By Abbey Mikha
Everyone knows that helping those who are less fortunate is the foundation of Jesus’s teachings. In Hebrews 13:16 it says, “Do not neglect to do good and to share what you have, for such sacrifices are pleasing to God.” If nations of the world truly have faith they would help the Assyrians who are among those suffering the most in the world right now, and they would say yes to the Assyrians.
The Assyrians are dying a terrible death in their homeland though they are trying their best to defend themselves. They are losing their mother land and the world is silent. The Assyrians are an ancient and modern nation. We have survived upon the earth since the beginning of documented recorded history.
Some scholars say that the royal blood line of the Assyrians died out, and that the people who were left were farmers and rustics. Since when though can’t a king, priest, or shepherd be a farmer, with all my respects to the farmer? Or, a farmer or rustic be or become a sovereign because of the person and individual that he or she is in spirit? Regardless of whether the royal line of the Assyrians has been continued the Assyrians are still worthy! The entire world, but especially the western Christian world must pay attention to the Assyrians and their plight. Without the Assyrians in the Middle East there will be extreme disorder which has already begun in the past years and in a few more years’ horror and terror could continue to take over the region and then the entire world.
In Philippians 2:4 it says, “Let each of you look not only to his own interests, but also to the interests of others.” Modern people of the world have been known to be very analytical and only care about the interests of the elites of their countries and their agenda. We must change this and help others because if we only serve ourselves what good have we done? People of the world and especially Canada, USA, Australia, and Europe you should help the helpless Assyrians. You are powerful nations with authority, influence, security, wealth, and societies which hopefully believe in justice. We need to realize as a human race that the interests of other good peoples around the world are also our interests because we are united in being well-intentioned and noble nations.
John 3:17 says, “But if anyone has the world's goods and sees his brother in need, yet closes his heart against him, how does God's love abide in him?” Isn’t that what is happening to the Assyrians right now? Since the Assyrians were thrown out what is called Mosul, which is Nineveh province the famous capital of the Assyrians in Northern Iraq, and ISIS took over the region who has given a helping hand to the Assyrians? Has the world community helped the Assyrians with weapons to defend themselves? Has the world community helped with the daily food rations as the Assyrians live in refugee camps in the North of Iraq? What has the world community or the western community done to elevate the suffering of the Assyrian men, women, and children who have lost everything? Jesus’s love does not abide in those who close their heart to the suffering of others. If you love Jesus you must say yes to the Assyrians.
Matthew 25:35 says, “For I was hungered, and ye gave me meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me drink: I was a stranger, and ye took me in: Naked, and ye clothed me: I was sick, and ye visited me: I was in prison, and ye came unto me. Then shall the righteous answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee hungered, and fed thee? Or thirsty, and gave thee drink? When saw we thee a stranger, and took thee in? Or naked, and clothed thee? Or when saw we thee sick, or in prison, and came unto thee? And the King shall answer and say unto them, Verily I say unto you, in as much as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren; ye have done it unto me.”
Yes, “the least of these” isn’t that what the world thinks of the poor and underprivileged Assyrians? Isn’t that what the people in Galilee, Judea, Jerusalem and many places Jesus preached thought of Him? Yet he became the King of Kings! Could not the Assyrians who believe in Jesus though their ancestors were considered gentiles, yet they were among the first to believe in Him, still have special and sacred people in their nation? In their human simplicity and through their spirituality could not others rise up with the help of good nations to preach beliefs of the ancient world and Christianity which is in their genes? These are the people and children of Assyria and these are the people who are being intimidated, murdered, raped, and starved. The roofs above their heads are being stolen and their identity is being camouflaged and devastated. If they declare themselves as Assyrians in the homeland they are terrorized and bullied. Do you really believe that we are the least of nations and this is the reason you ignore us? I’m sure not because I believe still in the goodness of the people of nations and that is the reason you must say yes to the Assyrians.
James 2:14-17 says, “What good is it, my brothers, if someone says he has faith but does not have works? Can that faith save him?” Indeed where are the deeds of the Christians of the world in relation to the Assyrians? They profess to believe in Jesus Christ but what about their actions? We are all as nations interconnected. Even our destinies are intertwined! We need to support each other. I believe that many Christian nations profess their faith but when it comes to actions they don’t do much. Do they truly believe in Jesus? If we believe in Him we must become like Him. It is easy to say we are Christians but to live our life as Christians in word and deed is always more difficult.
John 15:12 says, “This is my commandment, that you love one another as I have loved you.” I wish the Assyrians will be a beloved nation by other Christians and all peoples of the world. It is not right to hate the Assyrians because what it says in the Old Testament. This scheme of the Old Testament is not fair and the ancient hatred for the Assyrians needs to be analyzed and understood. These aren’t the words that were written about the Assyrians by God. They are the words of a vengeful people who wrote the bible under their agenda of hate and jealousy because the Assyrians had the power of civilization, and there is immense scholarly proof for these facts which you may seek. As Jesus said, “The truth will set you free.”
There are four million Assyrians in the world if all the churches are included. Could not the world and especially the western world help the Assyrians to establish themselves in their homeland? Say yes to the Assyrians because they are a moral nation that deserves to live. We will help the world when we are established in the North of Iraq which is occupied Assyria. Our culture is beautiful. Our music, poetry, books, ideology as a nation, and our faith in Jesus exemplifies devoutness and love.
Proverbs 19:17 says, “Whoever is generous to the poor lends to the Lord, and he will repay him for his deed.” There are rich people who are part of the Assyrian nation and many of them donate to the nation suffering in the homeland, but most Assyrians outside of Iraq, Syria, and Turkey are middle class. Many of the Assyrians in the homeland are educated but humble and living a simple life. As a nation of original farmers they are used to living off the land just like people did in the time of Jesus. Even the foods they eat such as olives, grapes, lentils, dates, nuts, milk, cheese, yogurt, eggs, lamb, bread, corn, wheat, and wine are foods that were eaten by Jesus in the days of the Lord. You could say that they are still living an ancient natural biblical life style in the homeland in modern days when they are allowed to express their identity and when they are allowed to live.
Hopefully in the upcoming days, months, and years peoples of the world and especially western people will say yes to the Assyrians and will help those left in the North of Iraq, Syria, and Turkey in order to improve their dire situation. Of course I must say to the Assyrians all over the world especially in diaspora, we are responsible for strengthening our house and home as well. We must work for our goals to free our homeland occupied Assyria especially in the North of Iraq.
Acts 20:35 says, “In all things I have shown you that by working hard in this way we must help the weak and remember the words of the Lord Jesus, how he himself said, ‘It is more blessed to give than to receive.” I have a friend who always helps me out when I’m not feeling well. She takes the time to have conversations with me just to give me another point of view. She also randomly gets me books that she thinks are beneficial and interesting. She is a great friend. These are just simple examples of friendship, but when I was able to do things for her how good did that feel?! All people must do this. Befriend the Assyrians. It feels so good to help a deserving person or nation. When I do things for anyone I never ask anything in return. I just say pay it forward. Continue this diffusion of good deeds and let it reach all around the world. Find it in your heart to say yes to the Assyrians.
Hebrews 6:10 says, “For God is not unjust so as to overlook your work and the love that you have shown for his name in serving the saints, as you still do.” From the beginning of history the Assyrian spiritual life has been rich and it continues from ancient times to modern times through their true Christian beliefs. The Assyrians pray to the saints whether Mar Zaia, or saint Rebka, or Mar Charbel, and many others. They bless our lives and keep us sane in a foolish and crazy world. There have been many miracles by Assyrian saints.
It is also said in the bible that you may be entertaining angels unaware. I’m not saying that Assyrians are perfect, but when I look into the eyes of those old Assyrian men and women from the homeland and the way they sparkle with deep meaning and the sacrifice they have made throughout their lives, I cannot but think of them as saints and angels. Perhaps other than children this group of people have suffered the most in the North of Iraq and Syria. Many of them want to fight back to regain the land that was in their memory before, their towns and villages. Some of the women cook for the young Assyrian men who are battling ISIS and also for the people in refugee camps. There are numerous pictures with older Assyrian women holding the Assyrian flag with humbleness, saintliness, and love.
1 Thessalonians 5:11 says, “Therefore encourage one another and build one another up, just as you are doing.” Do not put anyone down who is trying to progress in their life in the world as person or as a nation including the Assyrians. Let your dialogue be positive about the Assyrians. Do not judge the Assyrians without getting to know them. Other than in the homeland there are Assyrians all over the world especially in the United States, Canada, Australia, and Europe. Assyrians have conventions and festivals. They do fundraisers for their people in the homeland. There is also a real nationalistic Assyrian movement network which is growing day by day and this shows that the Assyrians will never give up. They are trying their best to make something from what little they have. Each person contributes according to their skills, ability, and love for their nation. I hope in the not so distant future there will be established a real nationalistic Assyrian leadership with positive goals, leaders who work with integrity for our Assyrian people and homeland.
Read about the Assyrians. This is the moment in time to deeply learn about the Assyrians and know the real facts. We are the last of our kind. Say yes to the Assyrians. The Assyrians deserve to thrive and live and be a nation not only in their own eyes and those of their children and people, but also in the eyes of the world.
Picture above is of my mom Yola and I
By Abbey Mikha
Shlama Qa Qol Ashouraye!
I hope you are all having a great summer, enjoying the nice weather, and doing things you love! Yesterday I was just sitting there alone at home and I remembered my mom’s town in Jilu Hakkari called Zerineh. I had some time and made a YouTube video with the song Zerineh by Janan Sawa and included some of my pictures. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Rufq4zmmAE
I always loved Janan’s songs and especially his songs to do with Atra, Kha’b Nissan, and Zerineh. I remember being at a Assyrian convention in Detroit in 2002 and dancing to his many beautiful songs at the picnic.
I’m not sure when the song Zerineh was written, but I can remember it since I was very young. It is a beautiful song with a sad tune, a tune that resembles the sadness that our ancestors felt when they had to flee Zerineh during the Seypa Genocide that devastated our nation.
This Genocide was perpetuated by Islamic Kurds and Ottoman Islamic Turks. They openly did then what they are covertly trying to do now! This Genocide is the first of the century and it is many times falsely called the Armenian Genocide. I say falsely because there were also Pontic Greeks and Assyrians who suffered and were killed and annihilated.
A lot of historians say that had this first Genocide in World War I been prevented, the other Genocide in World War II would not have taken place. This is something very significant that the people of the world must realize and give consideration to. We should never condone genocide! It is wrong on all levels. All good peoples deserve to live and the Assyrians definitely deserved and deserve to live.
