Jump to content

Talk:History of the Assyrians

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Orphaned references in History of the Assyrian people

[edit]

I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of History of the Assyrian people's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "EI":

  • From Ctesiphon: Kröger, Jens (1993), "Ctesiphon", Encyclopedia Iranica, vol. 6, Costa Mesa: Mazda
  • From Asōristān: "ĀSŌRISTĀN". Encyclopædia Iranica. Retrieved 15 July 2013. ĀSŌRISTĀN, name of the Sasanian province of Babylonia.

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT 12:51, 16 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You're right Anomiebot, I'll fix it. --Monochrome_Monitor 01:45, 27 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, reopening discussion

[edit]

I agree with previous comments that this article presents an anachronistic and oversimplistic view of Assyrian history. Even the word Assyrian is anachronistic and misleading. Assyrian topics in general on WP can't seem to make up their minds about Assyrians. On the one hand, by the fact that they include Arameans (an ethnic identity which traces its history to Aram) implies that "assyrian" basically means "christian aramaic speaking people in the middle east". Well, to be specific it calls them:

The various ethnic communities of indigenous pre-Arab, Semitic and often Neo-Aramaic-speaking Christian people of Iraq, Syria, Iran, Turkey, Lebanon, Jordan, Palestine and Israel

Um, that's nonsense. Newsflash, most of the middle east spoke Aramaic and Aramaic influence dominated the region until the Arab conquest. Yet, Assyrian topics would have you believe that all of the Aramaic speaking peoples (which I agree are generally indigenous peoples who are not ethnically Arab) came out of Assyria proper and the neo-Assyrian Empire. Also, how could an ethnic group who is indigenous to Ninevah/Assyria also be indigenous in Israel? There are pre-Arab peoples who are traditionally Christian and Aramaic speaking living all over the Middle East, but most are not actually Assyrian by the standard of "native to Assyria". Therefore, the standard "assyria-akkad-neo-assyria" continuity applies to few (if any) of them. So basically, Assyrian is a bullshit term the way we use it, and it foists an identity onto millions of people who don't identify with Assyria at all in favor of the minority identity of self-identified Assyrians. Next point. Okay, if we were to define Assyrians as people with roots in Assyria (which is the only reasonable definition), we still need to distinguish between the land and the people(s). The Assyrian people did not begin with Assur, which was most likely a Sumerian city in its first centuries, rather, the Assyrian nation grew out of worship of Ashur, which the city of assur is named for. Greek history handles the distinction between the land of Greece, the Greek-speaking peoples, and the Greek ethnos quite well. And see the key difference between these two templates?

"History of Assyrian people" it is not.

