I am wondering. What do you think the likelyhood for modern Assyrians to be
of direct genetic and/or cultural descent from the Ancient Assyrians? I am
specifically thinking of tribal Assyrians from the areas that comprised the
ancient Assyrian homeland (northern Iraq, southeastern Turkey, northwestern
Syria).
Also, to what degree could the same be true for Arab muslims from the same
area? Keep in mind that intermarriage across religions is extremely rare in
the region even today, and was more so in the past.
George Barota:
> I am wondering. What do you think the likelyhood for modern Assyrians to be
> of direct genetic and/or cultural descent from the Ancient Assyrians? I am
> specifically thinking of tribal Assyrians from the areas that comprised the
> ancient Assyrian homeland (northern Iraq, southeastern Turkey, northwestern
> Syria).
Don't forget the area of Northwestern Iran around Urmieh lake.
It's interesting to note that the same question is not being asked of
other ethnicities in the middle east, specifically the Iranians,
Egyptians, and Israelis. The people of those countries claim direct
descent from their ancient forefathers and yet no one is challenging
their lineage.
As an Assyrian, it is all too apparent that we are direct descendants
of the ancient Assyrians. There are some factors that validate the
link:
1. More than 2600 years of continuous habitation of the Nineveh
plateau (after the fall of the Empire) and the surrounding area:
2. Assyrian Christian kingdoms such as Osroene and Adiabene that
existed as semi-independent vassal states from 100 AD to 400 AD.
3. Syriac speaking bishops, saints, and historians noting their
Assyrian lineage as early as 200 BC -- Tatian and Iamblichus.
4. Continuous religious and secular records written in Syriac/Aramaic
dating from the fall of the Empire to the early Christian centuries
still existing in the heart of Mesopotamia.
5. The genetic relationship between Assyrians and their middle eastern
neighbors found in scholarly research. You might find the following
links to be useful:
> Also, to what degree could the same be true for Arab muslims from the same
> area? Keep in mind that intermarriage across religions is extremely rare in
> the region even today, and was more so in the past.
The Christian Assyrian population has witnessed many massacres and
genocides at the hands of its Muslim neighbors since the founding of
Islam. During that time, there have been recorded instances were
Assyrian boys and girls were kidnapped from their families and
villages and forcibly converted to Islam:
Even though Muslims and/or Arabs might have "Assyrian blood" running
through their veins, the pan-Arab and pan-Islam ideology has all but
erased any notion of that culture and heritage.
Emil:
> George Barota:
> > I am wondering. What do you think the likelyhood for modern Assyrians to be
> > of direct genetic and/or cultural descent from the Ancient Assyrians? I am
> > specifically thinking of tribal Assyrians from the areas that comprised the
> > ancient Assyrian homeland (northern Iraq, southeastern Turkey, northwestern
> > Syria).
>
> Don't forget the area of Northwestern Iran around Urmieh lake.
I meant to reduce it down to the closest ones to the ruins of Nineveh and
Ashur. I think I included too much anyway. On second thought, all Assyrians
in the general area are probably just as likely candidates.
>
> It's interesting to note that the same question is not being asked of
> other ethnicities in the middle east, specifically the Iranians,
> Egyptians, and Israelis. The people of those countries claim direct
> descent from their ancient forefathers and yet no one is challenging
> their lineage.
I ask because it seems to me that there is some question about the use of
the word Assyrian in an unbroken chain from ancient days until today. Among
other things, I have been reading the archelogist Henry Layard who (in the
1840's) refers to the tribes of Tkhuma (my dad is Tkhumnaya by the way),
Tiyyari and others only as Chaldeans or Nestorian Chaldeans. In fact, the
foreword to the book that I have suggests that it was he that inspired them
to start calling themselves Assyrians.
>
> As an Assyrian, it is all too apparent that we are direct descendants
> of the ancient Assyrians. There are some factors that validate the
> link:
>
> 1. More than 2600 years of continuous habitation of the Nineveh
> plateau (after the fall of the Empire) and the surrounding area:
>
There have been many wars and migrations through the area which would tend
to mix things up a bit. Also, at the advent of Christianity, I am thinking,
the ethnic identity would have been widened into a religious identity of
Christians and then later Nestorians. This way it would be more likely to
include other groups in the area. Then when the ethnic identity of
"Assyrian" returned, it would be applied to all Nestorians...
Interesting link. I skimmed through it, but I will now read it more
carefully. Thanks!