One day I will see the ground where you stood Zerineh and one day I’ll go back to my homeland to sit in your fields, to see your mountains, and to wonder why time has created this distance between us. Even though I am far from the lands of my ancestors I’ll always be a flower from the fields of Zerineh.
I have never been to Turkey but I always think about Zerineh. I imagine it as a very lovely place. I wonder who lives there now and do they remember it as my beautiful Zerineh ?
I am an Assyrian born in Lebanon. My mother’s family be Yousip left their homeland in Zerineh Hakkari and escaped to Kiev during the Seypa Genocide. There is a story passed down in my family that my great grandfather Adam Yousip from Zerineh walked from the Hakkari region with his family to Kiev. My grandfather Kostan was born in Kiev. His mother was an Assyrian originally born in Russia. They must have been strong people!
My grandfather moved to Lebanon with his family when he was very young.
I grew up listening to Assyrian music in the town of Ksara in Lebanon at the yearly Sherat Mar Zaia celebration and I have always loved Assyrian music even though my family left Lebanon to Germany and then to Canada at a very young age. I love the country of my birth Lebanon, but my heart pulses the song of Assyria and the song of Zerineh.. I wonder and have an inquiry if there will be future songs about Zerineh with a happy tune?
The Assyrians in Ksara call the town in Lebanon Zerineh because so many people in town come from Zerineh Jilu Hakkari originally. They are survivors of the Seypa Genocide. The houses in the town of Ksara were given to these Assyrians who still live there amongst each other. There is a beautiful church in the town called Mar Zaia to remind us of our beautiful church in Hakkari. Lebanon has many beautiful churches and monasteries and so does Hakkari! Although they are simplistic in their style they still are dripping with Christian Assyrian devotion, spirit, and love.
I hope to visit Hakkari one day and see what is left of the towns and villages of the Assyrians in Turkey. This land belongs to us but who will listen? This land was stolen from us! I hope that life will give you an opportunity to go back and visit our homeland as well. If one day you visit Zerineh think of me and I am with you there in spirit.
I have written an article about the Hakkari Assyrians called, “The Metis of Red River and the Assyrians of Assyria.” It is from some years back. Many people disagreed with my opinions in this article. I used to believe that multiculturalism should spread and the whole world should become one. Witnessing what is happening in the Middle East now to the Assyrians and other minorities, and the way people in the world are turning a blind eye to so much suffering and murdering, makes me question my old opinions. Nonetheless, here is the link for the article:
The Song “Zerineh” is one of my favourites ever since I was a child because I always knew that my mom’s ancestors were from Zerineh and because I myself like the lady in the song have green eyes. I wonder if many women from Zerineh have green eyes!? It is said that only 1-2 % of people in the world have green eyes. It could be typical of the Assyrian people of the region as I have many relatives with green and blue eyes.
I also have heritage from Alqosh and Mardin in Tur Abdin, but I always felt close to the town of Zerineh because I grew up with the kids of the town in Ksara until I was five years old many of which were Zerne. I am proud of my entire heritage. It is my honour to be from Zerineh, Alqosh, and Mardin! I never forgot the people in the town of Ksara no matter which countries I traveled to just like I never forget the people of Zerineh, Alqosh, and Mardin and all Assyrian towns and villages. They all always stayed in my heart. I think of them every day and even in dreams.
I hope to visit my relatives in Ksara Lebanon one day again and one day I hope and wish to see you Zerineh.
My friend Ashour and I were discussing this issue of returning to the homeland and he said, “We should ALWAYS think of our beautiful homeland and the glorious day that we return, like a lost child returning to his mother.” I responded to him: “Children sometimes grow up and search a lifetime for their mother even if she gave them up at birth or at a young age! Many of them forgive their mothers for letting them go because they realize that her situation was very difficult at that time. In a way our homeland gave us up since 1915, but this does not have to be forever. Those of us who are attached to the beat of our land and ancestry are connected to an invisible umbilical cord. It is like something that pulls us to the direction of the East. Like an image of beautiful goddesses of our homeland calling our names to return and signalling with their hands and telling us that we are all flowers who are supposed to be blooming there in those fields by those mountains.
Zerineh, you feel far away but close to my heart. If one day there will be justice in the world then houses for Assyrians will be built again in Zerineh.. One day the Assyrians may be allowed to go back to build their homeland, and all Assyrians shall realize that they were born Assyrian in this life because their soul was attached to and remembered the atrocities which took place in Assyria at the hands of the foe. Every Assyrian is here on earth to defend the memory of our martyrs, our great grandfathers who fought, and the future of our nation. There is one thing I’m certain of and that is that I will always love and think of you Zerineh!
The Berkley Argument on God: ‘To Be is to Be Perceived’ so Shouldn't God Save Abused Children and the Assyrians?
By Abbey Mikha
‘To be is to be perceived’ is what George Berkley proposed in his famous yet uncertain argument. Bishop Berkeley was an Anglo-Irish philosopher whose main accomplishment was the development of a theory he called "immaterialism." This theory denies the existence of material substance and instead believes that these things that are familiar objects like tables and chairs are only ideas in the minds of perceivers, and as a result cannot exist without being perceived. This may have been a truth in Berkley’s mind but my argument is that if it were true that ‘to be is to be perceived’ and that we exist because God perceives us as an idea in his super mind, then it would also be true that God is passive and does not perceive ideas which could save abused children from criminals. God is also responsible for those ideas which create the rise and fall of nations, even those early Christian nations such as the Assyrians who have worshipped him since the advent of Christianity, who are on the verge of extinction and are experiencing Genocide today.
George Berkeley tried to make sense of the Christian God of the Bible and he searched his own mind to be able to attribute the features of who he perceived to be his Creator. One of the main points in Berkleys argument on perception is that even for something to exist, that can be as simple and as complicated as an idea it must be perceived (Ariew and Watkins 139). Berkeley imagined a divine dialectic of ideas; Gods thoughts which are implanted into our psyches yet spontaneously pop up in our mind at his will. God is the writer and editor of the thoughts of human kind and all things which perceive. Berkley believed that things do not exist without some mind perceiving them; the mind which perceives humans is this super intelligence of the creator of the universe, the heavens and the earth; the one who also fashioned humans in the beginning long ago.
Ideas are manifested in our mind by this will of God. Berkeley compared God to a musician playing harmonious notes that human kind may not be able to understand (Ariew and Watkins 154). It is amazing how optimistic Berkeley is in regards to the tune God is playing. It makes one wonder if he doesn’t realize how much suffering there is in the world, and how much an Omnipotent God could do to change this. He calls the psyche of the creator the “eternal mind” (Ariew and Watkins 159) which never pauses and in which there is no questioning his everlasting continuousness.
Edward Sillem on Perception
The first main point in Edward Sillem`s argument is that Berkeley never meant for his theory on perception to be an abstract metaphysical principle (114). Berkeley, Sillem stated discovered the facts through experience (115). “The beginning of wisdom is to be found in a relish for the things which are known from actual perception and from the conscious experience of perceiving them” (Sillem 115). So, to understand perception is to seek to discover the mechanism of how we as humans perceive; one does not have to be highly educated to use this means of discovering the truth. Sillem reasoned that looking at the facts means analyzing perceived facts, and therefore also influencing our view of those facts (115). Sillem stated that the way in which we perceive things is our reality of them (116). Reality may be totally different then what we actually perceive, but what we perceive is the way we see the world, the things and the people around us.
Sillem also stated that “ideas are things which are perceived, and spiritual things are beings which perceive; it is impossible to find a material thing which perceives or a spiritual being which is perceived” (116). Here it can be argued that Berkeley himself states that we are perceived by God, so we are spiritual beings which are perceived by the Biblical God who may or may not exist. Sillem believed that Berkeleys metaphysical principle ‘to be is to be perceived’ is a statement about the ultimate actuality of things, and whether true or untrue should be decided by attention to the use of the word ‘existence’ when referring to particular things (116). The truth of Berkeleys principle Sillem believes is “incarnate within each and every concrete particular being” (119). Berkeley argues “what is perceivable but an idea? And can an idea exist without being actually perceived? (127). Berkeley believed that humans are an idea in God’s mind, and he tried to conjure the image of the unseen Biblical God who is distant from his creation.
Sillem explained that the actuality of sensible things consists in their being perceived right now by me, not by someone else (132). He continues about tables and chairs which are real for a person because he or she perceives them. However “he thought... that because things continue to exist when I am not perceiving them, and when no other human mind is perceiving them, they must be continuously perceived by some mind” (Sillem 132). That super mind is God.
Then Sillem brings up the issue of the motion of the earth which he says is “an idea of sense which exists really and independently of all human minds (133). So some other divine non-human mind is responsible for our place in the universe. No material things can exist without being perceived by an infinite spirit. “But so far as God is concerned material things exist because they are not only known by Him, but also willed by Him” (Sillem 134). Gods will is the immediate cause of all things, and because His will is omnipotent God has no need to use instrumental causes to produce any created effect“(Sillem 134). It is very evident that Berkeley was a highly idealistic person; although he admits the former about how little effort it takes for God to create an effect, he does not hold him accountable for this. In regards to the soul, Sillem stated that Berkeley believed that “the duration or continued existence of a spirit is due to the number of ideas or actions which succeed each other in that spirit’s mind” (141). It makes one wonder why then human existence is so fragile and at times can suddenly come to an end; why do bad things happen to good people?
Edward Sillems Discussion of Berkeleys Proofs for the Existence of God
Sillem goes on to discuss the proof for the existence of the Biblical God. These are important for this argument because if we are truly perceived by God then proof for his existence would be of paramount importance. One proof which we are interested in is the one where he uses the principle of immaterialism and perception.
Sillem believed that: In Berkeley`s view, it is necessary to establish the existence of God by arguing from effect to cause, showing, by an immediate inference from the beings of this world which we know from experience, that God must exist, and this in a way which is so cogent and easy for ordinary thinking people to follow that it admits of no escape or even questioning. Berkeley held that, if we know what the different beings familiar to us from experience are, we ought to be able to perceive at once and almost intuitively the absolute necessity of the divine existence. Such an ideal and convincing proof he professed to be able to provide from his forthright metaphysics of Immaterialism (144)
Berkeley said that men usually consider that all things are known by God, whereas he on the other hand instantly and unavoidably conclude the being of a God, because all reasonable things must be perceived by him (Sillem 145). A mind communicates itself to us in view of the rational universe, and Berkeley would like to conclude that this mind is God. Berkeley thought that those people who deny the existence of God should also deny the existence of other human beings and those who believe in the existence of other human beings should also believe in the existence of God (Sillem 150). The world does not owe itself to human perception; rather its existence is due to the perception of something much greater than us. Berkeley wants us to think of the universe as one galaxy ruled by the mind of one magnificent creator of things, beings, and ideas. The analysis of sensible things perceived by us, are administrated by laws so Berkeley concluded that God exists (Sillem 150). The existence of natural laws and a design shows that the whole universe is dependent on that one mind which was created by a will. One could argue that it is true that the universe is harmonious, although it may have been chaotic in the beginning of time, but there are many ways in which life could be better, especially where it concerns the relation of humans with other humans who are of different religions, cultures, and gods.
