Clarification on "Arameans and Aramaic in Assyria on the eve of it’s fall"

 

                                                                            Arabic

By: Henri Kifa

Translation from Arabic by Jack B

Clarification on "Arameans and Aramaic in Assyria on the eve of it’s fall"

The honorable Dr. Assad Sauma has published a very important research about the role of our Aramean forefathers in the history of the ancient Near East at the Baqofa site which can be found at the following link:

http://www.baqofa.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=38051

I was hoping that this topic was discussed in a civilized manner, and especially that Dr. Assad has highlighted the role of the Arameans in the history of the old Iraq. It is unfortunate that some of our brothers who are deceived by the Assyrian thoughts demand Dr. Sauma not to do " History Search" even though that history is a bright proof of the unity of our Syrian/ Aramean people and that history science is exposing the radical views of some counterfeit.
I've posted two comments on Dr. Saumas search at Baqofa site, but this site has prevented the comments indefinitely and this is something that drives me to publish the third comment today.

First comment: The role of Arameans in the fall of the Assyrian empire.
Thank you for this simple search on the role of Arameans in the fall of the Assyrian empire. I will comment on several points in a coming article, but I want to add a link which is an English translation of the tablets of Ajar (Ajaru, month of April/May)

which codified the history of the great Aramean Chaldean King Nabopolassar

and contains information about military operations against the Assyrians and their allies.

http://www.livius.org/ne-nn/nineveh/nineveh02.html

And those who want to know what happened, "on the eve of" the fall of the Assyrian State should known that many Arameans were fighting in the ranks of the Assyrian army, or were allies of the Assyrian empire.


* The thirteenth year of the rule of Nabopolassar (613 BC) the Arameans of Suhu on the Euphrates Souhi rebelled against the king of Akkad as they believed the final victory would be favorable to the king of Assyria.

* In the year 612 BC, Assur-uballit, king of Assyria, declared himself king of Assyria in the city of Harran in the heart of the Aramaic country. This prompted king Nabopolassar to destroy some Aramaic cities including the city of Nisibis which forced the king of Assyria to flee and ask protection from the Egyptian army and the city of Harran fell in the hands of the Chaldeans.

* When Assur-uballit, king of Assyria returned back with the Egyptian army to conquer the city of Harran in the year 609 BC, the city held out and the Egyptian army had to return back to Syria.

Finally, since you mentioned the famous historian Hayeem Tadmor I will add a link as many readers are interested in reading:

The Aramaization of Assyria

http://www.aramaic-dem.org/English/History/Hayim-Tadmor.pdf

Second comment: The extinction of the Assyrian people.

In your search it was mentioned : "And so the Assyrian star failed and fell from the graces of the great glory, and ceased to exist. Those who pulled through the killings and massacres began gradually melting together with the Arameans because of the Aramaic language that was used in Assyria.

After a short time there was no one calling himself "Assyrian" or belonging to the Assyrian ethnicity and nationality. All had become "Aramean", linguistically, culturally and nationally".

Dr. Assad, the Assyrians were brave and among the most warrior and organized nations. There is no doubt that the Assyrian political governance is gone for ever, and so did our Aramean political governance but we as people still exist unlike the Assyrian people, why?

Some of our oriental Syrians brothers began in the beginning of the twentieth century, claiming that they have maintained their identity since the fall of the Assyrian Empire and they present a large number of non-scientific historical propositions that demonstrate their misleadings (for example that they speak Assyrian and others false propositions ..) and they publish in different web sites what is mentioned in the Torah that the State of Egypt and Assyria will rise in witch they delude the youth into believing these dreams. My question to you is: How can you write that "After a short time there was no one calling himself "Assyrian" or belonging to the Assyrian ethnicity or nationality. All had become "Aramean", linguistically, culturally and nationally"? Isn’t your conclusion inconsistent with the prophecy in the Torah?

There's another important point which is that Assyria has been subjected to numerous attacks in which the final victory always was to the favorable to the kings of Assyria.

For example, in the end of the reign of the Assyrian King Tiglath Pileser I, Assyria was attacked by Arameans tribes. The Assyrians have left many Akkadian writings regarding the history of their kings. I will put a link containing the English translation that tells us about this difficult period the Assyrian people went through.

http://www.livius.org/cg-cm/chronicles/cm/tiglath-pileser.html

This text is about the siege of Assyrian cities by Arameans tribes that poured in like flooding, and forced the Assyrians to cannibalism to stay alive and they were forced to flee to the mountains and the Arameans got their gold and silver and their belongings…

This text shows us the Arameans tribe’s incursion on the banks of the Tigris River.