>
> 2. Assyrian Christian kingdoms such as Osroene and Adiabene that
> existed as semi-independent vassal states from 100 AD to 400 AD.
>
> 3. Syriac speaking bishops, saints, and historians noting their
> Assyrian lineage as early as 200 BC -- Tatian and Iamblichus.
As I understand, Syriac was widely used by Eastern Christians across the
Middle East at the time. Of course, if Syriac speaking individuals refer to
themselves as Assyrians, then that is significant.
>
> 4. Continuous religious and secular records written in Syriac/Aramaic
> dating from the fall of the Empire to the early Christian centuries
> still existing in the heart of Mesopotamia.
But Aramaic was widely spoken across the ancient Middle East at the time,
and your own link says that records right after the fall of the empire are
extremely scarce.
>
> 5. The genetic relationship between Assyrians and their middle eastern
> neighbors found in scholarly research. You might find the following
> links to be useful:
>
> "Genetic Differentiation among Iranian Christian Communities"
> www.aina.org/articles/gdaicc.htm
The only thing that seems to show is that the two Christian minorities in
Iran are genetically distinct from each other and from the Iranian majority
around them. It proves that those in Iran referring to themselves as
Assyrian are of a distinct ethnic stock, but it doesn't necessarily show
which one exactly.
"The genetic data are compatible with historical data that religion played a
major role in maintaining the Assyrian population's separate identity during
the Christian era."
Sort of what I actually suspect. I don't know how it can prove the link
though. I will read it more carefully.
I find it odd that the Druze are a separate line, and that the Assyrians and
Jordanians are related. But that's a different issue.
>
>
> > Also, to what degree could the same be true for Arab muslims from the same
> > area? Keep in mind that intermarriage across religions is extremely rare in
> > the region even today, and was more so in the past.
>
> The Christian Assyrian population has witnessed many massacres and
> genocides at the hands of its Muslim neighbors since the founding of
> Islam. During that time, there have been recorded instances were
> Assyrian boys and girls were kidnapped from their families and
> villages and forcibly converted to Islam:
Besides those instances. Unless we believe that most of the area was
depopulated around the advent of Islam and repopulated with Arabs coming out
of the Arabian Peninsula (seems kind of unlikely), then we have to believe
that much of the "Arab" population of Mesopotamia has non-Arab roots. The
question then becomes to what extent the converted indigineous populations
mixed with Arab populations.
Maybe that's more an issue for genetics than for historians.
>
> "The Assyrian in the Christian Asia Minor Holocaust"
> aanf.org/America/assyrian...istian.htm
>
> "The Massacres of the Khilafah"
> debate.org.uk/topics/hist...tnc-6.html
>
> Even though Muslims and/or Arabs might have "Assyrian blood" running
> through their veins, the pan-Arab and pan-Islam ideology has all but
> erased any notion of that culture and heritage.
Quite true.
My question, that I would like this groups expert opinion on and a
discussion of, is to what extent there is a chain (cultural and genetic)
leading back to the fall of the empire, and to what extent contemporary
Assyrian identity is ethnic identity invented or re-discovered during the
last 200 years.
> > Don't forget the area of Northwestern Iran around Urmieh lake.
>
> I meant to reduce it down to the closest ones to the ruins of Nineveh and
> Ashur. I think I included too much anyway. On second thought, all Assyrians
> in the general area are probably just as likely candidates.
They are good candidates because of Assyrian migratory patterns during
wars and other events. I'm specifically thinking about World War I
where the Assyrians allied with the Russians against the Ottoman
Turks. Many villages in the Nineveh Plain, Urmieh, and Southwestern
Turkey were abandoned when the war was going bad and people migrated
from one region to another.
I don't think you've included a big enough area because the atrocities
that have been committed against us have made us disperse to areas
outside our original homeland. It's a growing circle of habitation.
> I ask because it seems to me that there is some question about the use of
> the word Assyrian in an unbroken chain from ancient days until today. Among
> other things, I have been reading the archelogist Henry Layard who (in the
> 1840's) refers to the tribes of Tkhuma (my dad is Tkhumnaya by the way),
> Tiyyari and others only as Chaldeans or Nestorian Chaldeans. In fact, the
> foreword to the book that I have suggests that it was he that inspired them
> to start calling themselves Assyrians.
For all we can tell, Layard may have been commenting on the
denomination of those tribes. I don't think one source is enough to
warrant a definite answer.