Berkeley claimed to have proven the existence of God as “a being whose spirituality, omnipresence, providence, omniscience, infinite power and goodness, are as conspicuous as the existence of sensible things, of which...there is no more reason to doubt, than of our own being” (167). This is an explanation of the unseen God whom the Bible speaks of.
“The order prevailing within the universe is proof of God’s wisdom and goodness; since those attributes of His are the sole cause of the order of the universe and of the laws of nature, and again since God wills this order for the good of mankind, He will conserve it in the future as long as He wills man to live in his present condition” (Sillem 160).
These sentiments are exactly the reason I question God; since God is so powerful he should be doing more for the meek who according to Christian tradition are supposed to inherit the earth.
A.C Grayling on Percevability
Gods mind is the Universal Library of everlasting ideas and God holds the power and the ability to produce ideas in us. This is a very significant control that God has over humanity and it can be used to manifest a lot of good on earth. “Berkeley concludes that God, the ‘Author of Nature’, is the ultimate source both of ideas and their connections” (Grayling 52). Some individuals want to explain the causes of our experiences since God has so much influence on them according to Berkeley. In the ontological argument for God’s existence Grayling considers thoughts on the non existence of God as a contradiction because “existence is a perfection and God is perfect” (87). God may be perfect but life for humans is not perfect. “However, God’s having qualitatively the same ideas I have, in fuller form perhaps, is logically independent of his causing them in me, since he could cause those ideas in me without himself having them in just that form...” (Grayling 99). God therefore has the power to stop negative things from occurring in human life without even thinking about it just by sensing what needs to be thought.
“God is affected by nothing whatever, perceives nothing by sense, and is ‘absolute and independent’...hence is not subject to the imperfections in which ‘to endure, or suffer, or feel anything by sense’ consist” (Grayling 100).” Therefore it is questionable why God would create us in a form where we cannot live his type of existence. To say that S perceives x is in part to say that there is x; if there were no x to be perceived then S cannot perceive it (Grayling 105). That would mean that when we perceive James Camerons hit movie Avatar, the characters exist on some other distant planet because we can perceive them. Of course prescribers of such a theory would hold that the former is false because there are always exceptions to the rule.
To say that there are potential ideas is “to say that God stands ready to cause those ideas of sense-to make them actual-in case any finite mind should be in a position to perceive them” (Grayling 109). Both authors Grayling and Sillem insist on this issue and I fear that they are not attempting to reflect how possibly dangerous this could be especially if the God we perceive to be good has hidden motives and intentions. Grayling states that “Pitcher... suggests that if God causes ideas in his own mind then he must be partially passive” (111). I agree with this point immensely because I see the passivity in Gods character which is evident in everyday life and it makes me wonder about his reasoning.
Gods Passiveness in Perception
Berkeley addresses the issue of existence and being perceived by explaining how we are perceived by God, so it is not wrong of me to elaborate on what I perceive of God because he is not afraid of the truth; according to Berkeley he is producing these ideas in me right now.
My argument is that if it were true that ‘to be is to be perceived’ and that we exist because God perceives us as an idea in Gods super mind, then it would also be true that God is passive and at times does not perceive ideas which could save abused children from criminals; God is also responsible for those ideas which create the rise and fall of nations, even those early Christian nations who have worshipped him since the advent of Christianity; such as the Assyrians, who are on the verge of extinction today. So it would be true that the omnipotent Christian God which Berkeley has reasoned exists, who is the ultimate perceiver and creator of ideas, has the power to help the helpless, yet sometimes does not; this is evident in life and unlike Berkeley who is highly idealistic and sees the world for its beauty, I see it for what it is. Therefore, if God is Omnipotent as Berkeley perceives, and he perceives us, it does not equal to that God is all loving since he a being of Superpower is not always there for the powerless.
An example of God’s passiveness in perception is evident from all the suffering in the world. Does an omnipotent God exist? This is a legitimate question that should be explored because if he does exist he should always be there for his creation because he can be. I may be expecting of God to keep a full time job since he has the power to do so; although the universe is ordered, we must expect more of the One who holds the keys to everything. Just because one can perceive that God is orderly, as evidenced by the universe and nature, does not naturally follow that he is also completely good. Sensitive questions such as why God allows young children to be abused should be explored. Grayling and Edwards both mentioned that God has the power to create ideas in any human mind without even thinking about it. How about transporting and insisting on the idea of that a criminal should stop their bad actions? Should not the most powerful God who is good help abused children who have been left in the hands of criminals? Since God can bring about ideas in human beings, should he not bring about the idea to the criminal that a child is an innocent being and should not be abused by anyone? It is not uncommon for children under the age of one to be abused in this world and we hear of these atrocities in the news all the time. Where is God at the time when such things are occurring?
Another example of the passive perception of God is evident among the first ancient nation to convert to Christianity, the Assyrians who today are on the verge of extinction and are experiencing Genocide. Why has God turned his back on this nation which has been so loyal to him throughout the years and has suffered so much persecution because of their faith in this God? Berkeley believed this God to be the ultimate perceiver so why are the first of his followers, who for centuries have worshipped him, experiencing ethnic cleansing and Genocide today?
Some people may argue that we exist although we are not perceived by a God who has turned his back on humans; we are alive though we are not perceived. If it were true that the Biblical Christian God exists and he is good then he would not betray his people, but when searching the world it seems that the followers of this God are amongst those in the world who are suffering, although they devotedly follow him.
Some people may argue that we live and die at the will of God, and if we receive his blessing we exist, if we have lost his favour, or it is time for us to leave the earth we lose our life. That may be true, but it still does not explain why the first followers of the Christian God have become a nation who has literally been crucified by the world, through the denied genocide which was perpetuated against Assyrians at the hands of the Kurds and Ottoman Turks, and the atrocities that are occurring in the land between two rivers, modern day Iraq and Syria today.
I am sure that many people would say these types of arguments are based on emotion, but it is these types of thoughts which when investigated further will lead the human race to understand why we exist, who created us, and for what purpose. If God has done many great things, such as create the universe, he must also be held responsible for the many negative things which have occurred in the history of the human race.
There is blood on the hands of God and tears of children and cries of nations. God should be held responsible more than he is by Berkeley. It seems that Berkeley is so appreciative of his existence that he does not consider the pain which is involved in human life. Some people may also argue that the devil is responsible for these things and that God only works through miracles. This is illogical because the omnipotent God Berkeley argues for could do anything conveniently perceiving it.
Thoughts on Perception
Even if the devil is the cause of evil in the world God should fight and defeat this evil since he is more powerful than him. The Christian God is described as benevolent, so if this is true we should see the evidence in everyday life and not just by miracles for various people rather for all good people of various nations, cultures, and religions. Even if God the ultimate perceiver and producer of ideas is doing his best to let us know that he is there and that he exists that is not enough since God is omnipotent he must be there for those who suffer upon the earth. If the Biblical Christian God of Berkeley exists and he is omnipotent he has truly betrayed many people, including abused children and the early Christian nations like the Assyrians. By passively observing them God has taken part in their suffering.
One must note that the all loving Jesus that is described in the bible is very different from the God that Berkley is telling us can do anything by perceiving yet unresponsively observes human beings without interference. Jesus gave his own life for his people!
Ariew, Roger, and Watkins Eric. Readings in Modern Philosophy Volume II Locke, Berkeley, Hume and Associated Texts. Indianapolis: Hackett Publishing Company, 2000.
Betbasoo, Peter. “Brief History of the Assyrians.” Aina Magazine. March 15, 2010. 6th paragraph. http://www.aina.org/aol/peter/brief.htm
Grayling A. C. Berkeley: The Central Arguments. La Salle, Illinois: Open Court, 1986.
Sillem Edward. George Berkeley And The Proofs For The Existence Of God. New York: Longmans, Green and Co, 1957.
By Abbey Mikha
Veronica Franco led a double life where she was who she chose to be on the one hand, but also in her inner writing voice she revealed herself to be someone with varying and ambiguous points of views. Her words did not always match who she was in her professional identity. She was called the “honest courtesan.” This meant she was honored and virtuous, a sinner yet perhaps also a saint. Her duality can almost be compared to the ancient goddess of love and war such as Inanna that were spoken of in olden days, which also exhibited various characteristics in behaviors. Even in her writings it is evident there is a dilemma within her, confusion which causes ambiguity in her personality and in her letters and poems. Even though Franco participated in creating a new social role, her occupation was still contrary to some of her own beliefs and her spirit. She acted against her own opinions and will because of her personal circumstances and because of the situation of women in those days. She presented herself as a writer and intellectual not a provider of sexual services, yet she was both. Nonetheless, although she was an intellectual and wise woman there was ambiguity within the person Franco was in her professional life compared to who she was in her inner writing voice and in her letters and poems.
Women and the Fathers of the Church
Women would not be where they are today if it was not for the struggle of previous women of many hundreds and even thousands of years ago. There was a three thousand year history of misogyny and the hatred of women was rooted in the civilizations related to Western culture.[i] They were very much also rooted in the Christian civilization specifically. When discussing the person Veronica Franco it must be stated that the thoughts of the Fathers of the Church in regards to regular women at that time shed some light about the people and society that she was living in.
Saint Ambrose thought that a woman who was a true believer progressed to perfect manhood. Saint Augustine, the most important writer of patristic period tried to integrate Christian beliefs with Greek Philosophy and Plato and Philo influenced him. For him there was the issue of the body and soul dualism. Women equaled body, which was negative, and man equaled soul, which was positive. Soul was considered to be rational and the body was considered to be irrational. Irrational was woman. He focused on woman’s role in sin and “original sin.” Saint Augustine was revered during the Renaissance and many religious people, priests, bishops, and popes studied his writings. 
Many men of the church thought that women were the visible incarnation of lust. They interpreted Gen 3, the Fall Story, in terms of sex. Women tempted man, so it was her fault. They regarded women as the carriers of evil and guilt. Women on their own were not thought of as the image of God. The male individual was thought to be more honorable than the female individual. There was one good woman and that was the Virgin Mary and there were many bad women but one especially bad woman, Eve. Saint Thomas Aquinas thought the only purpose for which women had been created was procreation, because they in essence were defective. He thought women were by nature misbegotten. If pregnancy went well, the child would be male and perfect. If the child was female, it meant there was a problem with the pregnancy and the child was defective.