It is tragic that there are no historians specialized in the history of the ancient Near East among our people that can verify the validity of the translation of the important Akkadian literature. And this writing is very important because it shows the "Aramaen invasions power" in the twelfth and eleventh century BC.

The book of Edward Lipinski is one of the most important scientific resources on the study of our Aramaic history. I would advise anyone who wants to "enter deeply" in the knowledge of the spread of Chaldean and Aramaean tribes to review this book. It is possible to view a large section of the book on the following link.

http://books.google.ca/books?id=rrMKKtiBBI4C&pg=PA26&dq=aram+naram&lr=&as_brr=3#v=onepage&q=aram%20naram&f=false

On page 36 and on the basis of the significance of this letter, Lipinski mentioned:

"The Assyrians, pressured by starving Aramaean tribes took then refuge in Kirruri, in the Zagros area, norteas of Erbil, and the Aramaeans probably captured Nineveh

This Akkadian text, which was written in the tenth century, is not the oldest text were Aramaic name is mentioned, but is still about 600 years older than the Torah.
And some of our brothers being familiar with history are still claiming that the Aramaic name is the designation of Jewish and means pagans.

This text which is written by the Assyrians themselves, illustrates the importance of the spread of Aramaeans tribes and the extent of the losses suffered by the Kingdom of the Assyrian. Lipinski says that the capital Nineveh "might" had fallen in the hands of the Arameans, and this is likely because the text speaks about the escape of the King to the mountains…..

We know that the Assyrian people was subject to Mitani people for a long time, but managed to get independence and we know that it was able to be a strong Kingdom and great empire in the subsequent centuries: My question Dr. Asaad: why could not the Assyrian people rise again after the fall of the state year 612 B.C?

Third comment: Is "Babylonians" a name of an ancient people or naming of a specific geography?

Dr. Sauma has been using the term "Babylonians" just like a large number of researchers, but it is more correct not to use this expression for the following reasons:

First - An exhibition was held recently on the civilization of the Babylonians in the museums of Paris and Berlin and currently in London. I have visited this important exhibition at the Louvre in Paris and saw the artifacts displayed, and the comments about them. But unfortunately, this exhibition used the name "the Babylonian" meaning "name of historical people".

This exhibition launches the name "the Babylonian" on the king Hammurabi in the eighteenth century BC. and the king Nbokhaddnasr (II), who ruled from 605 to 562 BC. As it´s known Hammurabi used to belong to the Amouri people and Nbokhaddnasr (II) to the Chaldean/Aramaic people.

The responsible for these exhibitions have been using this Babylonian naming instead of the historical ones, leading to mistakes in history, which came to distort the large role played by the Aramean, Chaldeans, in the history of the country Akkadian and it’s capital the city of Babylon the Great.

During the fair, held in Paris at the beginning of this year, the Museum of Louvre established a special site about BABYLONE exhibition which can be visited on this link and which contains explanations on Akkadian archeology.

http://mini-site.louvre.fr/babylone/FR/html/1.4.1.html

Important comment: This link is on the French language and rich with rare archeological pictures and especially those tablets that have been left to us buy the painters. I recommend every one to visit this site.

Second: The city of Babylon in history. There is no mention of the city of Babylon in the Sumerian language sources. The earliest mention of this city is stated in Akkadian writing back to about 2500 years BC. It was also mentioned in "History of the ancient Kings" , which speaks about the occupation of the city of Babylon by Sargon of Akkadian and the building of his new capital," Akkad."

But the King Sargon used soil devoted to the city of Babylon, and this means that Babylon was sacred city for the Akkadians. The appearance of the Amorite tribes in the land ofSumer and Akkad dates back to the nineteenth century BC.

One of their kings "Sumu-la-El" captured the city of Babylon and reigned it between 1880-1845 BC and established the Amorite Dynasty in which their most famous king, Hammurabi, 1792 -1750 BC would turn the city of Babylon to the capital of the vast empire.

The most surprising is that the city of Babylon was not the oldest city in the land of Akkad and was not mentioned in the Epic of Gilgamesh, but become in the era of the Amorites the most important city in the land of Sumer and Akkad!

Third- We must not confuse between the city of Babylon and Babylon: The city was really existing since the late third millennium and the city was the capital of the land of Sumer and later the capital of the land of Sumer and Akkad, and in the first millennium BC, it became the capital of the capital of the land of Akkad and the title of the Chaldeans, Aramean kings was, "the kings of Akkad "and not" the kings of Babylon.

Each Syriac Aramean should know that the people of Persia were those who begun using the term "Marzaban of Babylon" on the southern and central Iraq and the people of this region were belonging to the Aramean people and to the rest of the people who were fully assimilated in the Aramean people as Dr. Sauma explained. However the Greek historians would use the term "Babylonian people," which would suggest the existence of Babylonian etnic people!