A Companion to Assyria
Page 110
Assyria and Assyrian in Pre‐Modern Syriac Sources
In pre‐modern Syriac sources, the term ʾāthorāyā “Assyrian” is not the typical self‐designation for individuals belonging to the Syriac heritage, whether East Syriac or West Syriac. The typical self‐designations, rather, are ʾārāmāyā “Aramean” and suryāyā “Syrian,” along with its truncated variant surāyā (for the relationship of the latter two, see Heinrichs 1993: 102 n. 2).2 The early Syriac author Bardaiṣan (154–222), for instance, is described both as ʾārāmāyā and suryāyā in the Syriac version of Eusebius of Caesarea’s Ecclesiastical History (Wright and McLean 1898: 243.18 and 183.7, respectively), which was translated before 420 (Van Rompay 1994: 73 n. 15). The adjectives ʾārāmāyā and suryāyā serve as the typical self‐designations for Syriac Christians throughout the pre‐modern sources.3
While ʾāthorāyā “Assyrian” is not the typical self‐designation for Syriac Christians in pre‐modern Syriac sources, Assyria (ʾāthor) and Assyrian (ʾāthorāyā) do occur in several senses throughout this period. First and foremost, ʾāthor refers to the ancient empire of Assyria and the area surrounding its last capital Nineveh. In the Syriac translation of the Hebrew Bible, for instance, Hebrew ʾaššur is often rendered by Syriac ʾāthor (Kings 15:19, 20, 29; 17:6, 23; 18:11; etc.). Following this usage, the gentilic adjective ʾāthorāyā designated a person from the ancient empire of Assyria or more specifically its capital Nineveh. From this primary sense of ʾāthor, at least two secondary senses developed in pre‐modern Syriac literature.
First, Syriac ʾāthor came to refer to the city of Mosul (Fiey 1965–86: 2.570), which was built on the west bank of the Tigris directly across from the ancient ruins of Nineveh. This is the primary meaning of ʾāthor relayed by the native Syriac lexicographers Ishoʿ bar ʿAli (ninth century; Hoffmann 1874: 63)4 and Ḥasan bar Bahlul (mid‐tenth century; Duval 1888–1901: 1.322). This meaning of ʾāthor is also found in the Arabic geographer Yaqut (d. 1228) who states that Mosul was called ʾathūru before it was called al‐mawṣil (Wüstenfeld 1866–1873: 1.119.16–19). With ʾāthor referring to the city of Mosul, the gentilic adjective ʾāthorāyā was, then, used as a designation for a citizen of Mosul. It is probably in this sense that the Syriac Orthodox patriarch and historian Michael the Great (d. 1199) called ʿImād al‐Dīn Zangī (ca. 1085–1146), who was the atabeg of Mosul, an “Assyrian (ʾāthorāyā) pig” in his Chronicle (Chabot 1899–1910: 3.261 [French translation]; 4.630.2.24 [Syriac text]). This meaning continued to be used in Classical Syriac at least until the turn of the twentieth century (see Fiey 1965: 156 with n. 53; Heinrichs 1993: 105). In addition, it is found in the Neo‐Aramaic dialect of Ṭuroyo (Ritter 1979: 352 [387]), which is spoken in the Ṭur ʿAbdin region in South Eastern Turkey. This use of ʾāthorāyā as a gentilic adjective for Mosul may well also explain why the Protestant mission in Mosul (1849–60) chose the name Assyrian Mission for “geographical reasons” (Anderson 1872: 8–106, esp. 83; see also Fiey 1965: 148–9).5 Finally, some scattered evidence suggests that the geographic sense of ʾāthorāyā extended beyond Mosul to include the area around Arbela (modern Erbil) and Karka d‐Beth Slokh (modern Kirkuk) (Brock 1982: 16–17; Salvesen 1998: 157).
