The history of Kurd. From Guti to Khorramdinians

Abstract

An independent history of the Kurds has never been written because the Kurds have never owned an empire-state since the science of history emerged. Great narratives of history narrate great empires. The Kurds, who did not own the empire and the state, have been removed from classical and modern historiographical narratives or reduced as a part of others such as Iran. In pre-Islamic history, history is monopolized by King who decided what would remain in historical memory and how it happened. In Islamic times, too, historians were scribes of the royal court who had no interest in the historiography of peoples without empires. Furthermore, because the source of modern historiography was, on the one hand, classical historians, the Kurds continued to be excluded or reduced in historical narratives, and on the other hand, the central subject of modern social science is the state, and stateless Kurds have not gained the importance of research. In addition, Kurdish historians were unable to deconstruct the framework established by others to write an independent history for the Kurds. For this reason, Kurdish history remains new and unknown, and the lack of narration does not mean the absence of history itself. Many anti-Islamic and anti-Iranian political and social movements were Kurds, however, in historical narratives they are referred to as evil, Zandiq and infidel not as an ethnic group, as today, the repression and genocide of the Kurds is not done in the name of the Kurds, but in the name of terrorism, infidels, Marxism, Mountain and separatists. Kurdish history is the history of the people, not the history of aristocracy and empire. Kurdish history is written, even so not in Kurdish name, in the name of the Other.