Competing Narratives on the Language of Ezidis: The Case of “Ezdiki”

Introduction

This article examines the linguistic identity of the Ezidis, with a particular focus on the terms Kurmancî and Ezdiki. Although Ezidis have historically been recognized as a Kurdish-speaking group, with Kurmancî recognized as the native language of the Ezidis, recent discourse has introduced Ezdiki as an alternative designation. By tracing historical linguistic classifications and examining primary sources, this study demonstrates that Kurmancî remains the established linguonym for the Ezidis and furthermore also critically engages with the arguments presented in articles such as “Ezdiki – The Language of the Ezidis” published 2018 in EzidiPress, which advocate for the use of Ezdiki as an authentic historical linguonym. The emergence of Ezdiki is explored as a modern construct rather than a historically attested linguistic term.

Kurmancî

Kurmancî, a northwestern Iranian language within the Indo-European family, constitutes the largest branch of the Kurdish linguistic continuum. Historically, it has functioned as both the vernacular and liturgical language of the Ezidi community. The vast majority of the Ezidi religious literature and lore (Qewl, Beyt, Qesîde, Dua, Diroze, Serhatî, Destan, Çîvanok, Çîrok, etc.) is composed in Kurmancî,^[1]See more in: Omarkhali, Khanna. The Yezidi Religious Textual Tradition, from Oral to Written: Categories, Transmission, Scripturalisation, and Canonisation of the Yezidi Oral Religious Texts: With … Continue reading which remains as the primary medium of daily interaction and liturgy across the Ezidi-inhabited regions of Iraq (with exception of the twin towns of Bashiqa and Bahzani), Syria, Turkey, Armenia, and Georgia.

The Kurmancî spoken by Ezidi communities is generally consistent with that spoken by neighboring non-Ezidi Kurmancî-speaking communities within the same geographical habitat. While some variation in phonology and vocabulary exists, these differences do not significantly hinder mutual intelligibility. In fact, intra-Ezidi dialectal variation can sometimes result in reduced intelligibility between Ezidis from different regions to a greater degree than that of between an Ezidi and a non-Ezidi of the same region. As such, despite claims to the contrary (to be discussed further below), there is no observable linguistic evidence to support the notion that Ezidis speak a distinct language that is separate from Kurmancî.

Prior to the emergence of the pan-ethnic term “Kurdî”, popularized through rise of Kurdish nationalist movements in 20th century, the endonym Kurmanc and the linguonym Kurmancî was widely employed by Kurmancî-speaking populations, as well as even among some tribes and regions that are today classified as Sorani-speaking or Zaza-speaking. Ethnographic observations from the previous centuries reveal that many communities classified as Kurdish did not uniformly identify with the term “Kurd” natively although these were still considered the same people by outsiders and somewhat by themselves. In fact, there was a variation of endonyms among Kurds; communities in northern and western areas of Kurdistan predominantly used “Kurmanc” as self-designation, while those in eastern and southern regions used “Kurd” as their primary self-designation.

This dichotomy is evident in early 20th-century ethnographic accounts. As an example, in Sir Ely Bannister’s report on Kurdish tribes in his 1914 publication, he specifies the Kurdish tribes using “Kurmanc” as self-designation distinctly from those who use “Kurd” as self-designation. In the list, among the groups he described as identifying by the term “Kurmanc” also extends to the populations that are in today’s discourse classified as Sorani-speakers, including the Mukrî tribe, Kurds of the Rawanduz region, the Şuwan tribe of Kirkuk and the Baban tribe of Sulaymaniyah.^[2]Soane, Ely Banister. To Mesopotamia and Kurdistan in Disguise: With Historical Notices of the Kurdish Tribes and the Chaldeans of Kurdistan. Small, Maynard and Company, 1914, p. 405. This appears to be substantiated in other traveller reports, like that of Claudius James Rich in 1836, who reports “Kurmanc” being the self-appellation of the Sekkir tribe of Pshdar region in Sulaymaniyah.^[3]Rich, Claudius James. Narrative of a Residence in Koordistan, and on the Site of Ancient Nineveh: With Journal of a Voyage Down the Tigris to Bagdad and an Account of a Visit to Shiranz and … Continue reading

The term Kurd appears to have been historically absent from the native vocabulary of Kurmanji-speakers, as evidenced by the late 19th-century Kurmanji-Russian dictionary compiled by Russian researcher Solomon Adamovich Egiazarov. In his work, he records the terms Kurmanji and Kurmanj as part of the native lexicon, but not Kurd, which appears only as a Russian translation of Kurmanj. Consequently, “Kurd” was also perceived as foreign term within many Kurmancî-speaking communities, evidenced by ethnographic fieldwork even into the late 20th century, some Kurmancî speakers expressed unfamiliarity with or resistance to the term Kurd. For example, Mehmet Orhan, who wrote in his book his observations on the village of Zindê in Gerçüs district of Batman province, Turkey, reports that the members of a family by the name of Zero defined themselves to be “Kurmanc” as opposed to “Kurd”.^[5]Orhan, Mehmet. Political Violence and Kurds in Turkey: Fragmentations, Mobilizations, Participations & Repertoires. United Kingdom, Taylor & Francis, 2015, p. 128 Furthermore, as Paul White recounts, Kurdish guerrilla leader Seyfi Cengiz noted that villagers in Turkey’s Dersim region insisted they were “Kirmanc” and not Kurdish, reportedly repeating the following:^[6]White, Paul J. Primitive Rebels Or Revolutionary Modernizers: The Kurdish Nationalist Movement in Turkey. United Kingdom, Bloomsbury Academic, 2000, p. 48

“We are Kirmanc. You are saying we are Kurdish. We are not Kurdish.”