Second, based on the fact that the Biblical Assyrians were the enemies of Israel, ʾāthorāyā was used with a metaphorical meaning for the enemies of Christians. This metaphorical use is often accompanied by imagery based on the Biblical depictions of the Assyrians (for which see Chapter 29), such as the Assyrians as the instruments of God’s wrath found in Is. 10:5–34. The metaphorical meaning of ʾāthorāyā was especially developed for the Persians.6 Already in the fourth century, Ephrem (d. 373), the most widely‐known of all Syriac authors, referred to Persia as “filthy Assyria (ʾāthor), mother of corruption” (Beck 1961: 21.24 [Syriac text]; 24 [German translation]). This metaphor was further developed in the sixth‐century Life of John of Tella, in which the term ʾāthorāyā serves as a negative epithet for the Persians on several occasions. The text narrates, for example, that after the Persian marzbān and his soldiers pursued John of Tella into the mountains around Sinjār they “descended on him like wild animals with swords drawn and bows out like Assyrians (ʾāthorāʾith)” (Brooks 1907: 67.15–17), adopting the Biblical imagery of the Assyrians as apt warriors. More direct biblical phraseology occurs at the beginning of the Life of John of Tella where the Persian capture of the city of Kallinikos in 542 is referred to as the “Rod of the Assyrian (ʾāthorāyā)” (Brooks 1907: 38.16), invoking Is. 10:5 (“Ah, Assyria, the rod of my anger” [NRSV]). The same Biblical verse is referenced in the Chronicle of Pseudo‐Joshua the Stylite (written after 506), which recounts the destruction brought by the Persians as follows: “(God) struck us with the hands of the Assyrian (ʾāthorāyā), which is called the rod of anger’ (ed. Chabot 1927: 240.2‐3 [Syriac text]; Trombley and Watt 2000: 5 [English translation]). The historian John of Ephesus (d. 589) also refers to the Persians as Assyrians, describing the conquest of Dara by the Persians in 566 as “its capture and its deliverance into the hands of the Assyrians (ʾāthorāyē)” (ed. Brooks 1935–36: 292.6 [Syriac text]; 221 [Latin translation]). Following the Arab conquests, the metaphor of Assyrians as the enemies of Christianity was naturally extended to the Arab conquers. The eighth‐century Chronicle of Zuqnin (formerly called the Chronicle of Pseudo‐Dionysius of Tel Maḥre) presents an elaborate description of the Arab conquerors as Assyrians based on Isaiah 10:5–24 (Chabot 1933 [Syriac text]; Harrak 1999 [English translation]; for analysis, see Harrak 2004). Thus, in the pre‐modern period, Syriac authors at times used ʾāthorāyā “Assyrian” as an epithet for their enemies (for additional examples, see Harrak 2004: 52–3).
While Assyrian (ʾāthorāyā) is not the usual self‐designation for Syriac Christians in pre‐modern sources, a connection between Syriac Christians and the ancient Assyrians is occasionally made in this period. In the Syriac History of Qardagh (written ca. 600–630 CE according to Walker 2006), the main protagonist Qardagh is described as being “from the stock of the kingdom of the Assyrians (ʾāthorāyē),” with his father descending from the house of Nimrod and his mother from the house of Sennacherib (Abbeloos 1890: 12.9–13 [Syriac text]; Walker 2006: 20 [English translation]). Slightly later on in the History, Qardagh is said to become the “prefect of Assyria (ʾāthor)” (Abbeloos 1890: 15.5 [Syriac text]; Walker 2006: 22 [English translation]), and Arbela is described as “the city of the Assyrians (ʾāthorāyē)” (Abbeloos 1890: 16.1 [Syriac text]; Walker 2006: 22 [English translation]). Walker (2006: 248–9; 2006–07) has argued that the connection of Qardagh with Assyrian lineage may be due to the fact that the saint’s shrine in North Iraq was situated on the ruins of a Neo‐Assyrian temple. According to this argument, the area around Erbil would have preserved some awareness of its Assyrian past (similarly Brock 1982: 16–17).7
It is clear from the examples presented here that the term ʾāthorāyā “Assyrian” in pre‐modern Syriac sources is used in its most basic sense as a gentilic adjective for ancient Assyria and its capital Nineveh. From this primary meaning, two secondary uses developed: 1. a gentilic adjective for Mosul, as well as possibly the area around Erbil and Kirkuk; 2. a metaphorical use for the enemies of Christians. The adjective ʾāthorāyā is not, however, the typical self‐designation for individuals belonging to the Syriac heritage. This function, rather, is filled by the adjectives ʾārāmāyā “Aramean” and suryāyā “Syrian.”
Assyrian Christians in Nineteenth‐Century Literature from the West
In mid‐nineteenth‐century writings by Western archeologists, travelers, and missionaries, Syriac Christians are at times connected with the ancient Assyrians.8 An early occurrence of the phrase “Assyrian Christians” is to be found in the Narrative of a Residence in Koordistan and on the Site of Ancient Nineveh (1836: 1.120) by the British traveler C.J. Rich (1787–21). It seems, however, that by the term “Assyrian Christian” Rich was only referring to geographic location,
since in a footnote on the same page he refers to the “Christians of Assyria.” It is noteworthy that Rich gives no indication that Assyrian was a self‐designation used by the communities in question.
