Assyrians and Chaldeans language shift

[Hajimurad]

How Kurdish historians described ethnic origin of modern Assyrians and Armenians? With quotes, please

[Halgurd]

Kuridsh dynasty of Adiabene?
Ah I see now my post to you was a complete waste, you're a troll.

You mean a dynasty with rulers that had Iranic names like Izates and Narseh?
A dynasty that is identical in name to the Kurdish Hadhabani?
A dynasty that had a tribe called 'Alan' inhabiting its territories?

[Halgurd]

We live in historical Assyria, we call ourself Assyrian, our dialects evolved from the Aramaic our ancestors shifted to with a substantial Akkadian influence, we are autosomally almost identical to Iranian and Iraqi Jews who also just so happen to consider themself to be descendants of Mesopotamians(Babylonian Jewry). What is difficult to grasp exactly?

Tell me why the Parthians and Sassanians never mentioned any people called 'Assyrian'?
The Sassanian province of Asorestan was not even located in traditional Assyria, it was located south of Hamrin mountains which is historical Babylon. The people there were always referred to as Aramean, never Assyrian.

Admit it, the link to ancient Assyrians simply isn't there. The last mention of Assyrians was by Herodotus around 400BC. For hundreds of years there was no historical mention of Assyrians, until Syriac scholars started referring to themselves as the "Athoraye".

[Halgurd]

It never died. They simply changed their language from Akkadian to Aramaic. The name Assyrian has been in continuous usage by the same people since its inception.



They've only existed since the 16th century and only started claiming to be ethnic Chaldeans after they became Catholics following a schism in 1552.

They call themselves Chaldean simply because their church is called that. Regarding why their church is called that, the reason is because after their communion with Rome (following their schism), the title "Patriarch of the Chaldeans" was given to their first patriarch by Rome. After Rome gave their patriarch that title, their church was called the "Chaldean Catholic Church".

As for why Rome gave them that title, its cause Chaldea bordered Assyria and they were poor at geography. It may have also sounded cooler to them than "Patriarch of the Eastern Assyrians" (which was the the title Rome gave their patriarch at first before quickly changing it according to the Chronicle of the Carmelites).

Still, the majority of Chaldean Catholics identify as Assyrian. Those that don't are just revisionists seeking a unique identity based on being Catholic following a geographic error from Rome. You won't see a single instance of "ethnic Chaldeans" being mentioned before 1553 (excluding ancient Chaldeans). They aren't even from geographic Chaldea. Its just their church's name, nothing more.

My post above goes for you as well. Aramaic was the language of most of the commoners, who were ethnic Arameans. Akkadian was reserved for the small elite that ruled the empire. Modern Assyrians are descended primarily from the former. They were spoken by different ethnic groups of the Neo Assyrian Empire. Akkadian eventually went extinct, whereas Aramaic survived.

As for the Chaldean issue that is not my concern, but I know countless Chaldeans who claim that they're a separate people and claim descent from Chaldea. I tend not to get involved about that.

[Halgurd]

Search up "Beth Aramaye". This was what the Aramaic speakers of Asorestan called their motherland. It means "land of the Arameans"

Why was there no "Beth Athoraye"??

[Halgurd]

How Kurdish historians described ethnic origin of modern Assyrians and Armenians? With quotes, please

I am not sure about this one. There was Sharafkhan Bidlisi who wrote extensively about the local region and its peoples but his books are not available.

The general term that was used for Assyrians was 'mesihi' i.e '-Christian'.

[Aren]

You mean a dynasty with rulers that had Iranic names like Izates and Narseh?
A dynasty that is identical in name to the Kurdish Hadhabani?
A dynasty that had a tribe called 'Alan' inhabiting its territories?

Yeah exactly a ruling dynasty that had Indo-Iranian names, not Kurdish. Kurds are not attested in Upper Mesopotamia until much later on. You can come up with dubious sources but this is the consensus amongst historians today.
The Kurdish clan very likely got it's name much later on as the area East of the great Zab is still today referred to as ḥaðyawa by us Assyrians.

Tell me why the Parthians and Sassanians never mentioned any people called 'Assyrian'?
The Sassanian province of Asorestan was not even located in traditional Assyria, it was located south of Hamrin mountains which is historical Babylon. The people there were always referred to as Aramean, never Assyrian.

Admit it, the link to ancient Assyrians simply isn't there. The last mention of Assyrians was by Herodotus around 400BC. For hundreds of years there was no historical mention of Assyrians, until Syriac scholars started referring to themselves as the "Athoraye".