Lokman Turgut also writes in his book, based on his field studies, that the expression of “Kurmanc” as an ethnic collective and the feeling changed in 1990s with the emergence of Kurdish nationalism as a mass movement, of which “Kurmanc” generally was not part of the vocabulary. Prior to this, cultural and political cohesion within Kurdistan was often articulated through localized identities. This is exemplified in the same passage through use of the phrase “mîrê wey lê Kurmanciyê” (The Prince of the Kurmanc) from a Kurdish folk song, which highlights the existence of an ethnic collective in pre-nationalist Kurdistan under the identity of “Kurmanc”.^[7]Turgut, Lokman. Mündliche Literatur der Kurden in den Regionen Botan und Hekarî. Germany, Logos-Verlag, 2010, p. 189

This terminology was prevalent among Ezidis (as will be shown below), as well as by Kurds of other faiths across some regions in Iraq, Syria, Turkey and Iran in Anatolia, Mesopotamia, and even as far as Khorasan, where the term Kurmanc remains in widespread use as an endonym today.

Linguistic Self-Designation of the Ezidis in Historical Sources

Due to the limited availability of historical first-person written accounts by Ezidis regarding themselves, much less their linguistic and ethnic identity, scholarly inquiry must largely depend on the observations of travelers, particularly those documenting direct interactions and discourses with Ezidi individuals. Unfortunately, even in those reports, the discourses tend to not be recorded in the native language of the Ezidi interviewee and are instead translated into another language, making it difficult to observe the exact terminology used in the conversation. A rare exception and among the most important of those sources is Ethel Drower’s travel report published in 1941, since she closely interacted with Ezidi women and recorded her own conversations with them, among whom was a certain “Daya Qoteh” (Dayî Qutê), who occupied the religious “Kabanî” female servant position in the sanctuary of Laliş. The present author of this article was able to trace this Daya Qoteh to a certain “Qutê Hecî Elî Kirêt”, whose biography is written on the wall of Baba Çawîş’s lounge at the holy sanctuary of Laliş.^[8]Found and photographed during field research at Lalish in the spring of 2024 She was born 1885 in the village of Bêristek in Welatşêx region of Iraq and was appointed as the Kabanî of Laliş in 1926, a title which she held until she passed away in 1969. In Ethel Drower’s report, Dayî Qutê explicitly refers to her language as “Kurmancî”, indicating a recognized self-identification with the Kurdish language. Dayî Qutê uses this glossonym in two different contexts in the book; on page 173 of E.S. Drower’s report we read the following:^[9]Drower, Ethel Stefana. Peacock Angel: Being Some Account of Votaries of a Secret Cult and Their Sanctuaries. United Kingdom, J. Murray, 1941, p. 173

When we paused at a rocky turn shaded by an over-hanging tree, we saw a range of snow-mountains rising in their purity behind more lightly covered peaks “Snow,” said Daya Qoteh, pointing them out to me. “In Kermanji (Kurdish) bafra.” There was a pleasant fiction between us that she was teaching me Kurdish.

On page 184 of the same source:^[10]Ibid. p. 184

“But you are not so old,” they replied, wondering.

“Sixty!” I answered, and showed my hands six times to Daya Qoteh.

“And I,” she countered in Kurdish, and I understood her, “am forty-eight. Forty-” she held up her hands too, “and eight!”

“Hashta,” I repeated. “That is ‘eight’.”

“Ha!” said she, delighted, “then you begin to know Kermanji!”

This historical account strengthens the argument that Kurmancî was the established glossonym for the language of the Ezidis. With no historical records indicating that Ezidis referred to their language by a glossonym separate and distinct from that of the wider Kurdish people. In an interview recorded on 27th October 1879 with the spiritual leader of Ezidis at the time, Baba Şêx Nasir, which was published in French by N. Siouffi, the vice-consul of the French Republic in Mosul, we find the following:^[11]Siouffi, N. Une courte conversation avec le chef de la secte des Yezidis, ou les adorateurs du diable. Journal Asiatique, vol. 116, 1880, p. 83. Société Asiatique.

Siouffi: “How can you get along, in terms of language, with those who come from Russia to visit the tomb of Sheikh Adi?”

Baba Şêx Nasir: “They speak the Kurdish language, which every Yezidi should know.”

 

Similarly in a Syriac manuscript dated 1899, we can find an interview recorded with an Ezidi individual who is ambiguously referred to as “teacher”, “wise teacher” or “lord”, likely indicating someone of high social or clergical standing. In response to a question about the language used in divine communication, the Ezidi interviewee answers as follows:^[12]Abraham of Zabe. (1899). History of Rabban b ‘Idta; misc. on Yazidi (Vat.sir.584, fol. 68r). Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana.

“Question: In which language did God speak with our father Adam? The Christians say in Syriac and the Jews says in Hebrew”

Answer: “They say this because it is written in their books, but we say that God spoke with Adam in the venerable Kurdish language which is the true language”

Since these interviews were translated into the languages which the documents are written in, it is not possible to ascertain the precise glossonym used in the original statement. However, as once again demonstrated in this instance, the linguonym used here is unlikely to have made it distinguishable from Kurdish. It is also worth noting that the Ezidi prince of Şingal, Mîr Îsmaîl Beg, appears to have drawn inspiration from the account in the Syriac manuscript. He incorporated the notion of God speaking to Adam in Kurdish into his book, “The Yazidis: Past and Present“, published in 1934 shortly after his death. In this work, he asserts:^[13]Chol, Ismail Beg. Al-Yazīdīyah Qadīman Wa-Hadīthan (The Yazidis: Past and Present). American Press, 1934, p. 76.

… and God spoke in the Kurdish language with Adam and with Malak Tawus, and for this reason the Mishefa Reş, which is the property of Melik Şemsedîn, and the Psalms of David are in Kurdish.