> There have been many wars and migrations through the area which would tend
> to mix things up a bit. Also, at the advent of Christianity, I am thinking,
> the ethnic identity would have been widened into a religious identity of
> Christians and then later Nestorians. This way it would be more likely to
> include other groups in the area. Then when the ethnic identity of
> "Assyrian" returned, it would be applied to all Nestorians...
Most definitely. During the Ottoman Empire, The patriarch of the
Church of the East was considered the leader of the millet,
specifically the Nestorians but also for all those that considered
themselves Christian.
The turn of the 20th century saw the Assyrians becoming politically
motivated while distancing themselves from the religious powers. While
the religious identity served us well before that time, the ethnic
awakening was needed to further our political cause.
> > "Assyrians after Assyria"
> > www.atour.com/education/20000703a.html
>
> Interesting link. I skimmed through it, but I will now read it more
> carefully. Thanks!
You're welcome. Prof. Simo Parpola is a noted professor and researcher
in Assyriology. He has set up the MELAMMU project to help show that
the modern Assyrians are directly descended from the ancients.
He has a few articles arguing that Christianity is a re-formulation of
the Assyrian pantheon and the reason why it was easy for Assyrian to
convert to Christianity. In case you're interested.
> As I understand, Syriac was widely used by Eastern Christians across the
> Middle East at the time. Of course, if Syriac speaking individuals refer to
> themselves as Assyrians, then that is significant.
> But Aramaic was widely spoken across the ancient Middle East at the time,
> and your own link says that records right after the fall of the empire are
> extremely scarce.
Scarce but that doesn't mean that they didn't exist. The destruction
of Nineveh was thought to be an earth shattering moment where
confusion reigned supreme. People were more likely to be trying to
cope with the situation and surviving rather than corresponding with
one another. This is just an educated guess.
It would make sense that those people survived that cataclysmic moment
and handed the culture and language down to future generations.
However, if that did not happen then people in Mesopotamia would
produce records of their existence 6 to 7 centuries later. But more
research is needed in this area.
> The only thing that seems to show is that the two Christian minorities in
> Iran are genetically distinct from each other and from the Iranian majority
> around them. It proves that those in Iran referring to themselves as
> Assyrian are of a distinct ethnic stock, but it doesn't necessarily show
> which one exactly.
and
> "The genetic data are compatible with historical data that religion played a
> major role in maintaining the Assyrian population's separate identity during
> the Christian era."
>
> Sort of what I actually suspect. I don't know how it can prove the link
> though. I will read it more carefully.
>
> I find it odd that the Druze are a separate line, and that the Assyrians and
> Jordanians are related. But that's a different issue.
I think that these two studies taken together narrow down the
possibility the Assyrians are a distinct ethnicity and that they are
ethnically Assyrian.
There is a whole lot more I can talk about this relationship but it'll
be too long. I'll try to flesh out a coherent argument.
> Besides those instances. Unless we believe that most of the area was
> depopulated around the advent of Islam and repopulated with Arabs coming out
> of the Arabian Peninsula (seems kind of unlikely), then we have to believe
> that much of the "Arab" population of Mesopotamia has non-Arab roots. The
> question then becomes to what extent the converted indigineous populations
> mixed with Arab populations.
>
> Maybe that's more an issue for genetics than for historians.
Genetics? Historians? :)
I'm thinking geneticists would have a better time looking into this
matter. If the study came out supporting your hypothesis, then the
pan-Arab ideology would crumble.
> > "The Assyrian in the Christian Asia Minor Holocaust"
> > aanf.org/America/assyrian...istian.htm
> >
> > "The Massacres of the Khilafah"
> > debate.org.uk/topics/hist...tnc-6.html
> >
> > Even though Muslims and/or Arabs might have "Assyrian blood" running
> > through their veins, the pan-Arab and pan-Islam ideology has all but
> > erased any notion of that culture and heritage.
>
> Quite true.
>
>
> My question, that I would like this groups expert opinion on and a
> discussion of, is to what extent there is a chain (cultural and genetic)
> leading back to the fall of the empire, and to what extent contemporary
> Assyrian identity is ethnic identity invented or re-discovered during the
> last 200 years.
I'll try to find a few more articles to help this discussion along.
