The Inside Assyria Discussion Forum #5

=> more ickywiki

more ickywiki
Posted by pancho (Moderator) - Friday, April 27 2012, 14:25:27 (UTC)
from *** - *** - Windows NT - Mozilla
Website:
Website title:

..And Rafy Goes On....to quote;

My position is that the modern Assyrians are closely related to the ancient ones,

...ah, who are you again? Are you the same one who called Frye an Assyriologist when he isn't?

the mythical part lies in the association of modern nationalist sentements with the glory of the ancient empire and its kings.

..I see THAT is the myth...but not your claimed descent from that empire.

::John Joseph's works are full with errors and amateurism.

...by my count you produced two which, if accurate, are rather minor and change nothing...you had nothing to say about all the sources he used, all the other historians like Edward Gibbon and Arnold Toynbee....of Richard Helms or even Herodotus...you just found two mistakes and the rest is all foolishness...except YOUR writing will never see the light of day through any publisher, unless you pay him to print them, and your views will never appear in any university curriculum, so I have to ask you; exactly of what value are YOUR views...and how dare you match your opinions with the FACTS in Dr Joseph's works?

In his refutation of the continuation of the Assyrians on page 18 for instance, he claims that the term "Aturaye" was first used by "Nestorian" immigrants to the United States in the late 19th century. This is simply wrong since the name Athuraye and Athur has been continuously used for thousands of years,

..it has? Where are your CITATIONS for this completely bogus claim? I tell you what, when Wikipedia insists that all encyclopedic content be verifiable AND asked for reliable sources AND asks that you provide citations, its policy helps me give you the lie; because we can all be sure that if you HAD such citations....you'd rush to put them down...but you don't. Your game here is to give citations for what NO ONE REFUTES, and which actually exist...and then in between and around those cited sources, make the kinds of statements you just made WITHOUT citations and hope everyone will come away thinking ALL were cited. This is the game of propagandists, not editors, not real ones anyway. I ask you again; what citations do you have, what recognized sources, for your claim that the name Aturaye was in "continuous use for thousands of years"...anything?

this can be seen in another work of him when he tries to answer a paper attesting the continuation of the Assyrians by [[Richard N. Frye]] by claiming that when [[Michael the Syrian]] mentioned that "{{lang|syc|ܐܬܘܪܝܐ ܕܗܢܘܢ ܣܘܪܝܝܐ}}"[http://www.aramnaharaim.org/English/John_Joseph_Assyria_Syria.htm] (it's hnwn not hywn by the way, another amateurish mistake) he meant the inhabitants of Mosul, but he forgets or ignores the fact that "ṯ/t" in Aramaic is a very popular cognate of the Akkadian "š" (šinā -> treyn, šalāš -> ṯalāṯ...) and the Aramaic/Syriac "Aṯur" is simply a cognate of the Akkadian "Ašur". Funny though that those who called themselves Aturaye (or Nestorians) didn't live in the city of Mosul itself but rather in an area stretching from Nisibis to Urmia.
::Another shocking fact for you: The "Nestorians" of Hakkari and Urmia were not actually Nestorians and they never identified as such. They were taunted by this name by western Syrians (Jacobites), and it later come to be used by Europeans erroneously. The true creator of the [[Church of the East]] (its real name) was [[Babai the Great]] who was an opponent of Nestorian views.[http://mb-soft.com/believe/txc/nestoria.htm]

...here's a bigger shock for you...the Christians of Iraq NEVER called themselves "Aturaye" until AFTER the 1840s and the discovery of those ruins...we all know we called ourselves Suyrai or Suraye, Syrians...which was the Greek version of Arameans, and not Assyrians...and Dr Joseph has the sources and cites them, which you do not.

::I could also go on for hours on how modern Assyrian settlements in Nineveh are surrounded by ancient Assyrian ruins,

...these modern settlements are NOT Assyrian...as they weren't when Layard dug up the ruins and decided for himself that these Christians and only Christians MUST be the descendents of the ancients...with no other proof than that they were living ABOVE the ruins. That is tantamount to me snapping a photo of myself standing in front of a Masserati and sending it home, to my village, with the hope that my villagers will believe that I own that car! Living OVER something doesn't make you related what is UNDER you, neither does standing NEXT to something make you the OWNER of that something. This is the kind of "evidence" you want grown-ups to buy?


and how ancient Assyrian names such as Sargon, Sinharib and Shammiram have been continuously used for the last 2,000 years.--<span style="font-size

...I already asked the editors here, when they aren't "researching Assyria" to remove this line of yours...this is the second time this statement has appeared without any citation or list of said names...at least this time you've bothered to list the names...now show the citation which shows them in use "for thousands of years"...where is it? These ancient names appeared AFTER the villagers became convinced that they really might be what the Euros were calling them...though at the very time, Anglican missionaries working in that region complained about INVENTING this Assyrian name for people who had NEVER used it before...because they didn't know a thing about Assyrians or being Assyrian, other than what appeared in the bible, which was hardly complimentary...you simply must stop making things up as you go along....you have decided that whenever certain words appear, they really mean Assyrian...how simple for you. Give us the citations which prove that these names existed in use for thousands of years...go on.



---------------------


The full topic:



***



Powered by RedKernel V.S. Forum 1.2.b9