It should be noted that this narrative is best understood as a personal interpretation rather than an authentic part of the Ezidi canonical theology and mythology, however, it highlights an important linguistic perspective; even among high-ranking Ezidi figures, the language was referred to without distinctions separating it from Kurdish. Mîr Îsmaîl Beg likely did not perceive the designation of the language as “Kurdish” to be problematic or inconsistent, hence why it came to be included in his book.

“Zimanê Êzdiya” & “Language of the Yezidis”: Linguonym or Descriptor?

As noted at the outset of this study, part of the analysis will involve evaluating certain arguments presented in a 2018 EzidiPress article titled “Ezdiki – The Language of the Ezidis“, authored by Yilmaz Algin.^[14]Algin, Yilmaz. 2018. “Ezdiki – the Language of the Ezidis?” Translated by Rojda S. Ezidipress. December 4, 2018. Accessed May 7, 2025. … Continue reading This article was also cited as a reference in the 2021 paper co-authored by Majid Hassan Ali, Dimitri Pirbari, and Rustam Rzgoyan, titled “The Reformation and Development of Yazidi Identity from Theoretical and Historical Perspectives“,^[15]Ali, Majid Hassan, Dimitri Pirbari, and Rustam Rzgoyan. 2021. “The Reformation and Development of Yazidi Identity from Theoretical and Historical Perspectives.” Ethnopolitics 21 (3): 258–77. … Continue reading The latter paper, which explored the ethnic identity of the Ezidis, incorporated some arguments similar to those found in Algin’s article. However, to maintain focus and avoid extending this study into the broader topic of Ezidi ethnicity, which is a subject reserved for a future study, we will specifically assess the arguments in the paper that pertain to language and the use of linguonyms. Regarding the glossonym “Êzdikî”, one of the arguments presented in Algin’s article is as follows:

“However, it is interesting that Ezidis who were not ancestors of Soviet Ezidis also used this glossonym.”

Which is followed by the presentation of a passage from “Notes ethnologiques sur les Yésidi“, a 1895 work of a certain French researcher by the name of Ernest Chantre. In the article authored by Yilmaz Algin, it is asserted that Chantre “interviewed Ezidis in Birecik, in present-day Turkey, during his research trips in 1895” and recorded the following observation:

“They both [Ezidis and Kurds] speak “Kourmandji.” The Ezidis call their language “zyman e ezda” (the language of the Ezidis), and they claim that it is the Kurds who speak their language, and not them who speak the language of the Kurds.”

Firstly, it is critical to clarify that this passage does not originate from Chantre’s own observations but rather from the work of the Russian researcher Solomon Adamovich Egiazarov, which Chantre appears to have translated into French. The original account is found in Egiazarov’s 1884 publication “Brief ethnographic essay on the Kurds of the Erivan province“,^[16]Also published in: Егиазаров, С. А. Краткий этнографический очерк курдов Эриванской губернии. В Записки Кавказского … Continue reading and there is no indication anywhere of such observation ever taking place in Birecik, Turkey, but rather, as seen in the work’s title, it took place in Armenia. This distinction is important not only because it discards the argument of the “glossonym” being historically prevalent outside of former Soviet Union, but also in order to understand the development of identity in different regions.

Within the context of the passage, the phrase Zimanê Êzdiya (“Language of the Ezidis”) does not appear to function as a distinct, historically attested glossonym. Instead, it seems to serve as a descriptive phrase used to assert linguistic ownership, rather than fulfilling the same formal role as established glossonyms like Kurmancî or the modern term Êzdikî. In Egiazarov’s Kurmanji-Russian dictionary, included in his ethnographic study published in 1891, one can find “Kurmancî” in the word list as a part of the native vocabulary twice, once as a linguonym and once as an ethnonym, however, there is no mention of Zimanê Êzdiya or any equivalent expression, despite the dictionary being based on a field research that included Ezidi communities in Armenia, suggesting that the phrase was not intended as a formal glossonym, but rather as a descriptor of the language in question.^[17]Ibid. In the section: Курманджийско-русский словарь, составил С. А. Егиазаров при содействии Л. П. Загурского … Continue reading Therefore, this usage cannot be considered an early attestation of the modern linguonym Êzdikî. Instead, it likely reflects a form of otherization of the term Kurd, which the Ezidi informants may have associated specifically with their Muslim counterparts (as discussed further below).

The underlying issue then, from the perspective of the Ezidi respondents, appears to have been less about the naming of the language and more about asserting rightful ownership, specifically, whether the language should be seen as belonging to the Ezidis or to Muslim Kurds. To understand why the respondents otherized the label of “Kurd” in this context and distanced themselves from it, it is necessary to revisit the earlier discussion on Kurmancî and its historical use among the Ezidis, which will be explored in the following section.

Otherization of the Term “Kurd” & Usage of “Kurmanc” as an Endonym Among Ezidis

While a more comprehensive examination of ethnonym usage within the Ezidi community is a subject that will be presented in a forthcoming study, some preliminary context is necessary to situate the glossonymic debate (i.e., concerning the naming and classification of languages). As previously noted in the article, “Kurmancî” served historically as the pre-modern endonym of all Kurmancî-speakers. The term Kurdî, by contrast, was integrated into the local and native Kurmancî usage relatively recently, coinciding with the emergence of Kurdish nationalism. Although the Kurmanc were broadly categorized by external observers, and at times by themselves, as part of the wider Kurdish ethnos, historical sources suggest that the term Kurd was often perceived as somewhat foreign or exogenous among the general Kurmanc population.

This phenomenon may have been even more pronounced among Ezidis. Among many Ezidis, particularly those in the Caucasus, there is a tendency to associate the term “Kurd” with Muslims, even those Ezidis who ethnically self-identify as Kurdish often conflate Kurd with Muslim in casual speech. Modern field research among Ezidis in Iraq, such as that of Eszter Spät and Tutku Ayhan, has shown that the word “Kurd” is associated with “Muslim” and in some contexts, the two are even used interchangeably as synonyms. Eszter Spät observed this even among Ezidis of Duhok governorate, who, despite defining themselves as Kurds by ethnicity, would still employ “Kurd” synonymously to “Muslim” in informal conversations.