You have no idea what you are talking about. The word Aθuraya was not introduced by Syriac scholars but by European missionaries sometime before WW 1. This word is not even used by all Assyrians today it has no relevance to our discussion.
All Assyrians regardless of church belonging refer to themself as Suraye and our language as Suraθ or Surayt. This is our inherited word derived from the Seleucid Greek word for Assyrian for when they invaded the Near East during 4th century BC.
You are also contradicting yourself. In your intial post you type "From a genetic point of view Assyrians are very much a people of the region", and now you started claiming that we are Arameans and Amorites. Now tell me if our auDNA tells us we are very much natives, our linguistic history matches that of our region and our own self identity is "Assyrian" how much more desperate are you gonna get?

I really didn't need to reply to your nonsense I couldve just linked to this vid

[Brutus]

The original Assyrians of the Bronze Age spoke a dialect of Akkadian and they are known to have made the first empire in civilisation.
Modern day Assyrians speak Aramaic, which is related but different to Akkadian. The Arameans were a people at the time of the Assyrian Empire who emerged from the Levant, and not Mesopotamia. They were a separate people to the Assyrians and in fact they conflicted with each other on several occasions.

How is it possible then for the Assyrians of today claim such a heritage? I am not denying their history, I simply do not see the link between modern and ancient Assyrians. If I am wrong, then I would appreciate an answer to this.

A sub section of Assyrians today (though many of them claim they are a separate ethnic group) are the Chaldeans who were another ancient separate people and, like the Arameans, did not originate from Mesopotamia. They helped to rebuild Babylon after its destruction by the Assyrians. Modern day Chaldeans live in Iraq, but they speak Aramaic as well. A group of Chaldeans who claim a separate ethnicity to the Assyrians today claim heritage from the ancient Chaldeans, which perhaps may make more sense.

From a genetic point of view Assyrians are very much a people of the region. But I think the link to ancient Assyrians simply isn’t there. I am very interested in knowing other people’s perspective on this topic.

Assyrians simply adopted Aramaean. Why? Well it became the lingua franca, but you have to remember that the Aramaeans and Assyrians were in heavy conflict, and some Assyrian kings take pride in the way they "annihilated the Aramaeans". They exiled them to Assyria same way the Babylonians did to the Israelites.

[Halgurd]

Yeah exactly a ruling dynasty that had Indo-Iranian names, not Kurdish. Kurds are not attested in Upper Mesopotamia until much later on. You can come up with dubious sources but this is the consensus amongst historians today.
The Kurdish clan very likely got it's name much later on as the area East of the great Zab is still today referred to as ḥaðyawa by us Assyrians.

What are you talking about? 1) Kurds are an Indo Iranian people and 2) area east of the great zab is the Erbil region where both the Adiabene and Hadabani dominated.

You are contradicting yourself.

You have no idea what you are talking about. The word Aθuraya was not introduced by Syriac scholars but by European missionaries sometime before WW 1. This word is not even used by all Assyrians today it has no relevance to our discussion.
All Assyrians regardless of church belonging refer to themself as Suraye and our language as Suraθ or Surayt. This is our inherited word derived from the Seleucid Greek word for Assyrian for when they invaded the Near East during 4th century BC.
You are also contradicting yourself. In your intial post you type "From a genetic point of view Assyrians are very much a people of the region", and now you started claiming that we are Arameans and Amorites. Now tell me if our auDNA tells us we are very much natives, our linguistic history matches that of our region and our own self identity is "Assyrian" how much more desperate are you gonna get?

Athoraye has been in use since 300-400AD from the doctrine of Mar Addai not WW1. This is when Syriac scholars began to link themselves to the ancient Assyrians. https://twitter.com/byalda/status/11...536937474?s=21

Arameans were also a people of the region in fact your closest genetic relatives other than Iraqis are Levantines which is where the original Arameans came from.

[Halgurd]

Assyrians simply adopted Aramaean. Why? Well it became the lingua franca, but you have to remember that the Aramaeans and Assyrians were in heavy conflict, and some Assyrian kings take pride in the way they "annihilated the Aramaeans". They exiled them to Assyria same way the Babylonians did to the Israelites.

Yes initially they were in heavy conflict, that is true.
The Neo-Assyrian Empire made Aramaic an official language alongside Akkadian because the vast majority of the population that the Assyrians ruled over were ethnic Arameans. This was true even during the downfall of the Assyrian empire. The original Assyrians are lost and probably got absorbed into the Aramean population.
But that would mean that modern day Assyrians are primarily descendants of Arameans and not the original Assyrians, although a small amount of them may possibly trace their lineage to the original Assyrians like all Iraqis will be able to.