If women were such a plague upon the earth at that time then they had the right to do whatever they wished, even if it was to seek the freedom to be a courtesan, and to escape traditional life, which had them as wife and child bearer of numerous children and nothing more. Although being a courtesan was not seen as being a virtuous profession by other women and some men, it gave Veronica Franco something which she desired, which was some of her rights, power as a human being and as an individual, and the right to be educated, to read, write, study, and express herself in every way possible as a young woman.
The life of women at that time was very difficult. They were brought up to be strict Christians and abode by all the laws of the Church. It is doubtful that all the priests and bishops abode by all of their own laws, but they followed the laws of men, and they were men after all. They were associated with the soul according to all those famous philosophers and religious men of the past. If they broke the laws they could be forgiven for they could always repent to God. Veronica Franco was an enigma of a woman, living a double life, a life that she did not completely believe in, but which afforded her some of her wants to be free.
A Warning to a Mother Considering Turning her Daughter into a Courtesan
In this Letter Veronica Franco explains to a woman why she should not turn her daughter into a courtesan. She discusses fulfilling a “humane obligation.” She explains to the mother that if her daughter were to become a courtesan she would become her go-between and would therefore deserve the harshest punishment. She says that she begged and warned her to protect her daughter’s virginity. She advised her to help her daughter and teach her in such a way so as to marry her off decently. She says she offered her all the help she could even with the means at her disposal. She tells the woman that her daughter is not that beautiful and that she does not have grace, wit, or conversational qualities that would be needed in this type of a profession. She warns that this mother might break this young girls neck.
A woman had to be beautiful to be a courtesan and beauty was very much revered. If she was not beautiful she could not succeed in this profession. If she was ugly and poor then she was very unlucky and destined to live a very miserable life. Her only hope was a big dowry. To save herself and her family a girl should only be a courtesan if she had special qualities. The ambiguity in Franco’s letter is evident. She believes this profession to be something demeaning for any girl or woman and that it could destroy her yet she thrived in the profession. She followed upon this path and did not revert from it. Veronica Franco could have made enough money and then made a life for herself somewhere else but she did not. In the end of her letter Franco continues to promise the lady to help her in any way possible. Once again there is indistinctness in intent because she is willing to help a stranger and this is very kind, but she should be rather helping herself escape from this lifestyle which sometimes she agrees is negative and destructive, and other times she believes is honest. She says one thing and does another.
Veronica Franco’s Love for a Man of the Church
In this poem Franco expresses her love for a man of the Church. She sees the greatness in his character. She says about him, “The excellence of your luminous virtues.” Virtues that she perhaps was not said to have according to society. She says that his virtues dazzled and burned her from far away. This could also be understood as a double meaning. Burning her as in her want of him, but also burning her because she could not have him because of who he was and who she was. She also says that how is it that a courtesan would fall in love with someone who was her opposite in profession. Was he truly honorable and righteous? She continues that she was pierced in the center of her breast. She says, “And so I started to hope that with cautious pity you might have taken notice of my love.” He must be pious towards her, and compassionate to accept a woman of her profession, and she understands this. She wants a love that is pure and hallowed; one that befits her ideals yet who she is in her profession does not really match what she wants. She says:
When you are far beyond these salty waves,
I beg of you to visit me by means of letters,
Full of glad love that corresponds to mine;
And should you wish to please me
More fully, you can easily do so
By sending some of your works to me.
And should I be unworthy to obtain this
For any particular fame of my own,
I wish to place my hope in your generosity.
She always appeals to his compassion and bounteousness because of who she is and what she does. She knows that publicly her profession is not considered good by most people especially those of the Church, yet she falls in love with a Churchman almost purposely as to defy all convention. She is who she is but she also wants whom she wants whenever. She knows that what she is doing although she professes to be a good woman is also questionable by those people and everyone and when her words are analyzed it is evident that she knows that those acts which she commits are wrong not necessarily against society but against her own spirit. She seeks a man so unlike herself because she herself is not truly happy in whom she is. She is longing for what she cannot have and also who she could have been had she chosen a different path in life.
Although Veronica Franco was a “honest courtesan” and a writer, the way she perceived women’s roles in society and her view on gender relations was evident in whom she was. She was a freethinker, a revolutionary woman who defied all forms of rules of society to the point that she engaged in relationships with even supposed men of religion, so as to say to everyone that she is either beyond religion or that even she should be included in all aspects of society. She spoke through her writing and she influenced people as individuals, but in her writing she proved to be someone living a double life. It was through her words though that people could read that this sinner and saint wanted to be something that the society of the time did not afford to women. She wanted to be free, and to be who she wanted to be. She did challenge the social order for she was in her spirit and in her defiance in many ways a small light of hope for women of the future. It is true that she was out of the ordinary and also considered a radical by the Inquisition, but she was the antithesis of woman to the thesis of woman at the time. Through this human female dialectic and with the help of those like her, there became a synthesis of the woman of today.
On Advising a Young Man that Intellectuals Win Her Affection
In this letter she explains to a young man that of all the men who count on being able to win her love, the ones dearest to her are those who work in the practice of the liberal arts and disciplines, of which though she a woman of little knowledge, especially compared to her inclination and interest, was so fond. She said that it is of great delight that she talk with those who know so as to have further chances to learn, for if her fate allowed, she would happily spend her entire life and pass all her time in the academies of talented men. She wanted to be around these men because she wanted an education. She knew that the information they had to offer was important and could be of use to her. She basically peddled herself in order to be able to gain knowledge and wisdom. She knew that in a perfect world education would have helped her claim her rights and realize her potential in the economic, social, and even political arenas. She knew that education could uplift women out of the poverty that they were mostly living in. She could not boldly profess that all women should be allowed to have an education so she humbly expressed that she likes to be in the company of sophisticated men. Once again she is vague and ambiguous.
Franco, To a Man Who Has Insulted A Woman
In defending a woman who has been attacked by a man she explains what she truly feels in regards to men and women:
Look with the eyes of your good sense
and see for yourself how unworthy of you
it is to insult and injure women.
Unfortunate sex, always led about
by cruel fortune, because you are always
subjected and without freedom!
But this has certainly been no fault of ours,
because, if we are not as strong as men,
like men we have a mind and intellect.
And virtue does not lie in bodily strength
but in the vigor of the soul and mind,
through which all things come to be known;
And I am certain that in this respect
women lack nothing, but, rather, have given
more than one sign of being greater than men.
Though she believes that women are greater than men, she worked in an organized profession, which degraded women and called them whores. She says all the previous but she could not in all honesty profess those words to her patrons for they would find her opinion a little too disagreeable. This is the double life she lived, the life of actually believing something but living and pretending to be something else. In this poem she also says, “Attacking women is an obvious sin.” Yet those religious people who follow every letter of the word of God could have considered her entire life a life of sin. Sin is a controversial issue, and though her accusers may have been many, the God of her people, the God of Christendom Himself may have still forgiven her, perhaps for the sole reason as she the controversial woman in her poems, always said farewell to her friends with the biblical expression of goodbye said by Christ to His friends which was, “Go in peace.”
Veronica Franco tried to dismantle the stereotypes of the corrupt and shameless courtesan. She tried to create a new portrayal, one that reversed the image of the “whore.” She was a powerful woman, but she lived a double life; what she thought in her words and in her inner writing voice was actually different than the life she lived in her profession. The sexual equality that Franco was seeking seems similar to perhaps 20th century feminism. In the movie Dangerous Beauty Veronica Franco was glamourized and was depicted as a hero of Venice. Perhaps Hollywood took it a bit too far but the character of Veronica Franco deserved to be given the benefit of the doubt, which she was given in the movie.
We do not know the complete story of the courtesan. It goes back thousands of years. In ancient times the goddess was revered regardless of her controversial actions with men. Sometimes the goddess would seek out mortal men so that she could be with them, but this was a normal part of ancient society. There was also something called “holy prostitution.” If a goddess of the past such as the Sumerian Innana who was also called the goddess of love and war and also “the holy whore,” a goddess with many idiosyncrasies in her personality could get away with such actions thousands of years back, in the beginning of civilization, why should Veronica Franco not be forgiven by our society and also made into a female hero? The only difference between Franco and Inanna is that according to the Wikipedia page on “sacred prostitution” scholars believe that a form of sacred marriage ritual or “hieros gamos” was staged between the king of a Sumerian city-state and the High Priestess of Inanna, the Sumerian goddess of sexual love, fertility, and warfare, but no certain evidence has survived to prove that sexual intercourse was included. Franco was never married at all not even in this way.
In the final speech when Veronica Franco was confessing to the Inquisition in the movie she says, “I confess I became a courtesan, traded yearning for power, welcomed many rather than be owned by one…I confess I embraced a whore’s freedom over a wives obedience...” She may not have wanted to be such a woman in her heart but it was the freedom that she was seeking. She wanted a life where she could gain more knowledge and have the chance to be who she wanted to be. Not every woman in Renaissance time was meant to live a life with a partner and in the sacred institution of marriage. Veronica Franco was a free spirit. Who knows who she could have been had she lived in our times. In her times she was a courtesan but in her own spirit she was a goddess.
Ann Rosalind Jones, and Margaret F. Rosenthal. Veronica Franco, Poems and Selected Letters. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1998.
Professor Milne. Women and Religion class, class notes, 2006.
 Jones, Rosenthal. Veronica Franco, Poems and Selected Letters. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1998, p ix.
 Professor Milne, Women and Religion class, class notes, 2006.
 Professor Milne, Women and Religion class, class notes, 2006.
 Jones, Rosenthal. Veronica Franco, Poems and Selected Letters, p 38.
 Jones, Rosenthal. Veronica Franco, Poems and Selected Letters, p 38.
 Jones, Rosenthal. Veronica Franco, Poems and Selected Letters, p 38.
 Jones, Rosenthal. Veronica Franco, Poems and Selected Letters, p 38.
 Jones, Rosenthal. Veronica Franco, Poems and Selected Letters, p 38.
 Jones, Rosenthal. Veronica Franco, Poems and Selected Letters, p 39.
 Jones, Rosenthal. Veronica Franco, Poems and Selected Letters, p 39.
 Jones, Rosenthal. Veronica Franco, Poems and Selected Letters, p 40.
 Jones, Rosenthal. Veronica Franco, Poems and Selected Letters, p183.
 Jones, Rosenthal. Veronica Franco, Poems and Selected Letters, p183.
 Jones, Rosenthal. Veronica Franco, Poems and Selected Letters, p183.
 Jones, Rosenthal. Veronica Franco, Poems and Selected Letters, p187.
