is something along the lines of Dravidian which elamites are supposed to be related to

You need to work on your reading comprehension. Indo-Iranians migrated into the Iranian plateau between 2500-1800 BC. On top of that, the Indo-Iranians began to migrated and heavily settle the areas surrounding Iran and making pushes into the adjacent regions and places bordering Elamite heartlands.

Do you know what else benefited the Indo-Iranians to help them overwhelm the Elamites as the dominant population? The Assyrians. The Assyrians completely razed many Elamite cities and towns in the late 8th and early 7th centuries.

Anshan was taken by a combination of Persian and Mede tribes and the Elamite urban population was put to the sword there. The vast vestiges of the large scale Elamite population outside of the core of Susa by that point. Getting fucked by Scythians, Persians, Medes, and other Indo-Iranic people, and having shit tons of their major urban areas destroyed or enslaved by the last Assyrian Empire really does not imply they had a larger population at all.

Is there autosomal DNA of Indo-Iranians?

>W-were totally pure Indo Europeans we never mixed with the natives we totally genocided them I swear!

Your level of delusion is pathetic

>J1-M267; typical of Semitic peoples, was rarely over 10% in Iranian groups, but as high as 30% in Assyrian minorities of Iran.

>J2-M172: is the most common Hg in Iran (~23%); almost exclusively represented by J2a-M410 subclade (93%), the other major sub-clade being J2b-M12. Apart from Iranians, J2 is common in Mediterranean and Balkan peoples (Croatians, Serbs, Greeks, Bosnians, Albanians, Italians, Bulgarians, Turks), in the Caucasus (Armenians, Georgia, northeastern Turkey, north/northwestern Iran, Kurds, Persians); whilst its frequency drops suddenly beyond Afghanistan, Pakistan and northern India.[94] In Europe, J2a is more common in the southern Greece and southern Italy; whilst J2b (J2-M12) is more common in Thessaly, Macedonia and central – northern Italy. Thus J2a and its subgroups within it have a wide distribution from Italy to India, whilst J2b is mostly confined to the Balkans and Italy,[95] being rare even in Turkey. Whilst closely linked with Anatolia and the Levant; and putative agricultural expansions, the distribution of the various sub-clades of J2 likely represents a number of migrational histories which require further elucidation.[94][96]

> is common in Iran, more so in the east and south rather than the west and north; suggesting a migration toward the south to India then a secondary westward spread across Iran.[97] Whilst the Grongi and Regueiro studies did not define exactly which sub-clades Iranian R1a haplogrouops belong to, private genealogy tests suggest that they virtually all belong to "Eurasian" R1a-Z93.[98] Indeed, population studies of neighbouring Indian groups found that they all were in R1a-Z93.[99] This implies that R1a in Iran did not descend from "European" R1a, or vice versa. Rather, both groups are collateral, sister branches which descend from a parental group hypothesized to have initially lived somewhere between central Asia and Eastern Europe.[100]

Khomeini just chilling in the background

No they didn't, go look up any genetic map.

If you're saying Darius the Great is a liar, then prove it.
>Iran clusters closer to India
No it doesn't. The only areas in India then even remotely come near Iranians are specifically in northern India where Dravidian and Vedic admixtures are at the least influential.
>Nomadic people never outnumber the settled urbanized populations
There is no absolute proof of this, you troglodyte faggot.

>strawman arguments this hard
More fallacies please.

Look at autosomal DNA plots. Arabs had absolutely no impact on Iranian gene pool, idiot. Check here: and gave one more image.

Fuck off.

Last one is R1a

>R1b – M269: is widespread from Ireland to Iran, and is common in highland West Asian populations such as Armenians,Turks and Iranians – with an average frequency of 8.5%. Iranian R1b belongs to the L-23 subclade,[101] which is an older than the derivative subclade (R1b-M412) which is most common in western Europe.[102]

>Haplogroup G and subclades: most concentrated in the southern Caucasus,[103] it is present in 10% of Iranians.[104]

>No it doesn't. The only areas in India then even remotely come near Iranians are specifically in northern India where Dravidian and Vedic admixtures are at the least influential.

You cluster much closer to India and the Middle East than you do to Central and Northen Europeans, who are those with the greatest Yamnaya (Proto Indo European) admixture.

Aryan my ass.

>says Iranians cluster closer with Southern Europeans and other Meditarratean peoples
>they do
>immediately strawmans by bringing up Northern and Central Europeans
>which never said
Please tell me how retarded you can be.
>India is more distant from Iran then Anatolians and Caucasus peoples
Try harder.

>for one the Elamite language completely disappears after the mid-5th century and no people representing or resembling the Elamites exist as a separate distinct culture or race by Alexander's time.
Because they were assimilated.

>Iranians completely out-populated the Elamites
How the hell could tribal nomads out-populate an urban agrarian civilization?

>Darius descriptions of them
Did you get this from realhistoryww or something? Post a source.

>journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0080673
>All Iranian populations studied here exhibit similarly high diversity values comparable to the other groups from the Caucasus, Anatolia and Europe. The results of AMOVA and MDS analyses did not associate any regional and/or linguistic group of populations in the Anatolia/Caucasus and Iran region pointing to close genetic positions of Persians and Qashqais to each other and to Armenians, and Azeris from Iran to Georgians.
>By reconstructing the complete mtDNA phylogeny of haplogroups R2, N3, U1, U3, U5a1g, U7, H13, HV2, HV12, M5a and C5c we have found a previously unexplored genetic connection between the studied Iranian populations and the Arabian Peninsula, India, Near East and Europe, likely the result of both ancient and recent gene flow.
>tldr; Iranians are heterogeneous

I think the Ossetians are the best proxy for Indo-Iranians. They are descendants of the Alan and also Scythians. On autosomal DNA plots, we plot more closely to the Ossetians than Westerners do to them.