A more direct connection between Syriac Christians and ancient Assyrians is made by the missionary H. Southgate (1812–94). In his Narrative of a Visit to the Syrian [Jacobite] Church of Mesopotamia (1844), Southgate states, “I observed that the Armenians did not know them under the name which I used, Syriani; but called them ASSOURI, which struck me the more at the moment from its resemblance to our English name Assyrians, from whom they claim their origin, being sons, as they say, of Assour …” (80; italics and small capitals in the original). It should first be noted that this report by Southgate does not state that Syriac Christians self‐identified as Assyrian, but only that the Armenians called them asori.9 It does, however, provide a witness to the fact that Syriac Christians themselves claimed an Assyrian lineage already in the mid‐nineteenth century.10
The connection between East‐Syriac Christians and Assyria was popularized by the British traveler and archeologist A.H. Layard (1817–94). In his Nineveh and its Remains (1849), Layard argued that there were good reasons to suppose that the Christians whom he met were “the descendants of the ancient Assyrians” (1.215–16; 2.237). Again, it is important to note that Layard does not claim that they were called Assyrians nor that they called themselves Assyrians – he only states his belief that they were their “descendants.” Layard may well, however, have come to this connection through his archaeological assistant Hormuzd Rassam (1826–1910), who was born in Mosul to a prominent Church of the East family.11
The earliest systematic use of the term “Assyrian” for Syriac Christians seems to have developed in the second half of the nineteenth century within the context of the Archbishop of Canterbury’s Mission in Urmia, a city west of Lake Urmia in Northwest Iran (in general, see Coakley 1992: 5–6, 366–7, passim as well as Fiey 1965: 149–53 and Murre‐van den Berg 1999: 37). By 1870, the term Assyrian had become entrenched in the Anglican vocabulary, at least partly due to the influence of G.P. Badger (1815–88) (Coakley 1992: 65–6). It should be noted that Badger’s advisor was Christian Rassam, the brother of Layard’s assistant Hormuzd Rassam. The use of the term Assyrian in the context of the Archbishop of Canterbury’s Mission probably arose in an effort to avoid the term Nestorian; an additional motivating factor may have been an attempt to find a term parallel to Chaldean, which had been introduced by J.S. Assemani (1687–1768) and J.A. Assemani (1710–1782) for Syriac Christians who were in communion with Rome. In the 1880s, the full name of the Anglican mission was established as The Archbishop of Canterbury’s Mission to the Assyrian Christians (Coakley 1992: 99–100). Though “Assyrian” became a regular part of the Anglican vocabulary in the West, it was not – or at least only rarely, e.g., by W.A. Wigram (1872–1953) – used by the missionaries themselves in the field (Coakley 1992: 5; Murre‐van den Berg 1999: 37).
Assyrian Identity and the Church of the East
It is in the context of the Anglican Mission to Urmia that East‐Syriac Christians likely adopted the term Assyrian as a general self‐designation and began to develop a national ideology based on it.12 This took place during what has been called the “Syrian Awakening” (Murre‐van den Berg 1998: 500–4), or “religious renaissance” (Macuch 1987: 818), that occurred in Urmia toward the end of the nineteenth century. Nineteenth‐century Urmia was a center of western missionary activity, with the aforementioned Anglican mission (1886–1915) as well as the Presbyterian missionaries of the American Board (1834–1918), the Roman Catholic mission (1839–1918), and the Russian Orthodox mission (1897–1914) (in general, see Murre‐van den Berg 1999: 43–74; for the Anglican mission in particular, see Coakley 1992). The presence of missionaries in Urmia led to the accentuation, as well as creation, of confessional divisions among the Syriac Christians in the Urmia and Hakkari regions. At the same time, however, it introduced a unifying factor in the development of Literary Urmia Aramaic, a new literary language based on the spoken Neo‐Aramaic dialects (see especially Murre‐van den Berg 1999). With the introduction of the printing press in 1840, a number of publications appeared in Literary Urmia Aramaic, including Biblical translations and the periodical Zahrirē d‐Bahrā “Rays of Light” (1849–1915; see Macuch 1976: 136–87). By 1870, the local Christians had assumed prominent roles in the local literary production, especially in the periodical Zahrirē d‐Bahrā as well as the slightly later Qālā da‐šrārā “Voice of Truth” (1896; see Macuch 1976: 194–201) and Kokhbhā “The Star” (1906; see Macuch 1976: 206–10). Thus, Literary Urmia Aramaic and the publications written in it provided a common means of expression for the East‐Syriac Christians of the area.