 Jones, Rosenthal. Veronica Franco, Poems and Selected Letters, p191.
Jones, Rosenthal. Veronica Franco, Poems and Selected Letters, p 34.
 Jones, Rosenthal. Veronica Franco, Poems and Selected Letters, p 245.
 Jones, Rosenthal. Veronica Franco, Poems and Selected Letters, p 249.
 Jones, Rosenthal. Veronica Franco, Poems and Selected Letters, p 71.
 Dangerous Beauty Movie 1998.
By Abbey Mikha
Jordanova Ludmilla, History in Practice second edition, New York: Oxford
University Press Inc, 2006.
What is truth? Can truth truly set a historian and a human free? Historical writing is always an unfinished work in progress but if the ideal of truth is always in the mind of the writer, then his or her work is a stepping stone towards truth. If a just God were writing the history of the world what would that history be? Would a just God have written "History in Practice" the way Ludmilla Jordanova did? Even when the facts are reasonably well established historians may differ radically in their interpretations of those same facts.
To truly be a historian one must seek truth above and beyond anything else. The biggest lie man has ever told in history is the denial of the genocide of the American and Canadian Native Indians. When most people think of genocide, the atrocities of Hitler immediately spring to mind. If a historian were to write that the United States and Canadian governments and its founding fathers also participated in mass genocide and assaults equal to those perpetuated against the Hebrew people in Germany, most scholars would call this truth unreliable. Ludmilla Jordanova mentions the Holocaust on fifteen pages in her book “History in Practice,” and rightfully so, but not once does she mention the struggle of the Native peoples of North America or any of the other forsaken people in history such as the Armenians, Pontic Greeks, and Assyrians who were also annihilated in 1915 by the Kurds and the Turks.
Jordanova herself is a highly distinguished historian of science. She is interested in the cultural history in early modern and modern Europe and the portraiture and identity in Britain from the seventeenth century to the present day. The worth of a historian and a human being is not in the sophisticated language one uses, but rather in taking the side of the poor and the meek and the forgotten. Jordanova considers the concept of truth, objectivity, knowledge and evidence. She writes about standards of reliability and truth, but she shifts to the grounds of the argument somewhat from an emphasis on truth to one on reliability. I disagree with her on this matter because there have been thousands of times throughout history when historians have emphasised reliability and yet were dishonest and truly selfish in trying to project their truth instead of the real truth of the world and history.
To Ludmilla Jordanova the writing of history is more important than the research but when one is seeking the truth both are equally important. The writing of history is influenced by our political prejudices and our subconscious but as human beings we are not all influenced negatively by our opinions because there are truly some more evolved types of human beings, and these people are able to be fair and just and for them objectivity and truth is more possible.
When the historian is searching for truth, the real truth and not just his or her own truth, but of truth itself, and he finds it then true history is written. Any other kind of history is just legend or a certain point of view. Jordanova is very broad and never concise in her book because she is looking at the practice of history from a very macro perspective. She believes that documents however reliable, can never tell us exactly what happened, even in the hands of the most impartial historians, yet she also realizes that without the documents we are that much worse off. According to Jordanova, with the documents we can at least write approximate accounts of what went on in the past which would mean that truth can never be reached by modern human beings and we should accept whatever historians write as long as it is backed up by sources.
I believe historical truth is accessible for anyone who is fair and honest and willing to put the time and effort to discover it. This requires a certain type of spirit and level of human being. Jordanova does not consider that the product of honest research and honest writing is truth. It seems that in Jordanova’s idea of history many more accounts can be written by historians than if the ideal was truth. Jordanova favours reliability and hence a historical procrastination of truth occurs.
Jordanova is a feminist whose primary area of expertise is the philosophy and history of science. Her book should be studied by advanced graduate history students because it is very complex. Jordanova seems to be suggesting that she is not writing the book for peers but it seems that she is trying to impress people in her field with her complicated opinions. The book satisfies our need for both theoretical understanding and practical advice. Her main goals are to provide an up-to date overview of important issues in the discipline, to locate history in the context of other related disciplines and to sketch in what historians actually do and how and why they do it. She examines history’s relationship with other disciplines especially anthropology, sociology, philosophy and literature.
She is ardent about the defence of the genuine significance of history and its capacity to speak meaningfully about past times, but she devalues history when she argues against the ideal of historical truth. Jordanova should have strived to be clearer in her explanations and she should not have used jargon when common language would have been more appropriate. She also should not have used abstract foreign terms when English was more comprehensible.
In chapter four of her book called “Status of Historical Knowledge” Jordanova tells the reader that history has been energetically challenged and has been subject to critical scrutiny, but of course every subject matter and especially history has been scrutinized in such a way because no other discipline is as untruthful. For example science and biology all speak of natural truth but history on the other hand has so many times proven to be false. She then considers that taking away the certainties which is in other words to say the truth promised by history has broad ramifications She is confused about truth. She wants to know the truth but she doesn’t want to be held accountable for it and she does not want to be the one to hold people completely accountable for it. Of course nothing in life may be certain unless it is absolutely true. She thinks that unsubstantiated claims, which need to be distinguished from ‘historical knowledge,’ are widely exchanged. She also considers the concepts of truth, objectivity, knowledge and evidence.
Jordanova writes about standards of reliability and truth but she shifts to the grounds of the argument somewhat from an emphasis on truth to one on reliability. I disagree with her on this matter as previously mentioned because there have been thousands of times throughout history when historians have emphasised reliability and yet were dishonest and truly selfish in trying to project their truth instead of the real truth. Jordanova believes that the quality of historical knowledge is important but the concept ‘truth’ does not seem productive, yet it seems when anyone is writing history without the principle of truth in mind they steer in wrong and deceitful directions.
The following is one of many examples where historians were dishonest in history because they did not follow the ideal of truth rather they had their own agenda in mind. In their book called “Time on the Cross” Robert Fogel and Stanley Engerman used some of the quantification techniques to confuse traditional historians to produce a fairly comprehensive reinterpretation of the nature of the slave economy which was false. They used cleometrics to deceive people about slavery. The documents they used and the conclusions they came to seemed reliable according to the information they provided but in reality they were not being accurate and telling the truth about the struggle Africans suffered under slavery. It is the oppressed who suffer when truth is not made an ideal in historical writing, because it is they who are constantly being attacked by historians, because their struggle was so great and so unfair that some people want to deny them their right to feel the pride of having survived such acts of cruelty. Jordanova does not even mention one example where history was falsified.
Jordanova’s stress on reliable rather than on objective truthful knowledge she says is intended to be realistic and honest but it rather seems that she is taking the easy way out. She believes that historians should not promise what they cannot deliver and therefore need to be clear about what they can deliver. Hence she is underestimating historians and people who want to tell the story of history and of the world as it actually happened.
Jordanova also has a major issue with emotional writing. She believes that “strong identification with people in the past is regarded by some as suspect, because it implies an emotional commitment that clouds the ability to make judgments.”[i] Without emotions a historian cannot find truth because it is these emotions which lead to compassion for those who have been persecuted throughout history. Numbing the psyche by depriving it of our human emotions is counterproductive and what is truly lacking in Jordanova’s writing is that emotional humanitarian quality.
Jordanova also writes about how one would decide whether someone or something is reliable and she makes the point that consistency is important because if a person makes many claims which turn out to be true and which turn out to be corroborated by other evidence then this is a high level of consistency and reliability. She continues that authenticity is a highly problematic category in historical practice and how even in politically sophisticated work, it is not only present but traded upon, sometimes in quite emotionally manipulative ways.
I must stress that Jordanova has a major issue with emotions. She mentions the Holocaust and how she shares those emotional responses but that she is aware of the need to subject them to scrutiny. People suffered during the Holocaust and she emphasises with them, she should not feel guilty about it. She mentions emotions again as she says, “Claims to authenticity are problematic because they grant privileges on emotional grounds.”[ii] She is wrong and a historian can be objective even when feeling and being sensitive.
Jordanova believes that the goal of completeness is simply impractical especially since as the world of scholarship expands, there is more and more to read, but she does not consider that if the historian tries to be as truthful as possible, then another historian can take the information the first one has researched, and continue the research from there with the goal of completeness and truth in mind. It is said that a good historian tries to analyse history from all perspectives, so that he or she can eliminate bias, and Jordanova has tried to do that but she left out many subjects from her analysis.
“History from Below” is a chapter in the book “New Perspectives on Historical Writing,” and it is a concept of historical narrative in social history, which focuses on the perspectives of ordinary people, rather than political and other leaders. The term was popularised by British Marxist Historians during the 1960s. This school of history was among the first to use emotions and have a sympathetic approach to the lives of the poor and seek the truth of the life and history of the ordinary person. Jordanova does not seem interested in such kind of history. She mentions the term once in the text but she does not elaborate on it. She also has listed the term in the notes section and in the glossary. It is as if the concept was in the back of her mind, she may have wanted to mention it but it may have defeated her arguments. Since Jordanova was considering the issue of truth versus reliability she should have mentioned the concept of ‘history from below’ in one of her chapters.
History from below seeks to take as its subjects ordinary people, and concentrate on their experiences and perspectives, contrasting itself with the stereotype of traditional political history and its focus on the actions of “great men.” The term `history from below’ denotes a shift in viewpoint, from writing history from the perspective of political elites, using the documentary record that they left behind, to writing history from the perspective of social groups who had previously been largely ignored by history, including industrial workers, peasants, racial and ethnic minorities and the poor.
Jordanova has not made this kind of shift yet so it can be questioned whether she is an elitist. Until recently, history was often regarded as solely a matter of what the powerful, the famous, and the wealthy thought and did. What ordinary people felt and what they tried to accomplish was regarded as insignificant, not even worth regarding as part of history, but the truth is that real history is history from below because it is the untold story of humanity.
Jim Sharpe mentions in the chapter that “regretfully, that although the concept has been with us for over three decades, history from below has so far had comparatively little impact on mainstream history or on altering the perspectives of mainstream history.”[iii] History from below is the history of the future and historians like Jordanova who are traditionalists will not easily adapt to this kind of thinking.
Historians interested in the concept of ‘history from below’ could write about what has been called the “Armenian Genocide” which occurred during World War I in 1915 where one million Armenians, seven hundred and fifty thousand Assyrians and hundreds of thousands of Pontic Greeks perished at the hands of the Islamic Turks and Kurds. There is much awareness about this genocide among historians today but it is still not included in the history texts of university level students in Canada and the world because the millions of people that died are sadly considered insignificant. Jordanova certainly does not mention it.
Many Turkish historians claim that this was not genocide and that it was a time when Turkey was under attack by other countries and had to defend itself. Some other historians have called these claims reliable but the three nations who were subjected to these atrocities continue on their plight in the memory of their martyrs and in their hope that their voices will be heard.
