[M]y own conclusions concerning the historical background of the language spoken by the Assyrian communities today is that it is not a direct descendant of the earlier literary forms of Aramaic, such as Syriac. Rather it is a descendant of a vernacular language that was spoken in the Mesopotamian area. This vernacular is related to the literary forms of Aramaic but has also been influenced by other languages, which include, in the ancient period, the spoken ancient Assyrian [Akkadian]. In later periods it has come under increasing influence of non-Semitic languages, especially Kurdish.
Judging by the core morphology of the dialects spoken by Assyrian Christians, the earlier vernacular from which they are historically derived would be classified by most scholars as a variety of Aramaic. The issue, however, is that this was not like any variety of Aramaic that has survived in literary texts, such as Syriac.
The veneration of Mar Qardagh offers an intriguing case study in the origins and evolution of an East-Syrian martyr cult. This investigation requires looking deep into the pre-Christian history of Melqi, the ancient shrine near Arbela that hosted the annual festival of Mar Qardagh. Qardagh's hagiographer introduces his hero as coming from ?the stock of the kingdom of the Assyrians,? the descendant via his father of the ?renowned lineage of the house of Nimrod,? and via his mother of the ?renowned lineage of the house of Sennacherib.? While this royal ?Assyrian? lineage has attracted the notice of several previous commentators, this chapter introduces new evidence for its significance by demonstrating that the late Sassanian buildings at Melqi stood directly over the ruins of a major Neo-Assyrian temple, the Akitu-shrine of the goddess Ishtar of Arbela.
Not a single iconographic depiction of Mar Qardagh has been published, and the history of the saint's cult after the tenth century remains sketchy. Although veneration of Mar Qardagh has continued into modern times, the location of the saint's original cult site has been lost, perhaps irretrievably. Its disappearance from the literary record coincides with the turmoil that befell the Arbela region in the generation following the Mongol conquest of Iraq in 1258.
The history of Christian settlement at Melqi after ca. 1200 is equally difficult to trace. Although scribes continued to copy the Qardagh legend into the twentieth century, no text after the hymn to the daughter of Ma nyo (twelfth or thirteenth century) mentions the saint's monastery. The disappearance of ?Beth Mar Qardagh? from the literary record mirrors the general turmoil that engulfed the Christians of the Arbela region in the wake of the Mongol conquest of Iraq in 1258.
Few of the Christian villages and monasteries of Adiabene survived these troubled times...It is probable that the monastery of Mar Qardagh at Melqi was also abandoned during this period. Its location, like that of many monasteries and Christian villages in the region, was gradually forgotten.
The reading and copying of the History of Mar Qardagh ensured that veneration of Mar Qardagh endured long after the abandonment of the saint's monastery at Melqi. After ca. 1300, the East-Syrian Christian community explored in this book was reduced to a fraction of its former geographic range...The only substantial evidence for the cult of Mar Qardagh during these centuries comes from manuscripts, such as the large hagiographical collection copied at Alqosh in northern Iraq in 1707.
In the 13th century BC, after the military triumph of the Assyrian kings Adad-n?r?r? I (1300-1270) and Shalmaneser I (1269-1241) over their weakened neighbor Mittani (called ?Hanigalbat? by the Assyrians), the former Hurrian kingdom was swiftly integrated into the Assyrian Empire. Hence, the wide plain east of the Euphrates which is traversed by the rivers H?b?r and Bal?h ? the so-called Jezirah ? became Assyrian, as well as the Upper Tigris region.
It was certainly the fact that the mountain range looks rather imposing from a southern perspective which has led to the still widespread opinion that the T?r Abd?n can be taken as Mesopotamia?s northern border, not only geographically but also culturally speaking. Thus, the mountain range is often identified as the northern perimeter of the Mittani empire. However, as has been already stated, new excavations in the Upper Tigris region (especially Giricano, Ziyaret Tepe and also ??tepe / Kurkh5) have proven the Mittani occupation of the area and confirmed the Assyrian presence in the 2nd and 1st millennium BC; it is therefore necessary to consider the T?r Abd?n as an integral part of the Mesopotamian topography, and not as a frontier zone.
Today, the T?r Abd?n, a limestone mountain range with an altitude between 900 and 1400 m, is best known for its numerous monasteries and churches, forming a unique enclave in a region which has been under Islamic rule for the past twelve hundred years. While the buildings remain, the 20th century saw the departure of many Christian families, and today the area is no longer predominantly Syriac, neither in language nor religion.
We will see that place names such as Midy?t, Mardin, Savur / Sawr?, K?vakh, Azakh and Kfart?th? can be identified with Aramaic toponyms already attested in the Assyrian age. Many sites, however, have been renamed by the Turkish authorities in the 20th century and, with the exodus of the Syriac speaking population, begin to be forgotten.