This semantic layering likely stems from the Ottoman-era millet system, where religion, rather than language or other ethnic aspects served as basis for communal identity, hence Kurds being grouped as a part of the Muslim umma. As a result alienating non-Muslim Kurdish speakers like the Ezidis who openly declared themselves as non-Muslims and were endeavoring for a status as an officially recognized non-Muslim millet under Ottoman administration.^[18]See: Gölbaşı, Edip. 2013. “Turning the ‘Heretics’ Into Loyal Muslim Subjects: Imperial Anxieties, the Politics of Religious Conversion, and the Yezidis in the Hamidian Era.” The Muslim … Continue reading This meant that despite linguistic commonality and shared use of the Kurmanc endonym, Ezidis constituted a group who were clearly, both by themselves and Sunni Kurds, differentiated from Sunni Muslim Kurdish population, with repeated experiences of persecution at the hands of Muslim Kurds reinforcing this associative connotation.^[19]Eszter Spät, 2018. “Yezidi Identity Politics and Political Ambitions in the Wake of the ISIS Attack” Journal of Balkan and Near Eastern Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. … Continue reading^[20]Ayhan, Tutku. (2021). “We are Yezidi, Being Otherwise Never Stopped Our Persecution”: Yezidi perceptions of Kurds and Kurdish identity. Kurds and Yezidis in the Middle East. … Continue reading

It is also probable that the strong animosity against Kurds among the Armenian neighbours of the Ezidis, which was a consequence of the participation of the Muslim Kurds in the Ottoman-led massacres and pogroms of the Armenians during World War 1, also played a factor in Ezidis of Armenia distancing themselves from their Muslim Kurdish counterparts and thus the “Kurd” label, as highlighted in an Armenian article titled “Ezidi Kurds” and published in the “LUMA” journal published by a certain A. Gyurkyan in 1904:^[21]Գիւրջեան, Ա. (1904). Եզդի քրդեր. Լումայ գրական հանդէս, № 1, էջ 75–93. Տպարան Ա. Քութաթելաձէի

… if you ask a Muslim or Yazidi Kurd who they are, they will respond that they are Kurdish, and when you inquire further about what kind of Kurd they are, they will then answer that they are a Muslim or Yazidi Kurd. This was the case until recent years, but with the growing hatred of Armenians towards Muslim Kurds, Yazidis also do not proudly declare their identity as “Kurdish”. This is especially noticeable among Russian Yazidis, who are somewhat dependent on Armenians.

This context likely shaped the responses of Egiazarov’s informants, who belonged to the Hesenî tribal confederacy. In the folklore collection Zargotina Kurda, compiled by Ordîxanê Celîl and Celîlê Celîl, multiple instances appear of the term Kurmanc used in folk recitations by Ezidi singers, including but not limited to a variant of the song and story of Derwêşê Evdî, a famous Kurdish folkloric figure who was an Ezidi belonging to the Şerqî tribe of the Mîlan tribal confederation, recited by Egîtê Têcir, a traditional singer who also belonged to the Hesenî confederacy born in 1922. In one passage, Derwêşê Evdî is recorded to have said the following:^[22]Allison, Christine. The Yezidi Oral Tradition in Iraqi Kurdistan. United Kingdom, Curzon, 2001, p. 255

Derwesh said: “I swear on the head of my king, truly,

On the day of heavy destiny, with the crashing of wood on wood, the waggons and horses, the wailing of lionhearts and heroes, the shouting of young Kurmanji lads,

How brave a man would be if he were to come out to face another man.”

This implies that the dissociation from “Kurd” was likely not rooted in ethnic divergence, as Ezidis clearly still shared the same endonyms as their Muslim counterparts, but rather stemmed from the religious connotations the term had accrued. We also find attestation of the use of “Kurmanc” among Ezidis in a 1910 study by the Armenian archpriest Sion Ter-Manvelyan titled as “Ezidi-Kurmanj”, which contains valuable information about the ethnography, lifestyle, language and customs of the Ezidis of Armenia. In it, we find the following statement:^[23]Տեր-Մանուէլեան, Սիօն. (1910). Եզիդի Կուրմանժ. Ախալցխա: Տպարան եղբ. Մարտիրոսեանների, (Ter-Manvelyan, Sion. Ezidi-Kurmanj. Printing House of … Continue reading

The Ezidis never call themselves by the foreign names of “Kurd” or “Ezidi”, as these ethnic names are not very dear to them. Instead, they generally and always refer to themselves as “Kurmanj”, pronouncing the name with a certain spiritual satisfaction, although it has not yet been clarified what “Kurmanj” means. However, it seems to me that this significant word carries the meaning of “orthodox” and nothing else.

While Ter-Manvelyan can be considered an important source, with his statement providing an important historical input to the discussion, it should still be approached casually and critically. The suggestion that Ezidis identify by “Kurmanc” in contrast to “Kurd”, of which he may have noted an absence or rejection, is in alignment of other data. However, the suggestion that the Ezidis did not identify by the term Ezidi does not align with other historical records that indicate that Ezidis did identify by this religious identity. Likely, it reflects the experiences of author from his interactions with Ezidis and may be explained by the fact that he did not personally observe “Ezidi” being used prevalently among his informants, which led to such a remark. The usage of “Kurmanc” also surfaces in place names. The village of Pamp in Armenia, previously inhabited by Turks and known as Axdaş (“White Rock” in Turkish), was renamed Pampa Kurmanca (and probably later, “Pampa Kurda”) after Ezidi settlers of the Şemsikan tribe relocated into the deserted village in 1828. The name is derived from the Pampak mountain range, where another Armenian-inhabited village was located and called “Pampa Ermeniya” by Ezidis.^[24]Serdar, Emerîkê. (2014). Mukurî. In Pamba Kurda-Sîpan: cîê wî gêografîê. Retrieved from http://kurd.amarikesardar.com/?p=1925 (Kurdish) and http://amarikesardar.com/?p=3523 (Russian). … Continue reading^[25]Siyabend, Marîna. Serdana gundekî kurdan li Ermenîstanê. (May 4, 2012) Accessed through Internet Archive: … Continue reading