Jordanova does not touch on such controversial issues and she does not defend anyone that history has not already shielded.
History from below emphasizes that not only professional historians but also ordinary people who are interested in the past of their families, communities, and organizations can contribute to the understanding of history. Through the concept of ‘history from below’ the truth of what occurred to many peoples of the world since the beginning of civilization can be discovered.
In the last chapter called “Trends” Jordanova writes in one section on the “Writing of World Histories.” The study of world history is in some ways a product of the current period of accelerated globalization and should be important to all historians especially because the world has become such a smaller place or as called a “small global village.” Jordanova gives this controversial and important subject one page and a half and she doesn’t really address any major issues. This type of history tends both to integrate various cultures and highlight their differences, but she does neither. Her idea of world history is the writings of Reynolds and Bayly, and John Robert’s. She does not mention any foreign historians. She states the fact that world history has become more popular in the last five year but she ignores most of the world’s history in her book.
Jordanova is a modernist and she never mentions any of the history from thousands of years ago which is so important for anyone studying history. She also does not mention her argument of reliability versus truth where it concerns world history. Jordanova is a Eurocentric historian and she writes from this point of view. She is not much concerned with discovering the true history of the world whether ancient or modern.
The study of the past or 'historical knowledge' is the process of researching the past using the available evidence. Historians argue about whose interpretation is most valid. These debates often last decades and are only resolved when either one side's research is shown to be of poor quality, or when new evidence comes to light proving one interpretation more true. Seeking the truth in history is one of the most admirable things a historian can do, and this is the only way that the true history of the world will be written.
Jordanova is inconsistent with the flow of her ideas and she debunked many concepts. She also does not define many of the terms she uses. Her strength is in the detailed detached style in which she writes, and her weakness is in the obvious lack of emotion involved in her book.
Jordanova is writing to be recognized and not necessarily to fight for some kind of high ideal which she truly believes in as a human being. If historians dedicated themselves to writing the real truth they would take responsibility for every word they write. I disagree with her on the matter of reliability versus truth because there have been thousands of times throughout history when historians have emphasised reliability and yet were dishonest and truly selfish in trying to project their truth instead of the real truth. The problem is not in her emphasis on reliability; the problem with Jordanova’s argument is that she discards truth as if to unreachable heights and hence makes peoples ideas unaccountable. Where is her faith in the ability of historians and where is her faith in humanity? Nonetheless, I am certain that it may take a lot of time before the sun will set on Jordanova’s writing but it will require sensitive truth seekers to call her and others out on her unemotional and rigid opinions on historical writing.
Works Cited and End Notes
Burke Peter, New Perspectives on Historical Writing second edition, Pennsylvania:
Pennsylvania State University Press, 2004.
Engerman L. Stanley, Fogell William Robert, Time on the Cross: Evidence and
Methods-A Supplement, Boston-Toronto: Little, Brown and Company, 1974.
Jordanova Ludmilla, History in Practice second edition, New York: Oxford University
Press Inc, 2006.
[i] Ludmilla Jordanova, History in Practice second edition, New York: Oxford University Press Inc, 2006. Pg 90
[ii] Jordanova, History in Practice, Pg 93.
[iii] Peter Burke, Jim Sharpe, New Perspectives on Historical Writing second edition, Pennsylvania:
Pennsylvania State University Press, 2004. Pg 38.
By Abbey Mikha
Egypt and Mesopotamia are regions of the world where the first civilizations of humankind suddenly sprung up thousands of years ago. Palestine is also an ancient area but it was called Canaan in Biblical text. Jericho is said to be one of the oldest urban habitations in the world where many important ancient souls walked and preached.
The writers of the two books being analyzed for this essay gave their versions of what occurred in these areas when the British were trying to break apart the Ottoman Empire. Antony Bluett and Bill Spackman have written their books as travellers journeying through foreign lands, but Bluett (1919) describes his journey as a crusade (p. 2). In Bluett’s case there were occasions where he uses intolerant language in regards to Arabs. For example in describing an Arab village as “evil smelling.” He also harshly speaks of the poor Arab Egyptian Labor Corpse and their sad songs. Lastly he contends that Palestine belonged to the Jews in order for them to become a nation without mentioning other peoples of Palestine like the Palestinians. These are considered as Arabs because of arabization in the region, though they have more ancient roots. In these instances it seemed that he had some negative underlying feelings for Arab people.
Contrary to this Spackman (2008) was trying to survive in Mesopotamia and was defending himself from hostile Arabs (p. 123) who would shoot at him and try to kill him. He did not use negative discriminatory language to describe the Arabs; rather he rationally explained the desperate situation in Mesopotamia. He knew that had nomadic Arabs in the land between the two great rivers Tigris and Euphrates captured him, it might have been the end of his life. Spackman though was reasonable enough that he admirably mentioned the fair-haired Arab children, he would play backgammon with Arabs, and he talked about the beautiful Arab women. This showed some positive spirit towards the Arabs.
Truly these two individuals had their own take on the situation in Mesopotamia at that time, but they were both courageous survivors of war, which took the life of many people from various cultures and religions. When trying to be fair, it is difficult to discern whether these two individuals were anti-Arab at heart, but there is some evidence which will be cited from the two books for and against the argument for each individual.
Antony Bluett and his Negative Language Tone in Regards to Arabs
Antony Bluett (1919) speaks of an Arab town where he says that they knew that assisting the force would be sent to “some evil-smelling native town” (p. 39) with a name he could not pronounce, far away from anywhere, left there to look after the place and excite the regular people with the power of the British arms, while the Arab leader and his wild horsemen (p. 39) would go about in the desert firing their guns in the air and make some extra ordinary noises to alarm the “half starved Turks” (p 39).
In these sentences Bluett demonstrates that he had some intolerant feelings for the Arabs. Describing the town as “evil smelling” is strong language. After all how can a town smell in an “evil” way? Here he shows his distaste for the Arab people and way of life. He goes on to call the Arabs in Egypt as, “a gang of natives” (p 52). The language tone is discriminatory; it seems critical and has a disrespectful nature.
In regards to the Egyptian Labor Corps who according to Professor Fantauzzo were, “A group of Egyptian laborers used by the British in Egypt, Palestine as well as in Gallipoli. They were comprised mostly of Egyptian farmers and manual laborers from the Egyptian countryside.” In Bluett (1919) he explains how the English person in charge of them would say to them “quais” when they did something good and when they made a mistake yell, “La! mush quais!” which means no not good (p. 89)! The people in charge talked to these poor Egyptian Arabs as a herd of cattle they were trying to chaperone, or even worse as animals.
Bluett (1919) speaks of the Egyptian Labor Corpse making the day, “hideous with their mournful dirge” (p. 89), which is to say the sad songs they sung did not amuse him. Then he further explains, “But if this eternal chant made one yearn to throw something large and heavy at the performers…” (p. 89). This is so insensitive on his part. These people were laborers; maybe a class up from slaves and their workdays were difficult. It was hot and they were tired. Obviously they would be singing sad tunes as people in their condition often do. These sad songs had a history in the region, and they were part of their folklore. Truly if one hears the songs of the African slaves of North America one can hear the sadness in such songs as well. It is appropriate to wonder if it was it the songs that were bothersome to him or was it that the songs were coming from these poor Egyptian Arabs?
Subsequently Bluett (1919) speaks of the scenery and the trees in Palestine and he is imagining the future of this region, this land of milk and honey, and how beautiful the landscape is (p. 98). The British wanted to liberate the Holy Land from the Ottomans, but they forgot that both Jews and Palestinians have history in that region of the world. The British wanted this land for their allies. In the land of Palestine he described a simple people living as in biblical times in clothes and mannerisms. Bluett (1919) also believed in Biblical prophesies. He said:
“Whether the Jews as a nation will ever settle in Palestine is a question the future alone will solve; certainly the wise policy of the British and French government offers them every inducement if they really wish to become a nation again in their own ancient land. If the prophets are to be believed Jerusalem will one day be the capital of the world-but it will not be in our day. “ (p. 288)
This statement is not sensitive to Arab aspirations in the region and can be called anti-Arab because it speaks of giving back the country to Jews without consideration and without even mentioning Palestinians, who had also resided in that region of the world for generations.
It is an amazing thing for the Jews to become a nation again in the land of their ancestors, but one must realize that this land as every land did not only belong to them. This land was a multicultural land in which many peoples of various religions were trying to survive and thrive, and who all should have had every right to do so. Unfortunately some humans never realized that they could be like birds, who have no castles other than the wilderness, but who sing for all of human kind impartially.
Spackman the Reasonable Man
Spackman (2008) had his own adventure. He speaks of the Arab guides in Mesopotamia as unreliable (p. 4). He says that they steal (p. 10), and they shoot randomly at the British (p. 10). Arabs in Mesopotamia at this time got in the way of the British fighting the Ottomans. Spackman calls some of the Arabs in Mesopotamia nomadic (p. 13), but the language he uses is not disrespectful and rather reasonable and explanatory, and even rather open-minded.
At one point Spackman (2008) explains that there were many ferocious mounted Arabs that were “hovering like vultures” (p. 19) on the side of the frontline, “waiting to fall on the hapless losers whichever side that might be” (p. 19). This was the situation the British were facing in a country with peoples of various nations, cultures, and religions. There were Arabs, Kurds, Jews, Assyrians, Armenians, Sabeans, Mandeans, Yazedi, Turkoman, and Shabak peoples spread out in various regions in Mesopotamia at this time. Some of these nations were peaceful and others aggressive. The word “vultures” used in regards to the Arabs is a strong word, but how can one see a shark and not call it a shark.
At one point Spackman (2008) says the Arabs were dangerous to “friend and foe” (p. 41). He speaks of the fate of those who fell into the hands of the nomadic Arabs in desert encounters. He says, “The more prepossessing of us might have suffered a fate worse than death or equally painful mutilation had such an encounter gone against us” (Spackman 2008, p. 54). There was also shameless looting and abuse by the Bedouin Arabs (Spackman 2008, p. 57). To this day there are such Arabs in Iraq who loot the archeological sights of the ancient Assyrians, Sumerians, and Babylonians.
Spackman (2008) mentions the “fair haired Arab children” (p. 34), who played in the water. He admires their behaviors maybe thinking of the young kids back home with similar hair color. It probably was a surprise to British officers to see children in Mesopotamia with blond hair, blue eyes, and fair skin. Spackmans language is rational and he positively explains these children from a culture of his supposed adversaries, who at some points were trying to bring about his death. A man filled with hatred for a nation will ignore even such small similarities as a light haired Arab, but a reasonable man will see the likeness as something positive of human beings of the same earth.