An additional unifying factor at this time was the development of a national Assyrian identity. At the end of the 19th century, the concepts of nation and nationalism – probably introduced from Europe – found expression in a number of communities, including the Turks, Kurds, Armenians, and Arabs, as well as the East‐Syriac Christians. The connection with the ancient Assyrians, whose civilization had been explored in the Mosul area since the middle of the 19th century, provided the East‐Syriac Christians with a national identity. Through the construction of an Assyrian ideology, East‐Syriac communities were able to transcend differences, including confessional differences, and unite behind a common national identity. Leading up to World War I, the Assyrian national identity was developed by authors such as Fredon ʾĀthorāyā, who in 1911 wrote an article entitled “Who are the Syrians (surāyē) and how should our nation (ʾumthā) be established?” (Heinrichs 1993: 110; Macuch 1976: 383).
At this time, Church of the East Christians began to self‐identify not only by Classical Syriac ʾāthorāyā “Assyrian” but also by the newly‐coined ʾasurāyā “Assyrians” (in general, see Macuch 1987: 818; Heinrichs 1993: 102–8; Joseph 2000: 1–‐20). The latter term was based on the inherited adjective surāyā “Syrian” but was updated with an initial glottal stop to mirror ʾāthorāyā.13 The change of surāyā to ʾasurāyā may have been further facilitated by the Armenian adjective asori (Heinrichs 1993: 106–7), since many Armenians are known to have resided in the Urmia and Hakkari regions. In the orthography of the written language, the initial glottal stop of ʾasurāyā was often “cancelled out” by means of a linea occultans (Syriac mbaṭṭlānā), an orthographic symbol that indicates an etymological writing that no longer conforms to pronunciation. The writing with linea occultans is already found in 1897 in an article in Zahrirē d‐bahrā entitled “The Kingdom of the Assyrians (ʾāthorāyē) or the (As)Syrians ([ʾ]surāyē) according to the Biblical History and the Antiquities of Nineveh” (Macuch 1976: 142; cited in Heinrichs 1993: 102 n. 3).
The First World War introduced dramatic changes to the Church of the East, as well as to the wider Syriac community more generally. It is estimated that anywhere from a third to a half of the population belonging to the Church of the East lost their lives during the course of the war and its aftermath. Initially forced out of Persia and Turkey, the surviving remnant was forced to settle in Iraq as refugees. During the British Mandate in Iraq, the name Assyrian continued to develop in a nationalistic sense, with some East‐Syriac Christians, including the Church of the East Patriarch Eshai Shemʿon (1909–75), pressing for the creation of an independent state. The end of the British Mandate in Iraq in 1932 brought further difficulties for the Church of the East, including the massacre of Assyrian civilians by the Iraqi army at Simele in 1933. In the end, a majority of the Church of the East was forced from its native homeland, displaced elsewhere in the Middle East, e.g., Syria, or emigrating to the world‐wide diaspora, especially to Europe (Germany, Sweden, Denmark, Great Britain, Greece, and Russia), the USA (Chicago, Detroit, and California), and Australia and New Zealand.
In the aftermath of World War I, the name Assyrian became firmly established as the usual self‐identification for individuals b
elonging to the Church of the East. The creation of modern Syria further reinforced this use of Assyrian, since Syrian now served as the gentilic adjective for Syria. Perhaps more importantly, however, Assyrian identity and ideology continued to be developed, especially in the diaspora, as a way to unify the East‐Syriac communities who had originated from different regions, but who now lived side by side in their new homelands. Many individuals and groups connected to the Church of the East continue to self‐identify as Assyrian today, with one of the two branches even adopting Assyrian in its official name, the Holy Catholic Apostolic Assyrian Church of the East.14
Assyrian Identity and the Greater Syriac Heritage
The term Assyrian was occasionally used by some West‐Syriac individuals and groups prior to World War I. It gained greater currency following the war as various individuals and groups wished to unite the different Syriac communities, both East‐Syriac and West‐Syriac, within a single nation of Assyrians. This use of Assyrian was popularized by several writers within the USA.
An early promoter of this use was Naʿʿūm Fāʾiq (1868‐1930) (for whom, see Chuqqī 1936; Macuch 1976: 432–33; Kiraz, in GEDSH, 163). Born in 1868 in Amid (modern Diyarbakır, Turkey), Fāʾiq survived the 1895 massacre of Christians there. Throughout his time in Amid, he served as an educator in various schools, and in 1908 he founded the periodical Kukhbho d‐Madhnḥo “Star of the East.”15 In 1912, he immigrated to the USA, living in New Jersey, where he established a new periodical, Beth Nahrin (1916–). Fāʾiq, whose ecclesiastical affiliation was Syriac Orthodox, was an ardent promoter of Assyrian nationalism. Among his many contributions to this ideology, his poem “Awake, son of Assyria, awake” is perhaps the most well‐known. The text of this poem reads:16