> Tiyyari and others only as Chaldeans or Nestorian Chaldeans. In fact, the
> foreword to the book that I have suggests that it was he that inspired them
> to start calling themselves Assyrians.
the term chaldean is a subset of the term assyrian. assyrian is a broad
term for christians of this region. chaldean, nestorian, jacobite etc.
are religious divisions within this group.
marco polo did not use the term assyrian in 13300ad, but used nestorian
and jacobite instead.
however, the geographers of the last 1000 years have been greatly
inclined toward resurrecting names from classical history. it is likely
that others have used the term assyrian in addition to the archeologist
you have mentioned.
> My question, that I would like this groups expert opinion on and a
> discussion of, is to what extent there is a chain (cultural and genetic)
> leading back to the fall of the empire, and to what extent contemporary
> Assyrian identity is ethnic identity invented or re-discovered during the
> last 200 years.
herodotus identified a people of 400bc as assyrian, in addition to
chaldeans. so the name did survive the classical iron-age empire of
700bc, and thus may have survived to be picked up again by early
christians in 100ad.
herodotus equated the name syrian with assyrian, although other
etymologies for this name are from king cyrus [who was the namesake of
syr-eschate and the syr-darya] or mount sirion.
modern assyrians differ on this. if you are a syrian orthodox assyrian
living in syria, you'd probably be inclined to agree with herodotus.
> Don't forget the area of Northwestern Iran around Urmieh lake.
>
> It's interesting to note that the same question is not being asked of
> other ethnicities in the middle east, specifically the Iranians,
> Egyptians, and Israelis. The people of those countries claim direct
> descent from their ancient forefathers and yet no one is challenging
> their lineage.
Challenges to the lineage of the Jews have been a staple of anti-
Semitism for centuries. The main form this has taken in recent
years is the insistence that all Jews living today are really
descended from the Khazars. This is contorted into a proof that
hating Jews is impossible because if Jews aren't Semites by blood,
then obviously anti-Semitism has nothing to do with Jews...
There is by now a small library of genetic studies that prove more or
less that the majority of Jews are just who they say they are. I must
admit I'm rather surprised - I'd have expected more interbreeding
myself. But anyway this particular canard is only dying because
geneticists have put a lot of work into killing it.
I'm not familiar with the Egyptian and Iranian cases, but I'll note
that the Iranians have an extremely powerful argument on their side
which the Assyrians, Jews, and Egyptians all lack: They still speak
a direct descendant of the ancient language. I really don't know
how I would go about constructing a claim that the modern Iranians
aren't descended from the ancient ones, given that...
Whether the inhabitants of Pakistan today are directly descended from
the Indus Valley people has been hotly controverted for decades.
And that brings me to a pertinent point. Something the Assyrians and
the Pakistanis have in common is a big *hole* in the archaeological
record. Older archaeologists have used this to claim that their
home regions were outright depopulated after the relevant empires
fell. I know the Pakistani case has changed radically due to
studies of dental material, in particular, but I don't know what the
new consensus is. In the Assyrian case, I know there now *is* some
information about the archaeology of the late centuries B.C., but I
haven't yet had access to any of it.
> As an Assyrian, it is all too apparent that we are direct descendants
> of the ancient Assyrians. There are some factors that validate the
> link:
>
> 1. More than 2600 years of continuous habitation of the Nineveh
> plateau (after the fall of the Empire) and the surrounding area:
>
> "Assyrians after Assyria"
> www.atour.com/education/20000703a.html
Thank you for this link. I notice that it relies much more heavily
on literary and historical than on archaeological evidence; what
archaeology is cited runs to temples and archives, not to pots and
postholes.
Let me toss an article back at you:
David Oates. <Studies in the Ancient History of Northern Iraq>.
London, 1968.
Oates has several individual articles in there; only one is really
relevant, that one being his overall summary of his researches.
In it he repeatedly points to a site and says "And then after the
imperial level there's nothing." Or "And then after the imperial
level I found one house, poorly made, that was used for maybe 30
years in the 4th century B.C." Or something like this. The
cumulative effect is strong: Assyria at that time was a nuclear
wasteland, with no human inhabitants except mutants struggling
from one outpost to the next... I realise this isn't what Oates
*meant*, and I also realise it isn't *true*, but my point is that
within my lifetime it has been archaeologically respectable to
present post-Imperial Assyria as a depopulated nowheresville.
As I said before, I know this has been changing some, but I haven't
seen the evidence, and I'm mildly disappointed Parpola didn't see
fit to cite it.