Spackman (2008) also speaks of playing ‘towlu’, backgammon, with the Arabs in coffee shops, a game he had not played for a long time. This was a very ancient game (p. 118). If Spackman had bad feelings towards Arabs he would not have sat down to play such a game because it requires a certain amount of respect for the other competitor. From his words it seemed like Spackman was playing this game with Arabs as if he had been playing this game with an Englishman back home.
Spackman (2008) furthermore speaks of the Arab women, “With their Arab features and olive complexions the girls looked very attractive” (p. 15). Had he had a backward mentality, he could not have seen these women as beautiful, but through a certain spirit he tells the truth about these girls. What was the nature of these encounters is not clear, and he makes it seem rather innocent.
Antony Bluett and Bill Spackman are persons who lived through war. When trying to be fair, it is difficult to discern whether these two individuals were anti-Arab at heart, but there is some evidence from the two books for and against the argument for each person, which was previously analyzed.
It is wrong to harshly judge people who have come before in History, for they lived in a different time and under different circumstances, but hopefully as the human race evolves ideas in regards to nations and peoples will also develop and change.
Nationalism was rising all over the world during these wars in Egypt, Mesopotamia, and Palestine. Thinking people did not realize back then, but hopefully they will realize in the future that now it is time for the world to heal and to become one. Giving the Jews their ancient land back hardly solved the problems of the region and for neither side. Humanitarianism and multiculturalism should encompass the world and tolerance should be the language that everyone speaks.
When reading Bluett there was a distinct negative tone to the language in the story in regards to Arabs, whereas Spackman came across as more reasonable. Bluett had his own religious beliefs and he hoped to see Christian prophecies become a reality in the future. He was a British man from a nation, which had its own goals for this region with its own interests.
Spackman mentions the mounds of Nineveh and the way the Old Testament God had asked Jonah to go to this city to speak to its people. At that time did he know about the Assyrians and their struggle?
Both of these individuals were well versed in Biblical tales. It may have come as a surprise to some of these people at the front line of the British army that these regions of the world held and hold the secrets to the history of the human race. Even the Arabs of the Middle East have a vast history in the region as conquerors bringing war to the region through Islam. Their language is Semitic, and they are a Semitic people like the Jews, Assyrians and others. The unfortunate thing about some of the nomadic Arab tribes at the time was that they were violent and lacked diplomacy. They were fanatic about their religion, which they themselves did not even entirely understand.
It is a great gift to students of history that books such as those of Bluett and Spackman have been written and can be read so that they can get into the minds of these people. The most difficult thing when writing in a sort of memoir is to completely hide prejudice and negative feelings towards others. Some are well aware of the negative connotation of being biased, and are well versed in the language, which make them seem impartial. Only geniuses can write false history in order to create an affect for generations of the future, and there have been many such writers. Though Bluett seemed more prejudiced towards Arabs than Spackman no one really knows how they truly felt.
The heart of the man at war is a mysterious ocean.
Today people have various feelings about the modern day Arabs especially because of the Islamic extremist group called ISIS. There are good and bad people in every nation. It seems the radical Islamic Arabs are going backward in to a dark time in history. Today three suicide bombers exploded themselves in an airport in Turkey and most news outlets are saying that once again it must be ISIS. The Arabs of the world need to rise up against this world threat if they want any good words said about their nation by intellectuals and the people of the world. If they ignore the evil acts that are being committed, those who write truthful history will reveal everything about some of their backward culture.
I reviewed Bluett Antony, “With Our Army in Palestine” (1919) and Spackman Bill, “Captured at Kut Prisoner of the Turks” (2008 ).
By Abbey Mikha
There is a video circulating on YouTube of president Obama’s previous speech from 2015 where he made the following comments, “Radical groups exploit grievances for their own game. One of those groups is ISIL which calls itself the Islamic State.” He continues, “Let’s make two things clear ISIL is not Islamic, no religion condones the killing of innocents and the vast majority of ISIL’s victims have been Muslims.”
My question to you president Obama is if ISIS is not Islamic than who are they and why are they using Islam? Why are they aggressively fighting and dying in the name of Islam? Wouldn’t it be more appropriate to say that ISIS is a new small but steadily growing extremist Islamic group like Al Qaida which is exhausting Islam to gain power, land, and a new terrifying Islamic culture? If ISIS is not Islamic than all the Muslim countries in the world should unite, stand up and fight for the honour of Islam against ISIS! Saudi Arabia should fight ISIS! Qatar should fight ISIS! Turkey should fight ISIS! The billions of Muslims should make their voices heard against ISIS! The brutality of ISIS should not be condoned by anyone as they are seeking to build their state inch by inch, day by day, at the cost of blood and souls of innocent men, women, and children from all around the world. Does the Islamic world want to be responsible for allowing the creation of a terror state in the Middle East which its sole purpose for existing is to attack true Muslims, Assyrian Christians, Yezidis, other minorities in the Middle East and create terror attacks in the Middle East, Europe, and North America? What kind of quality of life will the people of this world have if the Islamic State is successful and they take away all our freedoms?
President Obama isn’t it true that in her book your previous secretary of state Hillary Clinton acknowledged that America created and funded Al Qaeda as a terrorist organization in the prime of the Soviet-Afghan war? Mrs. Clinton was fine with all of this but when the revolution came about in Egypt and the Islamic brotherhood government and president were kicked out by thirty-eight million Egyptian demonstrators it changed the American plan.
The United States with its technology can see what is going on in Mars and other planets and beyond! The secret intelligent agency of United States is so powerful that we should ask them to tell us what they know and what they see in regards to ISIS. Tell us what are the plans of Islamic countries like Turkey, Saudi Arabia, and Qatar and the international Islamic brotherhood group in regards to ISIS? Mr. President how is ISIS functioning? Who is buying their oil? Who is buying them thousands and thousands of trucks and weapons to use in the fight against the world? How are the millions of dollars from oil sale being transferred and through which banks? Wondering which borders the oil barrels go through? Mainly what has been named “The moderate Islamic government of Turkey!” And also one of the big questions is what is the role of the government of Barazani in Northern Iraq in regards to ISIS? Is the dictator Barazani and his family and gang taking advantage of the fragile situation in Iraq and going ahead planning with the Turkish government lead by president Erdogan to sell the terrorist oil together and making millions of dollars? Yes that is definitely what is going on!
We want to believe you president Obama, but the American people and the world have a right to know the truth and you need to provide proof and answers in regards to ISIS truly not being Islamic! You cannot just say the majority of people they attack are Muslims because they have been annihilating Assyrian Christians and other minorities in Iraq and Syria. They are killing our people, stealing our land, and destroying our collective dream of a future Assyrian region in Iraq. Of course Mr. President you would never mention the Assyrian martyrs which have been murdered, raped, starved, and kidnapped by ISIS in Syria and Iraq. These are Assyrians and they are Christians! Were Al Qaida not Islamic Mr. President? What is the difference between ISIS and Al Qaida? We remember your friend Zbigniew Kazimierz Brzezinski in the time of Al Qaida fighting the Soviets praising Muslims calling them, “The Revolutionary Islamic Mojahideen.” Mr. President is this not another game like when the British sent Lawrence of Arabia to create Wahhabis for the Saudi family in World War I? Is this the extent the United States has gone to make sure its own interests are secured? Please Mr. President, the American people are searching and they will find everything they are searching for. Hope you had a good last year as president of the United States Obama. Greetings from the children of Assyria living in refugee camps in the North of Iraq who the world are ignoring and you consider too insignificant as a minority to even care about.
By Abbey Mikha
One does not have to look up stats to know that there are millions and millions of children living in extreme poverty all over the world. Advanced nations could eradicate child poverty but they do not because perhaps it does not suit their ideals or it is not in their own interest. They do not even destroy child poverty in their own countries, let alone others. From the time we as children attend kindergarten in western countries one of the main things we are taught is to share. So, why do not people who control the cash flow of the world share with children dying from lack of food, clean water, and sufficient health care?
Most children in Africa are suffering from food deficiency. There is also a lack of clean water and medical assistance and medication for diseases and even regular illnesses. The world harvests enough food to feed the entire world including these children. The question must be asked why these children do not have access to a consistent food supply.
The main method to eliminate the hunger crisis is for people all over the world to open their minds and hearts and to realize that there are people starving in Africa and other poverty afflicted locations worldwide. However, food is not the only major problem for African children. Other issues, such as slavery and forced armed forces participation are also problematic.
In the Middle East, specifically in Syria, because of the recent ongoing war there is a dire situation of child poverty. Education has collapsed in the country. Half of children that used to attend school did not during the 2014-2015 period. There are many stories of children losing parents and having to care for their young brothers and sisters. The situation for the children of Syria is dreadful and the world needs to lend a helping hand to these children who have suffered a great deal as a result of the wars in their country and in the region.
Assyrian Christian children in the North of Iraq and all over Iraq are also suffering today immensely. They are living in cramped refugee camps and they are allotted small rations of food each. For this reason many have become malnourished and hopeless. These children live in crowded refugee camps in their own country with only the clothes on their back. There is an uncertain future for them in this heart-breaking country because not enough world attention is being paid to their horrible and disastrous situation. The Assyrians are the indigenous people of Iraq and very little is being done to help them by the Iraqi government and also by foreign countries. They are being ignored, intimidated, and pushed around and are suffering from ethnic and religious persecution.
Iraq and all its children have suffered for many years since the first Gulf War and the embargo which came into effect August of 1990. This embargo brought much poverty to Iraq and millions of its children died or were negatively affected.
There are children all over the world living in lack. Poverty does not always discriminate based on color or race. Many children of the entire human race live in poverty and in every country of the world, even in countries like Canada and the United States.
People need to care about the children of the earth and each other. People need to realize that when they lend a helping hand to those who are impoverished and suffering in their life they are doing the least that they can do. One of the main goals of every established country should be the eradication of hunger and poverty in their own countries and other underdeveloped countries and crisis areas which are facing famine, war, and disease.
We were brought into this earth to do good especially in relation to other human beings. We are all one human race. It does not matter what our identity is: the color of our skin, the texture of our hair, or which God we worship. We all have two eyes, one nose, and a heart. This heart will regret every beat it lived in the end if the individual and nations do not help others in need.
As an Assyrian I say please help all the children of the world and include the children of my Assyrian nation as part of that human race. It is time to eradicate poverty and hunger and give hope to all the children of the world so that they may live and survive unto maturity. Only then can they have the hope of dreaming and in their future becoming whatever they wish to be.