Furthermore, this term was also used in early publications of Soviet Kurdish literature by the Ezidi intellegentsia. For example by the Ezidi scholar Arab Shamilov (Erebê Şemo) “Şivanê Kurmanca” in 1931, which was the first-ever novel to be written in Kurdish, and “Xwe bi Xwe Hînbûna Kurmancî” (lit. “Teach Yourself Kurmanji”) in 1929, which was the first textbook for Kurmanji-learning, as well as the first Kurdish book to be printed using the first ever Latin Kurdish alphabet created in 1928 by the same Arab Shamilov in collaboration with the Assyrian scholar Ishak Margulov. In both Ezdiki – The Language of the Ezidis and The Reformation and Development of Yazidi Identity from Theoretical and Historical Perspectives, another point for the legitimacy of “Êzdikî” is made by relying on one of Shamilov’s newspaper pieces, accompanied by one where he refers to Ezidis as a nationality, namely:

“Two Yazidi villages, Bolshoi and Maliy Mirak, together have commenced the construction of a school for 80 pupils. The subjects in school will be taught in the Yazidi language.”

– Shamilov, 1926

“Even such a small nationality in Georgia as Yazidis has had its own school in Tbilisi since 1922. At the School in the Yazidi settlement area, they teach in their native language.”

– Shamilov, 1925

However, as earlier discussed, these statements are best interpreted as general language descriptors, rather than indications of a discrete glossonym or proto-form of Êzdikî. Shamilov’s own publications from the same period suggest that he viewed Ezidis as part of the Kurdish ethnicity, it is thus unlikely that Shamilov would have considered Ezidis to be distinct from Kurds, and likely would have seen no problem with using “Ezidi” and “Kurd” interchangeably in the context of language and nationality. In a 1924 piece published by him we find the following:^[26]Шамилов, А. [Shamilov, A.] (1924, April 17). Среди курдэв [Among the Kurds]. Заря Востока [Zarya Vostoka Newspaper], (553)

“The Kurds are divided into sects and tribes:

1. Kurds-Yezidis, 2) Kurds-Khalta.

The following tribes belong to the Khalta sect: Avdon, Dzhamaldini, Chelomi and Dzhalali, and the Zilan, also known as Sipki, Hasni, Zukri and Akochei belong to the Yezidi sect.

Part of the Kurds-Yezidis, living in Erivan and Kars in 1917 and 1918, during the Turkish and national unrest, fled: some to Armenia, others to the Tiflis Governorate and settled in the Kakheti and Akhalalak districts, and some ended up in Batum. Many of those settled in Tiflis.”

– Shamilov, 1924

Furthermore, we know that around the same time as the aforementioned newspaper pieces, following the First Conference of Caucasian Kurds in 1925 held in the village of Tsaghahovit in Armenia’s Aragatsotn province, a decision was made to create the first-ever Latin-based Kurdish alphabet. The task was assigned to Arab Shamilov and the Assyrian scholar Isahak Margulov, who began developing it in 1926 and completed it by 1928. From 1929 onwards, this alphabet was used in Kurdish-language schools across Armenia and also adopted in Georgia, Azerbaijan, Turkmenistan, and other Soviet republics. If, as the two aforementioned studies claim, early Ezidi intellectuals, Shamilov included, viewed themselves as “ethnic” Ezidis and claimed a separate Ezidi language, then Shamilov’s prominent role in developing Kurdish linguistics and literature in the same period while lack thereof for “Ezdiki” stands in direct contradiction to that narrative and demands further scrutiny.^[27]Mahabad, Occo. 2021. “SSCB’de Kürtlere Yönelik Alfabe, Eğitim Ve Kültür Çalışmaları.” April 22, 2021. Accessed July 6, 2025. … Continue reading

In the following decades, the term “Kurmanc” continued to be featured prominently in many other educational and scholarly texts authored by Soviet Ezidi intellectuals without dispute.^[28]For more on the works of Soviet-era Ezidi intellegentsia, see: Bretèque, Estelle Amy de la. “The Yezidis in the Soviet Union.” Chapter. In The Cambridge History of the Kurds, edited by Hamit … Continue reading Some examples include:^[29]Алексанйан, Н. А. 1962. Библиография Ктебед Кордиейә Советиe (Салед 1921–1960). Нәширәтә Академиа Р’СС … Continue reading

• Kitêba Zimanê Kurmancî (“The Kurmanji Language Book”), a Kurmancî-language textbook series published from 1929-1937 by Ruben Drambjan, Ishak Margulov, and subsequently Ezidi scholars such as Heciyê Cindî, Emînê Evdal, and Casimê Celîl. The same Ezidi authors also continued to author new editions of the textbooks from 1948.
• Mêtodîka Zimanê Kurmancî (“Methodology of the Kurmanji Language”) from 1932, authored by Heciyê Cindî.
• Nivîskarê Kurmanca (“Written Works of the Kurmanj”) series from 1934-1935, authored by Heciyê Cindî.
• Xebernama Têrmînologîyê ji Ermenîyê-Kurmancî (“Armenian-Kurmanji Terminological Dictionary”) in 1936 compiled by the Ezidi scholars Heciyê Cindî, Emînê Evdal and Cerdoyê Gênco.
• Kilamên Cimeta Kurmanca (“Ballads of the Kurmanj Community”) in 1936 by Heciyê Cindî.
• Folklora Kurmanca (“The Folklore of the Kurmanj”) in 1936, co-authored by Heciyê Cindî and Emînê Evdal.
• Gramatîka Zimanê Kurmancî ya Kurt (“A Short on the Grammar of the Kurmanji Language”) in 1948 by Ezidi scholar Qanatê Kurdo.

