A tangled web they weave: the mystery of Kurdish roots

International Journal of Kurdish Studies, Jan, 2002 by Vera Beaudin Saeedpour

Kurds often complain that their ancestors, particularly the illustrious ones, are at best misidentified, at worst misappropriated. And therefore credit does not accrue where credit is due. Take for example, Karim Khan Zand (or Zend), a notable to whom more than a few Kurds refer with affection as "Karim Kurd," and more than a few Persians prefer to call "the Father of Persia." But consult the 1911 edition of Encyclopedia Britannica ("Persia") to find this exercise in futility. At the outset, Karim Khan is "a chief of the Zend Kurds" who for nineteen years "ruled with the title of wakil, or regent, over the whole of Persia, excepting the province of Khurasan. He made Shiraz the seat of his government, and by means of his brothers put down every attempt to subvert his authority. The rule of the great Zend chief was just and mild, and he is on the whole, considering his education and the circumstances under which he was placed, one of the more faultless characters to be met with in Persian history." But read down a few lines only to find that "The Zend is said to be a branch of the Lak tribe." Proceed to the accompanying footnote and return to square one: "Markham. Morier says of Karim Khan's family, 'it was a low branch of an obscure tribe in Kurdistan.'" (1)

If Britannica vacillated back in 1911, it has been in good company since then. In his book on Kerim Khan Zand published in 1979, John Perry, University of Chicago professor of Persian language and civilization, hovers between Kurd, Lak, and Lur. The Zand tribe he describes as "a minor pastoral people of the Zagros foothills. They are generally said to be a branch of the Lak tribes, which also include the Kalhor, Zangana, Mafi, and Bajlan, and like their neighbors have been classed by Persian and by foreign writers both as Kurds and as Lurs." (Tell that to the Kurds who today identify themselves as Kalhors.) Perry then proceeds with this attempt to clear the cobwebs: "The reason for this confusion is evidently the position of the Zand home, at the eastern limit of the line through Kermanshah that traditionally divides Luristan from Kurdistan and where in practice Kurdish and Luri customs and dialects are intermingled. The narrative sources clearly imply, however, that the Zands regarded themselves, or at least were regarded, as quite distinct from their neighbors the Fayli Lurs on the one hand and the Kurds of Ardalan on the other. The Lak tribes, whose dialect shows characteristics of Kurdish rather than Luri, were apparently immigrants into this northernmost zone of Luristan, or were settled there by Shah 'Abbas. In the later Safavid Period, the Zands are mentioned together with the Laks as Lurs."

Perplexed? Perry covers his sources with a footnote leading us further into the pathless woods. As for the Zands, he writes that "Qazvini, Shirvani and Kuhmarra'i ... class them as Lurs," while "Bedlisi, Zaki and Nikitine ... have them as Kurds." And there is more. "There are (or were until recent times) various groups in Kurdistan and northern Luristan calling themselves Zands ... sundry pockets of Kurdish Zands are remarked by Edmonds, Nikitine, and Zaki." (2)

In the second example, there is no uncertainty. It is as clear as it is indefensible, attached as it is to Saladin, the most misappropriated of all Kurds. It lies in a Kurdish Library acquisition titled The Middle Ages: an Illustrated History by Barbara Hanawalt, Ohio State University professor of British history and, according to the Oxford University Press book jacket, "a renowned medievalist." Dr. Hanawalt had this alone to impart on Saladin: "The Third Crusade took careful planning. Richard was the only enthusiastic participant, but Philip and Frederick soon followed because the Church and laity were concerned that the Turks had unified under their great leader, Saladin, and threatened to take over the entire Holy Land once again ... According to myth, he fought single-handedly against Saladin. Whether or not this is true, he did in fact achieve major victories and succeeded in reaching a compromise with the Turkish leader, who agreed to give the Christians the port city of Acre and a corridor through which pilgrims could pass to worship in Jerusalem." No oversight, the index reads, "Saladin (Turk leader), 101."

On the one hand, the confusion is understandable. There are to date no definitive sources attesting to the origins and early history of the Kurds. Only four centuries ago Sherif Khan Bedlisi, a Kurdish provincial governor of an Ottoman vilayet, authored a history to which most Kurds refer today as a definitive source. But even Bedlisi did not write in Kurdish, he wrote in Persian; nor was history his primary employment.

Like the early Jews, the Kurds are a tribal people. Yet the Jews managed to leave voluminous records and writings for well over 2,000 years. Not so the Kurds. Generally believed to have a history of great antiquity, no Kurd to date seems to have left that imprint in print. Apparently, only in the seventh century did Arabs use the word 'Kurt.' Under these circumstances, the quest to discover Kurdish origins and ancestry--and Kurdish contributions to the contents and discontents of civilization as well--have been left to others. Like Kurds, they come equipped with varied expertise, perceptions, sentiments, interests and aims. This is to be as expected as the night the day. In what follows, perhaps readers will get some impressions of where that path has led.