Assyrian - Babylonian Empires Map
known about the religion of the Babylonians and Assyrians. oracles, regarding the relationship to the gods, the creation of Damit and Mamu, or Meme.  Then the king of Assyria came up throughout all the land, and went up to from their Babylonian cousins to the south and the Egyptians (other groups like .. The connection between Mizrachi Jews and Assyrians probably has to do .. The Math Gene · The Mating Mind · The Meme Machine · The Moral. raiders were most likely to attack the settled areas of [Assyria and] Babylonia in .. J. L. Bintliff quotes results of investigations by other authors to the effect .. the degree of correlation between temperature and rainfall are available only for.
Even though there always existed connections across the Roman-Persian frontier which in any case periodically shiftedit is notable that the ancient historical divisions persist down to the present day among those who consider themselves the descendants of the As Syrians of that era: In Iraq the majority of Christians come from a different stream, the ancient Church of the East which grew out of the Christian communities of pre-Islamic Iran and Iraq.
Today the majority of Iraqi Christians are in communion with the Pope of Rome, while the Assyrian community of the Church of the East is predominantly found abroad this is due to 20th century politics.
But whatever the current configuration, it remains true that to this day these churches can root their lineage back to the Roman and Sassanid period. And Syriac in the form of neo-Aramaic remains a living language in the Middle East among some Christians.
In Syria it is almost extinct, but substantial numbers of Christians in the east still speak it. Ignoring the reality that whole Arab tribes were known to have been Christian even before Islam, it is probably correct to assume that almost all Arab Christians are Arabicized Aramaic or Coptic speakers. In other words, Arab Christians were far more common than Syriac Muslims.
Even though the majority of the population of the core Middle Eastern nation is descended from the peoples of antiquity, they now consider themselves by and large Arab. The Arabs were also present in antiquity, and are mentioned early on as a group on the margins of the ancient world and sometimes at the center.
But it seems implausible that the antique Arabs had the demographic heft to overrun so many peoples across the Fertile Crescent, let along Egypt. Though the Semitic populations of the Middle East now generally have an Arab self-identification in keeping with their dominant language, some among the Christians dissent. For speakers of neo-Aramaic in Iraq this makes total sense; but Arabic speaking Lebanese Maronites also object to an Arab identity though this gains some traction due to the common bilingualism of Maronites in French and Arabic.
But even if most of the Christians of the Arab Middle East are no longer non-Arabs by speech, they preserve a direct link with the ancient pre-Arab Middle East in their liturgy. In the Fertile Crescent this would be a variant of Syriac, but in Egypt it would be Coptic, the language which descends from ancient Egyptian. There are obviously many in the Middle East who take pride in their pre-Islamic past.
Saddam Hussein liked to fashion himself a latter day Nebuchadnezzar II and Hammurabi, while the government of Egypt is a lavish funder of Egyptology.
But the Christians seem particularly attached to the pre-Islamic past, because their religion is a tie back to antiquity, and its broad outlines were formed then. This has a bit of an ironic aspect, because in Late Antiquity the Christian Church was a powerful force in the destruction of the indigenous religious traditions of Syria and Egypt.
The Assyrians and Jews: 3, years of common history - Gene Expression
In Syria it seems that a non-Christian culture and society made it down to the Islamic period around the city of Haran, showing up in history as the Sabians. This was probably just a coincidence of geography, as the forced conversion which Justinian the Great imposed on the non-Abrahamic minorities and to a lesser extent on the Jews and Samaritans as well in the 6th century was unfeasible so close to the border with the Sassanid Empire.
Unfortunately the textual records from Persia are not so good. However it happened, what we do know that is that by the early Islamic centuries the Aramaic speaking populations of the Fertile Crescent were instrumental in being channels for the wisdom of the Classical Age. Many of the Syrians were trilingual, in their own language, as well as Greek and Arabic. For an overview of what transpired between then and now to the Christians of the Middle Eastern Orient, read my review of The Lost History of Christianity.
Suffice it to say, by the year Westerners who were reacquainting themselves with Oriental Christianity observed that they had lost much of its cultural vitality, and been subject to involution. They were allowed to persist and exist, but only marginally tolerated. Debilities and indignities were their lot. One famous component of the modus vivendi between Muslim polities and the non-Muslims whom they dominate is that one can defect to Islam, but defection from Islam is not tolerated.
The involution of dhimmis then is simply not cultural, it is genetic.
Babylon and the cities and tribes of Southern Mesopotamia
By and large the cosmopolitan welter of the great Islamic Empires would have passed the dhimmis by. Eastern Christians then may given us an excellent window into the impact of the Arab conquests on the genomes of the peoples of the Middle East. For example, how much of the Sub-Saharan genetic load in modern Egyptians is post-Roman, and how much pre-Roman?
A comparison of Copts to Muslims would establish this. It has clear political implications in the United States, where Afrocentrism is rooted in part on the presupposition that ancient Egypt was a black civilization. But this post is not about Egypt. I wrote up the historical introduction for perspective. But this is about genes. David Wesolowski, a year-old Australian who runs the Eurogenes ancestry project http: Wesolowski and a colleague have drilled into the population history of people living in Iran and eastern Turkey who identify as descendants of ancient Assyrians, and who sent their DNA for analysis.
Preliminary findings suggest their ancestors may have once mixed with local Jewish populations, and Wesolowski plans to submit these results to a peer-reviewed journal. But with all the energy invested Paul wanted something to come out of the project, so he forwarded me a link to a set of files, and suggested that if I found it of interest I could blog about.