In conclusion, although the hostility or disinclination towards the term “Kurd” among Ezidis is well-attested in historical documents, we still observe a strong presence of the term “Kurmanc” among Ezidis, which was also shared by their Muslim Kurdish counterparts. This term was used widely among the early Soviet-era Kurdish intelligentsia spearheaded by Ezidis in consensus and without dispute, for their publications relating to ethnography (specifically Kurdology), linguistics and even textbooks that came to be used in schools in Ezidi settlements. The otherization of the term “Kurd” can likely be attributed not to ethnic factors, but rather to the fact that during pre-modern period, the ethnonym “Kurd” had not yet established itself as a familiar term and identity among the majority of the Kurdish population until rise of Kurdish nationalism in 20th century. This is also evidenced by the fact, as noted previously in the article, that the otherization of the term “Kurd” was not only present uniquely among Ezidis, but also among various other non-Ezidi Kurdish groups, including the Kurds of the Alevi stronghold of Dersim. It is also likely that the categorization of “Kurds” as part of the Muslim millet under Ottoman administration whereas Ezidis were openly declaring themselves as non-Muslims and endeavoring to achieve an official status as a distinct recognized non-Muslim millet, led to “Kurd” carrying a religious connotation associated with Muslims among Ezidis and reinforced the otherization of the term.

Rise of the “Êzdikî” Movement in Armenia

Considering the lack of usage and historical evidence of the glossonym Êzdikî outside of Armenia, as well as its suffix “-kî” which among the Ezidis, is only found in the Serhedî dialect of Kurmanji spoken by Caucasus Ezidis when referring to languages (for example “Ermenkî” for Armenian, “Ûriskî” for Russian, “ÎnglizkΔ for English, etc.), the word can verifiably be traced to the late Soviet period in Armenia, particularly around the time of the dissolution of the Soviet Union in 1991 and the concurrent Nagorno-Karabakh War (1988–1994), when ethnic tensions and nationalist sentiment were escalating across the region. Amid this climate, the Yezidi National Union was founded in 1989 under the leadership of prominent Armenian Ezidi figures such as Aziz Amar Tamoyan (president), Khdr Hajoyan (vice president), and other socially influential leaders including Karame Salon, Hasane Mahmood Tamoian, and Hasane Hasanian. This organization laid the groundwork for an emerging nationalist Ezidi movement that advanced the idea of a distinct Ezidi ethnicity and a separate Ezidi language, which they termed as Êzdikî.^[30]Estelle Amy de la Bretèque, 2021, pp. 467-469

This movement sparked significant controversy and created a rift within the Ezidi community. On one side were those who identified as Kurds and considered Kurmanji their mother tongue, which primarily members of the Soviet-era Ezidi intelligentsia and Ezidis from the Aragatz mountain region (notably the Talin and Aparan provinces) were prone to being a part of. Opposing them was a steadily growing faction led by Tamoyan, which enjoyed favorable support from the Armenian government and promoted the view that Ezidis constitute a separate ethnic group with their own language distinct from the Kurdish languages, which the Ezidis residing in the plains regions of Ashtarak, Echmiadzin, and Armavir provinces were more prone to being a part of.^[31]Ibid

Representatives of both camps constantly accuse each other of political schemes and pursuing politically motivated agendas. The pro-Kurdish faction contends that the Êzdikî movement is a recent, artificial construct that emerged within the politically charged atmosphere of the Nagorno-Karabakh War, alleging that it has been actively promoted by Armenian nationalists and state institutions. Conversely, proponents of the Êzdikî narrative often accuse the pro-Kurdish camp of being influenced by, or aligned with, the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK), and frame Kurdish-oriented Ezidis as recipients of foreign backing or ideological influence. Furthermore, they argue that Ezidi claims to identity and language were suppressed under the Soviet system, which officially classified Ezidis as Kurds and thereby facilitated their “assimilation” into Kurdish identity. This dispute has not remained purely theoretical; it has, particularly during the 1990s escalated to political disputes and even violence.^[32]Ibid

Arguments from both sides hold a degree of the truth. Many on the pro-Kurdish side, in part owing to the close proximity of some Ezidi settlements to the Turkish border, had close ties with the PKK, which no doubt would have advanced them more into aligning themselves with the Kurdish identity and further away from their Ezidi identity due to the PKK’s irreligious ideology.^[33]Assessing Kurdish militancy in Armenia – Onnik James Krikorian – journalist, photojournalist, consultant. (2022, March 24). Onnik James Krikorian – Journalist, Photojournalist, … Continue reading It is also true that Soviet Union adopted a strictly non-religious approach for their censuses, which led to communities within the Soviet Union being marked by “nationality” rather than religious creed, including Ezidis who went from being recognized as an ethnicity in the 1926 census to being grouped under Kurds in 1930 census.

Moreover, the Soviet state’s anti-religious campaigns, particularly during the Stalinist period, led to the systematic suppression of religious life. These campaigns affected nearly every sphere of public life, including the education system, press, cultural production, and access to employment. Religious institutions were closed or repurposed, religious instruction was banned, and public expressions of faith were actively discouraged.^[34]For more on Stalinist-era repression of religion, see: Dyachenko, Andriy, “​​​​From Repression to Appropriation: Soviet Religious Policy and Reform, 1917-1943” (2022). CUNY … Continue reading Among many Ezidis, just as among other religious groups, this led to a diminished role for religion in public and private life,^[35]Komakhidze, B., & Fatemi, S. (2021). Facing Post-Communist Religiosity: Questioning And Shifting Religious Identity Among Yezidi Women From Armenia and Georgia. Journal on Ethnopolitics and … Continue reading which no doubt could have reinforced identification with secular ethnic categories such as “Kurd” in place of religious self-assignations like “Ezidi”.