Lastly there is no clear continuity between the ancient Assyrians and contemporary Assyrians, period. Are contemporary Assyrians indigenous to Assyria? Yes, genetic evidence indicates that, and I'm not one of those people who denies that or calls Assyrians Arabs. But being indigenous to Assyria doesn't mean they are related to the ancient Assyrians. They have barely anything Assyrian in their culture, and this can be attributed to neo-Assyrian influence rather than direct Ancient Assyrian descent. Assyrian identity is quite recent, and largely inspired by developments in Assyriology. Compare that to Jews who have maintained a tradition of continuity for their entire existence. I'm not saying the Assyrian people are a recent people, but they are not Akkadians. Now is where I ping people who raised this concern before and others who defended it. @Dbachmann: @Pmanderson: @Benne: @Kotniski: @Chaldean: @Yannismarou: --Monochrome_Monitor 03:14, 27 February 2016 (UTC) Or compare it to the Copts. The evidence is scant in comparison. The article on continuity itself basically uses "self-identified assyrians are a related and distinct ethnic group" as its main argument. Okay... so are the Druze. That doesn't mean the Druze are descended from Jethro. There needs to be more evidence than that.--Monochrome_Monitor 03:24, 27 February 2016 (UTC) Or the Greeks... or the Han Chinese... --Monochrome_Monitor 22:54, 27 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Monochrome_Monitor, I share your concern, and I agree there needs to be a better consistency on Assyrian related page. I don't know where there is any indication on wikipedia saying Aram or Aramean related people [or any other ancient people from Mesopotamia] are Assyrian. If there is such text, then it needs to be removed. However, I strongly disagree with a few other points you make "they have barely anything Assyrian in their culture" [if language, clothes, food, a modern religion influenced by ancient Assyrian traditions, and celebrations are not enough, then I guess no one in this world has any continuity to their ancient past.] Chaldean (talk) 09:04, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Look at the "history of the assyrians" template, it includes "Arameans". The notion that assyrian language, clothing, religion are related to ancient assyria is bs. The only source for that is nutjobs like Parpola. Food I'm not so sure about. I see your username is "chaldean". Chaldean, while a name foisted on you by the catholic church, is a much older name than assyrian, foisted on you by the anglican church and antiquity frenzying 19th century archaeologists. You are much more likely to be chaldean than Assyrian historically speaking.--Monochrome_Monitor 11:53, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Then let's delete arameans in the template. What are we waiting for? Regarding your comments about our language, clothing and religion, Well I thought you were an academic who was interested in the topic, instead you seem to be more interested in insulting us as a nation. No point in continuing this conversation. Yes, my great grandparents converted to Chaldean Catholism after being forced by the French forces in Urmia. One's religion conversion doesn't change one's ethnicity of course. Have a good day. Chaldean (talk) 12:36, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
An academic? I'm a freshman in college interested in a myriad of subjects. I'm sorry for insulting you, I did not mean to. I don't deny you're a nation and I respect the culture of your nation, what bothers me is when mythical origins are attributed to it for nationalistic reasons. If you do have reliable sources indicating I'm wrong I will gladly read them.--Monochrome_Monitor 20:47, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, the term Assyrian is ONLY used to describe those people who 1. Speak Eastern Aramaic dialects (which have Akkadian influence), 2. Are from Historic Assyria (Iraq, northeast Syria, southeast Turkey and northwest Iran), and 3. Have been continually designated and described as Assyrians (and derivative names) from ancient times to the present. Therefore it is an accurate term, particularly as; The term is NOT used to describe Christians (Aramaic speaking or not) from the western and central Levant, Jordan, Israel, Palestinian territories, Lebanon, western or south-central Turkey or the Arabian peninsula. These people either speak Arabic, or a tiny minority speaking Western Aramaic The latter groups identify as 'Maronites, Arab Christians, Arameans, Phoenicians, Melkites etc etc. The term also does NOT apply to Aramaic speaking Jews, Mandeans or Mhallami.

The terms Syrian and Syriac are also pretty conclusively proven to etymologically, historically, geographically and ethnically derive from the terms Assyria and Assyrian in any case. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.100.25.101 (talk) 11:26, 2 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on History of the Assyrian people. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:04, 3 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on History of the Assyrian people. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:20, 5 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 29 January 2022

[edit]
The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: moved. Sensible rationale and seeing no opposition (closed by non-admin page mover) Megan B.... It’s all coming to me till the end of time 19:57, 7 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]


History of the Assyrian peopleHistory of the Assyrians I am proposing that this be moved to "History of the Assyrians" for 5 reasons:

  • Per WP:CONCISE: "History of the Assyrians" is shorter but carries the same meaning
  • This article serves as an historical overview over both ancient Assyria and the Assyrian people after the ancient empire's fall. Though I substantially expanded the article just two hours ago, the article has covered both ancient Assyria and the later Assyrian people since as far back as records go (2007). "Assyrians" inherently seems to me like it encompasses both better.
  • The corresponding category is already called History of the Assyrians and the term already redirects here
  • Numerous other similar articles use this format, i.e. History of the Kurds, History of the Basques, History of the Cossacks
  • Consistency (WP:CONSISTENT) with related articles - e.g. Assyrian cuisine (not "Cuisine of the Assyrian people"), Assyrian culture (not "Culture of the Assyrian people"), List of Assyrian settlements (not "Settlements with Assyrian people", List of Assyrian tribes (not "Tribes of the Assyrian people") etc. etc.

A quick comment: Both the scholarly community and Wikipedia itself appear to have taken a pretty firm stance for Assyrian continuity, which should be apparent by how this article is written, but if anyone hypothetically wants to argue that "Assyrians" is POV I'd remind you that the consensus (just look at how related articles are titled) seems pretty clear that we're sticking with that term. "Assyrians" is also no more POV than "Assyrian people". Ichthyovenator (talk) 01:05, 29 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This is a contested technical request (permalink). McMatter (talk)/(contrib) 00:58, 29 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.