So yeah, I think the PIE that came to Iran were more North Caucasus genetically rather than Yamnaya.

Northern Europeans have significantly more Yamnaya than Southern Europeans, but they are not pure Yamnaya, pic related.

Likewise, Iranians are basically North Caucasians and Mesopotamian. Check here: Only autosomal DNA matters.

Haplogroups just give you ideas on migration of different groups of people (e.g., mtDNA for maternal migration and yDNA for paternal migration), but autosomal DNA gives you a better idea of current race since it's inherited from all of our great grandparents.

Paternal haplogroup doesn't actually mean much though. Can only be reliable up to your great grandfather or something. This is because the Y chromosome mutates easily. The maternal haplogroup literally does go all the way back, but it is still a worse marker of race compared to autosomal DNA.

>says Iranians cluster closer with Southern Europeans and other Meditarratean peoples
>they do

They don't, fix your eyes:
Either way mediterranean isn't an ethnicity
>India is more distant from Iran then Anatolians and Caucasus peoples

Anatolians are clearly not pure Indoeuropeans

Stop referencing haplogroup studies. They're retarded. Only autosomal DNA matters for the reasons I gave here: Autosomal DNA is the best marker for race.

>They were assimilated.
Not a defense: Elamite was used as an administrative language and given imperial importance by the Medes and Persians, it still died out despite that protection.
>How the hell could tribal nomads out-populate urban agarian civilization?
By Elam being reduced to a handful of small hamlets, townships, and a few cities when the last Assyrian in the 8th century razed the entire country and enslaved most of the native Elams in chains? Check up on the Neo Assyrian Empire in the 800s and 700 BC time period, user.

>tldr
>Iranians are more Indo-European then anything else still, as their ancestors were.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iranian_peoples#Genetics
Even the wikipedia has the cited articles there.

They do, fix your eyes and stop with the /stormfront/ bullshit. See here: and here >Anatolians are clearly not
They clearly are. They are Caucasians, closely related to Indo-Europeans and that's the end of that, my stuttering retard.

Elamites were pretty much wiped out by the Assyrians.
>"Susa, the great holy city, abode of their Gods, seat of their mysteries, I conquered. I entered its palaces, I opened their treasuries where silver and gold, goods and wealth were amassed … I destroyed the ziggurat of Susa. I smashed its shining copper horns. I reduced the temples of Elam to naught; their gods and goddesses I scattered to the winds. The tombs of their ancient and recent kings I devastated, I exposed to the sun, and I carried away their bones toward the land of Ashur. I devastated the provinces of Elam and on their lands I sowed salt."
What was left assimilated with the Medes/Persians.

>Iranians are more Indo-European then anything else still, as their ancestors were.

Good lord how deluded can you fucking be?

Iranians cluster close to NEAR EASTERN people, how the fuck could they be pure prehistoric South Russian/Ukraine people?

God damn what a deluded retard, and start looking at autosomal dna you retarded waste of space

I forgot to give the pic.

There are no pure Indoeuropeans anymore. Also, I think Indo-Iranians were most likely more North Caucasus genetically rather than Yamnaya.

How are you this fucking retarded? Iranians cluster with Near Easterners who have strong Indo-European admixture. Hence why there is a LARGE observed HG discrepacnay and distance between them and Semitic peoples in general.

Also you fucking retard again: which rebukes your claim. As well as those even on fucking wikipedia article with the provided links and sources.

Iranians cluster closet with other Iranians, then people of the Caucasus areas and Southern Europeans and those of parts of Mesopotamia which historically have had huge Iranian presences and populations.

You are stupid.

Exactly, the the last vestige of the Neo Assyrians wiped out a huge part of the Elamite sedentary population.

Many Iraqi Arabs cluster closely with Iranians, that doesn't mean Iranians have signifigant semitic admixture but rather because most of Iraq was part of the tradititional Persian heartland region for thousands of years and majority of Arabic speakers are not in fact, native Arabs but Semitic or Iranian peoples who were assimilated.

Learn history.

Based off my own studies, here's how I'd decompose the "White race":

1) North Europid (all Northwestern Europeans have significantly more Yamnaya ancestry than Southern European -- there is sufficient reason to break them into a different race)
2) South Europid
3) Near Eastern (Anatolian Turk, Persian, Armenian)
4) North Caucasus (Circassians, Ossetians, etc.)
5) Mesopotamian (Assyrians, Iranian Jews, etc.)
6) Arab (Levantines, Gulf Arabs)

Iranians are Near Easterners but have a close relationship with North Caucasus people with some marginal Mesopotamian (hence the nose). We don't have any Arab on average, we cluster too far on autosomal DNA plots. North Caucasus people have no relation with Europeans at all.

I believe the Indo-Iranians were genetically more North Caucasian and not Yamnaya***.

Debunks WHAT?

Your map doesn't include 3/4 of the Near Eastern population while MINE does, fix your eyes you fuckwit

Yeah obviously cluster close to Middle Easterns with some Yamnaya admixture, that means that you are, guess what A MIDDLE EASTERNER with some minor Proto Indo European admixture, what a surprise!

If you were le pure untouched Aryan you would cluster close to Eastern Europe/Russia who have something like 60% Yamnaya admixture

Gulf Arabs have 18& subsaharian admxiture they are not white by any definiton

Once again, I don't think Indo-Iranians were genetically the same as Yamnaya. I think they were North Caucasoids.

The Ossetians, for example, are descendents of the Alan people, and we cluster closer to them than they do to Europeans, etc.