However, the Ezidi identification with the broader Kurdish population, internally and externally, is unlikely to have originated from these factors. Rather, it predates the Soviet period, as seen in the Armenian documents from prior to World War 1, namely the one from 1904 by Gyurkyan and 1910 by Ter-Manvelyan for example. There was still a strong identification with the pre-modern Kurdish ethnonym of “Kurmanj”, which at that time, was the predominantly used endonym shared among various religious and sectarian communities within the Kurdish population, including Ezidis. At most, the influence of Soviet classification policies and Kurdish political affiliations contributed to the consolidation of an already existing Kurdish identity, and consequently accelerated a shift away from religious self-identification as “Ezidi” and the older ethnonym “Kurmanj”. Furthermore, if Soviet influence and ties with Kurdish political groups were the primary drivers behind the Ezidi embrace of Kurdish identity, it remains unexplained why early Soviet-era Ezidi intellectuals consistently used the term “Kurmanj” in their publications, despite “Kurd” being the term favored both by Soviet authorities and Kurdish nationalist movements.

Ezidis residing in the plains regions of Ashtarak, Echmiadzin, and Armavir, areas with a stronger Armenian demographic presence, were notably more inclined to support the Êzdikî narrative. By contrast, those living in the more ethnically homogeneous and isolated mountainous settlements around Aragatz tended to maintain a firmer identification with the broader Kurdish ethnolinguistic identity. This geographically based divergence can plausibly be attributed to the differing degrees of integration and interaction with Armenian communities. Such a dynamic appears to have been emerging as early as the early 20th century, as evidenced by the 1904 Armenian article by Gyurkyan quoted above, in which the author notes an observable distancing from the Kurdish identity among Ezidis of the Russian empire, likely influenced by their social and political dependence on neighboring Armenians who had developed a strong prejudice against Kurds, owing to the participation of Muslim Kurds in the Armenian massacres of Ottoman period.^[36][36]Estelle Amy de la Bretèque, 2021, pp. 467-469

It is therefore no coincidence that the Êzdikî narrative began to materialize during the politically volatile period coinciding with the dissolution of the Soviet Union and the escalation of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict (1988-1994), and hence separation of Ezidis and Kurds in the 1989 census for the first time since the first census in 1926. This era saw a marked intensification of ethnic tensions throughout the region, including a schism between Ezidi and Muslim Kurds within Armenia who found themselves on the opposites of the conflict. While Muslim Kurds, due in large part to shared religious affiliation, found themselves aligned with the Azerbaijani side and eventually fled Armenia for Azerbaijan, Ezidis were increasingly integrated into the Armenian national framework and enlisted for support by the Armenian political movements.^[37]Ibid

In the following years, Armenia began formally distinguishing Ezidis and Kurds as separate ethnic groups in their first post-Soviet census of 2001, which listed 40,620 Ezidis and 1,519 Kurds. In 2005, the Armenian parliament officially recognized Êzdikî as an independent language. This recognition led to a separation in media programming, with radio and television broadcasts divided between Êzdikî and Kurdish content. Additionally, separate schoolbooks were printed for Êzdikî, despite there being no substantive linguistic difference between these materials and those used for Kurmanji. These developments were met with resistance from Ezidis aligned with the pro-Kurdish position, particularly in the Aparan district, where schools rejected the newly introduced Êzdikî textbooks and continued using Soviet-era Kurdish materials instead.

Despite initial high tensions and strong opposition from segments of the Ezidi community in Armenia, the Êzdikî camp, spearheaded by Aziz Tamoyan’s “Yezidi National Union”, nonetheless succeeded in establishing and promoting its narrative both nationally and at the intercommunal level among Ezidis outside of Armenia as well. There are several factors that likely contributed to this success. Firstly, the regions with a stronger Armenian demographic presence, where support for the Êzdikî narrative was more prevalent, also happened to be home to the majority of Armenia’s Ezidi population. These areas served as the main base for the Union’s membership and activities.

Additionally, while the Êzdikî camp benefited from political favor from the support from Armenian nationalist circles and subsequently the Armenian state, granting them a clear institutional advantage, efforts by the pro-Kurdish camp to resist the Êzdikî agenda or to seek government intervention against hostile actions and obstruction attempts by the other side were frequently met with indifference. This imbalance is evident in various sources, including a 1990 draft letter written and signed by members of the Soviet-era Ezidi intelligentsia in protest of the separation of Ezidis and Kurds in 1989 census, in which they complain of no Ezidi intellectual receiving any invitation to the “Third Congress of Ezidis in Armenia”, and the ones who attempted to be present were given no opportunity, thus being excluded from the conferences and declaration drafts discussing the nationality of Ezidis.^[38]Document found from the private archive of an anonymous informant

Similar grievances are documented in the book Mukuri by the late Armenian-Ezidi writer Emerike Serdar, who criticizes the support that the Êzdikî movement, whom he refers to as the “New Ezidis”, received from Armenian nationalists. He specifically names figures such as Professor Garnik Asatrian, as well as Armenian parliamentary deputies Ekhya Nacharyan, Khachik Stambolsyan, and Galust Galoyan (the latter of whom facilitated the opening of a radio station for the Êzdikî camp). Serdar also notes how Armenian media provided extensive coverage to Aziz Tamoyan, the leading figure of the Êzdikî movement, while denying airtime to pro-Kurdish figures who had requested a platform to respond. Additionally, he provides an account of an instance where Armenian political actors interfered in a court decision to the detriment of the pro-Kurdish camp upon the request of their Êzdikî party members (Armenian National Movement Party).^[39]See the book section “Kirina Êzdîê Teze”, which can be accessed through https://kurd.amarikesardar.com/?p=1738 (Kurdish) or http://amarikesardar.com/?p=3061 (Russian). Retrieved June 24, … Continue reading Meanwhile, the pro-Kurdish movement lost the institutional support and funding it had once received during the Soviet era, which had enabled the development of Kurdish linguistics and Kurdology, the organization of cultural events, and the production of Kurdish-language literature, newspapers, and radio programming.