> 3. Syriac speaking bishops, saints, and historians noting their
> Assyrian lineage as early as 200 BC -- Tatian and Iamblichus.
As early as 200 B.C.? Neither Tatian nor Iamblichus predates Christ.
Who did you have in mind?
(The link noted up above talks about a number of "second-century"
writers, but the people in question are also "writers and philosophers
of late antiquity born in Roman Syria" - ergo A.D.)
> 4. Continuous religious and secular records written in Syriac/Aramaic
> dating from the fall of the Empire to the early Christian centuries
> still existing in the heart of Mesopotamia.
I know of no substantial works in Aramaic before the time of Christ,
except I guess the Mishna. I know of no continuous records from the
fall of the Empire to the time Syriac literature does get going,
although I'm prepared to accept Parpola's claim that the chronicle of
Kirkuk *covers* such early times.
I'd *love* to be wrong about this. Citations welcomed.
The one time I've discussed this with a self-proclaimed Assyrian on
Usenet before, he insisted that Aramaic and Akkadian were really the
same language, which made me dubious about his claims, to say the
least. I'm much happier with the level of discussion you two have
maintained, and I'd appreciate more information. I find the
disappearance of northern Iraq for a millennium after the fall of
the empire a totally unreasonable imposition on my view of history,
and spent several extremely frustrating years trying to get past it,
whose results you can see at:
Honestly, I'll be very pleased, despite the amount of work it would
uproot, if you could show me that things are different from how I've
understood them to be.
Re: Assyrians: Modern and Ancient
George Barota wrote:
> I am wondering. What do you think the likelyhood for modern Assyrians to be
> of direct genetic and/or cultural descent from the Ancient Assyrians? I am
> specifically thinking of tribal Assyrians from the areas that comprised the
> ancient Assyrian homeland (northern Iraq, southeastern Turkey, northwestern
> Syria).
Some certainly are but how direct is direct enough to satisfy you? A few years back the
brits found a body in a bog some 3000 or more years old. They got some DNA and found a
local relative or two still living in the area. Genes are mixed once per generation with
five gens per century. That is a lot of mixing.
However after people started living in cities actual migrations became fairly rare. Some
breaking away to start a new city was common but the old city would stay unless it got a
slaughter and slavery treatment in some war.
> Also, to what degree could the same be true for Arab muslims from the same
> area? Keep in mind that intermarriage across religions is extremely rare in
> the region even today, and was more so in the past.
The idea of Arabs migrating is also largely over-rated. When they won the army got the
spoils but they did not wholesale drive out and replace the existing population. It was
more like the French conquering England in 1066. Lots of migration bringing arab culture
but the original population simply converting and later claiming to be arabs by culture.
Abraham Registered User
Posts: 1
(1/17/04 7:26 pm) Reply
To George Barota
Dear George, at 1/5/04 7:09 am you wrote:
"I ask because it seems to me that there is some question about the use of the word Assyrian in an unbroken chain from ancient days until today. Among other things, I have been reading the archelogist Henry Layard who (in the 1840's) refers to the tribes of Tkhuma (my dad is Tkhumnaya by the way), Tiyyari and others only as Chaldeans or Nestorian Chaldeans. In fact, the foreword to the book that I have suggests that it was he that inspired them to start calling themselves Assyrians."
* I am aware of it too, and I have been asking myself the question you started your earlier posting with many times over and over again! Especially scholars in Syriac-Aramaic studies, John Joseph's "The Modern Assyrians", and many Syrian Orthodox faithful, not least their clergymen, have spoken out their objection against direct Assyrian linkage and simultaneously the plea for an Aramean one.
See for instance one of their often quoted websites where you will find also quotations from our church fathers, "Nestorians" that is, wherein an awareness is present of our Aramean roots.
- www.aramnaharaim.org
- www.aramnaharaim.org/film_arameans.htm
Lately I have come to my senses a bit and am more open for such arguments too. I don't no about you guys, but personally I feel as if I have been blindfolded for years through a fierce form of nationalism that has closed our eyes for other arguments among our very own people. Instead of unity I have seen only division, anger and hatred all in the name of a political ideal that in my view will never be worth the unity of our whole people.
* George, what kind of "other things" have you read beside H. Layard, if I may ask? Could you please also refer me to the edition you have read? (If you could scan the foreword and send it to me by e-mail, I would highly appreciate it.)
Email This To a Friend
Topic Commands
Click to receive email notification of replies 
Click to stop receiving email notification of replies