The Assyrians designated the T?r Abd?n as K?si?ri, hence adapting a locally used toponym that is also attested in the Hittite sources as K?si?ri / G?si?ri and refers to an area under Hurrian (Mittani) control. It is therefore well possible that the toponym is derived from the Hurrian language.
The last Assyrian campaign to K?si?ri is recorded for 855 in the inscriptions of Shalmaneser III (858-824): ?In my fifth regnal year, I ascended to K?si?ri and captured eleven fortified cities?. After this, the Assyrian control over the K?si?ri region seems to be firmly established ? there is no more mention of fights (or any other activities for that matter) in the Assyrian royal inscriptions.
It is important to note that beyond the area where the Syriac language and culture has helped to preserve the ancient Aramaic toponymy, going back to the beginning of the 1st millennium BC, the old place names have rarely been retained and identifications on the basis of etymology are generally quite problematic. The changing toponymy is, of course, also an indication that the population has changed again and again ? in contrast to the T?r Abd?n region which, typically for a mountain region, has served as a retreat area.
Tell Nader Project/Tell Baqrta Project[A]s literacy dawns over the horizon of prehistory the first ethnic group whom we know to have inhabited the region [Arbil and its environs] are the Hurrians. This is not to say there were not other groups. There almost certainly were. Texts over these millennia relating to the eastern frontiers of Mesopotamia (for instance Ur III administrative documents and the Shemshara archives) contain a large number of personal names whose linguistic affiliation has not yet been established and it is, in my view, probable that parent languages will one be day be recognised and reconstructed for at least some of them. Be that as it may, the Hurrians are the earliest definable group for whose presence in the region we currently have evidence; followed closely by the Sumerians.
The etymology of the -? suffix
How does this evidence square with our ideas about the origin of the -? suffix? There is no consensus about its etymology, except that it was not the masculine-plural-definite nominal ending in Proto-Aramaic (save perhaps for the nisba nouns). Three theories have been enjoying support since the late 19th century: 1) *-ayy?? > -?; 2) generalization of the -? that since prehistoric times had been used to the right of the nisba ?y- in the whole of Aramaic; 3) borrowing of the Assyrian [Akkadian] masculine plural ending -?.
Theory (1), being the weakest claim, is the most appealing one, but it has no phonological justification. A shift ayy? > -? is attested nowhere in historical Aramaic, and the last-syllable stress makes it improbable in prehistoric times as well (Rosenthal 1936:76 fn.6, pace N?ldeke 1904 and Cantineau 1931).
Theory (2) is based on the assumption that ka?d?y? < *ka?d?yayy? should be ?a natural Aramaic development, a simplification of the overly cumbersome *-ayayy? (Kaufman 1974:128 fn. 58). Thus this theory presupposes two unexplained (and to my mind improbable) developments: the ad hoc contraction -ayy? > -? in this particular surrounding and the subsequent generalization of -? to combine with all the relevant nominal bases.
Theory (3), shared by the present writer, is a strong claim, therefore it requires typological and historical justifications. The borrowing hypothesis will look more plausible if we relate it to the fact that the morpheme in question (i.e., the postpositive article of Proto-Aramaic) was going to forfeit its pristine discourse function in the whole of Middle Eastern Aramaic. It is natural to ask whether this shared loss had its beginnings in the immediate common ancestor of the Eastern Aramaic languages.
Aramaic (both Old and Middle) has two productive derivational morphemes almost certainly borrowed from Akkadian: the nominal abstract suffix -?(t) and the causative verbal prefix ?-/s-. The -?(t) suffix is highly expansive, to the degree of becoming ?parasitisch? (Barth 1894:415), while ?-/s- is hardly attested with more than a dozen Aramaic roots (cf. Loesov 2009:490 f., a review of data gleaned from reference tools). Given this evidence and the above typological considerations, the borrowing of the plural nominal ending -? from Akkadian into Proto-Eastern-Aramaic does not look as improbable as it would seem on first sight.
Shahin said:Asuryoyo your inbox is full so I answer you here:
Shlomo ahuno, tawo no, tawdi, w hat aydarbo hat ?
harke kibokh qorat i Doctrine d'Mor Addai bu Suryoyo bHerfat Estrangeloye w bleshono Englishoyo sti : http://ia700300.us.archive.org/16/items/doctrineofaddaia00phil/doctrineofaddaia00phil.pdf
Tawdi sagi aho tobo no! Tawdi ste d'mshadarlokh o namq?.
Those that are referred to as being residents of Mesopotamia' would have included Assyrians, since Assyrians are one of the original people to accept Christianity.And how is it that we each hear them in our own language to which we were born? 9"Parthians and Medes and Elamites, and residents of Mesopotamia, Judea and Cappadocia, Pontus and Asia, (10)Phrygia and Pamphylia, Egypt and the districts of Libya around Cyrene, and visitors from Rome, both Jews and proselytes...