More recently, an example of such interference was reported by the British-Armenian journalist Onnik Krikorian, who covered the identity crisis within the Ezidi community of Armenia. He recounted an incident from 2004 involving a professor from Yerevan State University who attempted to bribe him to stop writing about Ezidis. The professor, after inviting Krikorian to lead a student reporting trip to Georgia, unexpectedly asked him to “name his price”, a gesture which struck to him as unusual. The professor then presented him with copies of his own writings on the Ezidis, with every reference to the PKK marked and underlined, and he was then told that accepting the job would require him to stop writing about Ezidis, as the subject was deemed “very sensitive” by the Armenian government. The professor appealed to Krikorian’s Armenian heritage and claimed that friends at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs had expressed concern over PKK fighters allegedly slipping through Armenia’s western border. Krikorian, interpreting the offer as a veiled attempt at censorship or even a bribe, declined the job and left the meeting.^[40]“Cable: 06YEREVAN1484_A.” 24 October 2006. https://wikileaks.org/plusd/cables/06YEREVAN1484_a.html.

Perhaps most importantly, the historical enmities and tense relations between Ezidis and the Muslim Kurds, who participated in events that caused massacres as well as the exodus of the ancestors of Armenian Ezidis from their homeland, and consequently the historically-rooted disinclination towards the “Kurd” identity (as explored earlier), helped create conditions in which the idea of a separate, non-Kurdish Ezidi identity could gain traction and take hold more easily, especially in a society where religion had served as the main basis for communal identity for centuries. As such, the term “Êzdikî” was able to replace or take precedence over Kurdish-associated ethnic terms, including “Kurmancî” despite being a historically established endonym and linguonym among the Ezidis. This also applies to Ezidi communities outside of Armenia, particularly in Iraq, where the 2014 genocide and the Peshmerga forces’ sudden withdrawal from Shingal intensified the already strong feelings of mistrust toward Muslims, including Muslim Kurds who made up the bulk of the Peshmerga force that withdrew. As such, the Êzdikî ideology was able to gain accelerated resonance even among the Ezidi communities outside of Armenia, especially through media dissemination.^[41]For more on the shift of Ezidi identity following the 2014 genocide, see Tezcür, Güneş Murat , Zeynep N. Kaya , and and Bayar Mustafa Sevdeen. “Survival, Coexistence, and Autonomy: Yezidi … Continue reading^[42]Eszter Spät, 2018^[43]For more context on the withdrawal of Peshmerga forces from Shingal, see: Hama, H. H. (2019). What Explains the Abandonment of Yezidi People by the Kurdish Forces in 2014? Foreign Support or Internal … Continue reading

Conclusion

The article has shown that throughout the pre-modern and early modern periods, Ezidis, regardless of where they lived, identified themselves linguistically and ethnically through the term Kurmanc, a designation shared with other Kurdish-speaking populations. This remained the case well into the Soviet era, where Ezidi intellectuals themselves played a leading role in developing Kurdish-language education and literature under the banner of Kurmancî. The rebranding of the Ezidi language as Êzdikî was not born of organic linguistic divergence, but of socio-political fragmentation and a constructed effort to differentiate Ezidi identity from Kurdishness. As such, Kurmancî stands as the authentic and historically grounded linguonym of the Ezidis, while the usage of Êzdikî must be understood not as a reflection of linguistic reality, but as the outcome of a particular set of regional, political, and ideological dynamics in post-Soviet Armenia. This case illustrates how linguistic identities can be shaped or reshaped, not by natural linguistic evolution, but by external sociopolitical forces acting upon vulnerable communities. Furthermore, although there is historical attestation of the disinclination towards the “Kurd” label among Ezidis, this can mainly be attributed to religious factors, considering the fact that atleast among Ezidis, “Kurd” had gained an Islamic connotation. This is further added by the fact of “Kurd” not having been an established part of the native vocabulary of the Kurmanji populations, who instead ethnically identified by the endonym “Kurmanj” in premodern era.

Although Kurdî and Kurmancî still remain the most widely used linguonyms among Ezidis today, the question of linguistic self-designation has become one of the most contentious and emotionally charged debates within the community with the growing popularity of “Êzdikî”. However, based on the historical and linguistic evidence examined, Kurmancî emerges as the most authentic linguonym of the Ezidis. While Kurdî may also be considered a recent and modern linguonym that spread with the rise of Kurdish nationalism, one can still argue for it as a considered legitimate and scientifically accurate designation, given that Kurmancî constitutes a major branch of the broader Kurdish linguistic continuum.

On the other hand, if the desire to be considered a distinct ethnicity and nation persists among Ezidis, one may argue that Êzdikî is the right term to use to solidify this distinction even though it lacks historical attestation. After all, such phenomena would not be unique to the Ezidi case, as for example, the breakup of the former Yugoslavia saw the once-unified Serbo-Croatian language split into Serbian, Croatian, Bosnian, and Montenegrin mutually intelligible varieties now tied to separate national identities (to a large degree, albeit not solely, motivated by religious differences). The trajectory of this discourse, especially in light of recent sociopolitical shifts, remains uncertain. It is yet to be seen how the use and perception of these terms will evolve among future generations of Ezidis.