The latter two are the same for our purposes; the the separation of the Chaldean Church from the main body of the Church of the East is a feature of the past years. The Jacobites though presumably are from Syria, though I know that there were some Jacobites in the Assyrian lands as well.
In any case, the key is this: They give us an insight into the genomic landscape of the Late Antique Levant and Mesopotamia. The rest are MDS which relate individuals within populations on a two-dimensional surface. Sephardi Jew Some of the populations should be familiar.
One thing to keep in mind is that the patterns you observe are partly conditional on the inputs. Rather, the spatial relationships reoriented themselves as the underlying data set from which they emerge are changed.
In regards to the Jews, there are three obvious groups. The Yemeni cluster is straightforward: Babylonia is frequently called the cradle of civilisation and the inhabitants of ancient cities such as Uruk, Nippur and Babylon would certainly have agreed with this assessment, carefully maintaining their rich heritage of architecture, literature, festivals and communal life.
The "Babylonian Map of the World", showing the city of Babylon at its centre. View large image on the British Museum's website. Babylonia's history was already long and complex by the time the expanding Assyrian empire gained political influence there in the 9th century BC, its political landscape shaped by the vicissitudes of past centuries and millennia.
Babylon, which had for a millennium been the centre of authority for the entire region, had lost its dominant role and was now merely one of several prominent cities in the region. But the traditional office of the "King of Babylon" still conveyed the notion of control over the entire south of Mesopotamia and was maintained although in practice its power was now nominal and limited.
The other great cities of the region, such as Nippur, Der and Uruk, were essentially autonomous. The citizens of all these cities proudly called themselves "son of Babylon", "son of Nippur" and so on.
The Aramaean and Chaldean tribes added another layer of complexity to Babylonia's political geography. From the late second millennium BC, they controlled the rural hinterland of Babylonia, including the marshlands in the extreme south, which they roamed with their flocks.
The tribes were known as houses e. Bit-Yakin, "house of Yakin" named after their founder, and their members called themselves sons of this founder e.
Increasingly, members of these tribes settled also in the ancient cities or founded new settlements, such as Dur-Yakin. Royal relatives and Chaldean challengers The relationship between the kings of Assyria and Babylon had traditionally been close.
From the 14th century BC when Assyria became an independent state, the royal families had been linked by marriage. Iraq Museum, IM Mallowan, Nimrud and its remains, Londonvol. The close family links meant that both Assyrian and Babylonian rulers felt fully entitled to involve themselves in the internal affairs of the other country at times of political turmoil.
Hence, several Assyrian kings dispatched their armies to Babylonia and, in the absence of a Babylonian ruler who was legitimate in their eyes, some of them even claimed the titles of "King of Babylon" and "King of Sumer and Akkad" for themselves, including Tukulti-Ninurta I BC.
These were the only foreign titles adopted by the Assyrian kings and this indicates that the throne of Babylon was considered equal to that of Assyria - unlike, say, the throne of Damascus or Carchemish. It highlights the close link between the ruling houses but also the Assyrian respect for Babylonia and its institutions. This 'special relationship' between Assyria and Babylonia continued throughout the reigns of Tiglath-pileser III and his successors in the 8th century, defining and shaping Assyrian strategy and policy in the south.
During the reign of Tiglath-pileser III of Assyria, the complex and fractured interests that comprised the web of Babylonian politics resulted in events that were of grave concern for Assyria. Nabu-nadin-zeri of Babylon BCan Assyrian ally, was deposed by one of his officials, who was in turn quickly deposed by Mukin-zeri, leader of the Chaldean tribe of Bit-Amukani, illustrating both the tortuousness of Babylonian politics and the weakness of dynastic rule.
This led to the intervention of Tiglath-pileser. The deposition of the pro-Assyrian ruling dynasty of Babylonia was a reason for military intervention, and their replacement with a Chaldean chieftain, openly hostile to Assyria, presented a further cause for war. Tiglath-pileser defeated Mukin-zeri in BC. But he did not annex Babylonian territories and turn them into provinces under the control of his governorsby then the established Assyrian practice.
Instead, in keeping with earlier practice, he assumed the throne of Babylon directly and claimed the title of "King of Sumer and Akkad". Babylonian documents such as the King List seem to indicate that at least some Babylonians accepted the Assyrian king's claim to the throne of Babylon, as he and his successor Shalmaneser V BC are included in the sequence of Babylonian rulers.
But when the latter's short reign was ended by the revolt of his brother Sargon II BCwhich caused rebellions all over the empire, Babylonia was again claimed by a Chaldean chief: Babylonia was lost to Assyria for twelve years. Sargon II as king of Babylon After consolidating his rule over the empire, Sargon was ready to reclaim the lost throne of Babylon. In BC Sargon invaded Babylonia. The fractures and conflicting interests between the polities of the region became visible in the ensuing war when some cities and tribes quickly joined Assyria while others stayed loyal to Marduk-apla-iddina.
Eventually, faced with this crumbling of support, the Chaldean abandoned Babylon and its citizens invited Sargon to enter the city SAA 17 Marduk-apla-iddina II left as king of Babylon in BC, as depicted on a monument commemorating a royal land grant kudurru. Vorderasiatisches Museum Berlin, VA Once again, an Assyrian king assumed the Babylonian throne.