By Abbey Mikha
The goddess Aphrodite is the mother of all, yet she is considered by some as a mythical being, which originated in ancient Greece. Many historians and scholars though have also associated her with earlier civilizations. There is evidence that she existed from the dawn of time, from the beginning of civilization, and from the foundation of religion on earth. According to the evidence found, some scholars attest to that Aphrodite was an epithet for the Sumerian goddess Inanna, who was later called Ishtar by the Assyrians, Ashtart by the Canaanites, and Ashtoreth by the Hebrews. In this essay these old theories will be reconsidered, not to cause more division in beliefs, rather to move away from concrete beliefs, and reintroduce the idea that no religion, whether ancient or modern is absolutely original, especially those religions who deny the rights of the woman, and the presence of The Woman. As Paul Friedrich notes in his book The Meaning of Aphrodite, “The love symbol, Aphrodite, has been proclaimed as having universal human relevance” (1).
Historiography of Aphrodite and Related Matters
The ancient love goddess has many origins and many histories (2). Many scholars from perhaps even before the time of Herodotus attest to that the worship of Aphrodite was of eastern origin (3). There was a continuous debate where some academics like Lewis Richard Farnell and James Fraser tried to prove this (4). Then there were various views like those of Stephanie Budin, which gave their view on syncretism of the various goddesses of ancient times. Those who did believe Aphrodite was eastern in origin usually connected her to the goddess Inanna of the Sumerians, Ishtar of the Assyrians, Ashtart of the Canaanites, and Ashtoreth of the Hebrews.
Where it concerns the stories of Inanna, Ishtar, Ashtart, and Ashtoreth it should be noted that translations of some ancient text were done by J.B. Pritchard, Stephanie Dalley, Diane Wolkstein and Samuel Noah Kramer (5). The idea behind trying to prove where Aphrodite is from, that she is actually the goddesses Inanna, Ishtar, Ashtart, and Ashtoreth which are also one in the same being, is that if such a connection truly exists amongst various religious figures, pantheons, and various cultures, like those of the Sumerians, Assyrians, Canaanites, Hebrews, and Greeks then it can also be noted that there must be other similar connections with all the various cultures of the world.
We are all human beings; we all belong to one earth, and that means we all need to learn to coexist peacefully. If people were more tolerant of ancient religions and not directly consider them as pagan, then we might learn something from the evolution of religion on earth. The world though seems to be heading in the direction of intolerance. So many times it has been said that people of various religions actually worship one God with different names. If this message could be spread amongst the human race and introduced into the education systems of the world, there might be less wars and hatred amongst peoples and nations.
The goddess Aphrodite was said to be born from the sea, the sea being a symbol for the unknown and mysteriousness, and many images depict her rising from waves (6), but Epimenides, an early Greek sage, taught his followers that Aphrodite was the daughter of Kronos, father of Zeus, in the generation before the Olympians (7).
Zecharia Sitchin on the Annunaki Including the goddess Inanna
Zecharia Sitchins books and theories are all based on the knowledge that the Sumerians gave to us. In the ruins of Sumerian cities excavated by archaeologists in the past century and a half, hundreds, if not thousands of the texts and illustrations that were found dealt with astronomy (8). On cuneiform tablets the Sumerians repeatedly wrote about a planet they called Nibiru, which literally means “Planet of the Crossing.” That is where Zecharia Sitchin says the Anunnaki or Nefilim (as called in the Hebrew Bible) came from. The term Anunnaki literally means, “Those Who from Heaven to Earth Came” (9). According to Zecharia Sitchin (who recently passed away at the age of 90) the goddess Inanna was one of those Annunaki. Zecharia claims that all the ancient gods can be traced back to Sumer. Some people blame Zecharia Sitchin for the Mayan Calendar hype, which supposedly proposes that this calendar, and the world, will end in 2012. In his good bye video Zecharia at 90 he clearly stated that the world was not coming to an end so soon and he agreed more with the Newtonian theories of how much time there is left on Earth.
Aphrodite, Inanna, Ishtar, Ashtart, and Ashtoreth
There is an eternal earthly truth in the statement by Mark Morford and Robert Lenardon that, “the contrast between myth and reality has been a major philosophical concern at least since the time of the Pre-Socratics” (10), Myth though is a cultural phenomenon that has evolved from the beginning of civilization. It is not there for us to cloud our consciousness; rather it is there for us to make clearer what we cannot understand and to perhaps answer many of our unanswerable questions. The truth is that Aphrodite‘s story has eternal universal values and a spiritual truth. Perhaps she is a gift from another world to this world.
Deborah Boedeker mentions how Pausanias believed that Aphrodite was worshipped by the Assyrians. It is interesting to note that the Greeks called Assyria by the name of Syria by dropping the vowel at the front of the word, whereby Ashur became Shure, and later became Syria. Nonetheless, she says that Aphrodite and Ishtar‘s association with the sky “could thus provide a basis for identifying Aphrodite with a goddess like Astart Queen of Heaven or Ishtar Daughter of Anu” (11). Similarly to Aphrodite, Ashtart is even called the Holy Queen (12).
Miroslav Marcovich also asserts that Aphrodite was an immigrant goddess from Lebanon, and Syria (13). He emphasizes that as far back as 3000 B.C there existed a Sumerian goddess named Inanna, who he says her Akkadian name was Esh-tar (14). He also says that she is “particularly well represented in Canaan, a fact of importance for Israel, as Ashtar(t), Ashtoret, Ashtoreth, and Astarte” (15). Ishtar is also sometimes called the “Queen of Heaven”, as the planet Venus, as the Morning Star and the Evening Star full of grace (16).
Paul Friedrich states that, “Inanna appears at the dawn of history as the dominant divinity of the Sumerians, architects of the most innovative civilization after the Neolithic” (17). He contends that the name Aphrodite is actually a non- Greek word that could be related to others names. He states that Aphrodite like her grandmother Ishtar has the epithet heavenly. Miroslav Marcovich contends that the Virgin Mary “inherited from Aphrodite the functions of Queen of Heaven, the Morning Star full of Grace” (18).
In his book The Meaning of Aphrodite, Paul Friedrich also tries to trace the origins of Aphrodite. He expresses that although Aphrodite was one of the more interesting gods, she has been ignored by Historians. He says that they seem to “edge away from a discussion of her” (19). Friedrich concludes that, “Early Greek religion was significantly Semitic in origin” (20). It is interesting to note that Friedrich mentions that, “a conflated Inanna-Ishtar rite of marriage probably underlies the wedding rites of the Song of Solomon (21).
Furthermore, similarities between Aphrodite, Inanna, Ishtar, Ashtart, and Ashtoreth are symbols like the dove as their bird, the alters for burning incense and perfume, and the famous oriental garden of Aphrodite, and Ashtoreth which was filled with fruits and flowers (22). A strange yet interesting similarity between the Aphrodite of Cyprus and that of the Assyrian goddess Ishtar is a supposed Babylonian custom whereby some women of the land prostituted themselves at the temple of Aphrodite or Ishtar by having intercourse with a stranger (23). This may be a myth, but this among other things is the reason Ishtar is also sometimes called the holy prostitute.
Another similarity between the various goddesses is the tales of their lovers. Aphrodite‘s most famous lover is certainly Adonis, but Adonis existed long before the Greeks gave him this name (24). To the people of ancient Mesopotamia his name was Tammuz and Dumuzi. The Sumerians tell the tale on cuneiform tablets where the goddess Inanna wanted to marry. She questioned her brother Utu on who should be her partner. She said, “Who will share my bed with me, brother” (25)? In the end Dumuzi the shepherd god proves himself worthy to Inanna by telling her about his virtues (26). After the marriage to Dumuzi Inanna dared to defy the universe and do many courageous things. She even traveled to the underworld, where her sister, Ereshkigal, was queen (27). This tenacious quality in Inanna strikes a chord with the personalities of Aphrodite, Ishtar, Ashtart, and Ashtoreth who were likewise fearless.
In his book Venus a Biography Andrew Dalby states that women throughout ancient times prayed to these goddesses: “Ishtar and Inanna, like Aphrodite and Venus, acknowledged the prayers and responded to the magic practices of women who hoped by this means to make themselves beautiful, to be desired by all, or to be loved faithfully by one person to the exclusion of all others.” Similarly to the way humans today pray to God.
Analysis of Stephanie Budins Aphrodite-Ashtart Syncretism View
Stephanie Budin believes that scholars have for a long time recognized an “interpretation syncretism, between Aphrodite and the Phoenician goddess Ashtart” (28). She says that “the origin of this syncretism is usually attributes to the eastern origins of Aphrodite herself, whereby the Greek goddess evolves out of the Phoenician, as is suggested as early as the writings of Herodotus” (29). She believes that Aphrodite was “Orientalized by the Greeks to an extent.” She says:
“I argue here that the perceived syncretism actually emerged differently on the island of Cyprus than throughout the rest of the Mediterranean. On Cyprus, the syncretism emerged out of identification between the two goddesses of Cyprus—Aphrodite and Ashtart. In Greece, by contrast, it evolved out of a slow orientalizing of Aphrodite combined with a Greek tendency to equate almost all eastern goddesses. As a result, the identification between Aphrodite and Ashtart was quite general, and both goddesses were syncretized not only with each other, but also with a full range of Mediterranean goddesses” (30).
Budin says that interest in Near Eastern influences on Greek culture has grown in the past century. However, she believes that:
“This inquiry has long been hampered by one basic misconception concerning the early relationship between these two goddesses: that Aphrodite evolved, to on extent or another, out of Levantine Ashtart. Based on this hypothesis, it is inevitable that one would assume that the Aphrodite-Ashtart syncretism dates back to the origins of Aphrodite herself, and that the syncretism as the ancient Greeks saw it was merely the result of historical fact” (31).
She also indicates that deities of the same gender in one or more pantheons are seen as being the same god or goddess in ancient Greece (32). Budin also says that “Long-term parallelism may eventually cause amalgamation to occur, so that a new deity, or a new conception of the old deities, comes into existence” (33). She continues:
“This is due to the Greeks own understanding of the universalism of their pantheon. That is to say, the Greeks believed that all peoples worshipped the same deities, although obviously with different names and different customs…As such, as the Greeks came into contact with different cultures, rather than recognizing the individual characters and identities of the foreign‖ deities, the Greeks equated them (interpretation) with their own gods” (34).
She also says that the Greeks seemed to also believe that Ashtart was just another name for Aphrodite, and vice versa for the Phoenicians (35). Budin addresses the issue of sacred prostitution and says that, “Selling sex for the profit of a deity was invented by Herodotus in Book 1.199 of his Histories” (36). She concludes that sacred prostitution is a myth, and should not be used as evidence to support the Aphrodite- Ashtart syncretism. She says that, “When the early Semites came into contact with the Sumerians in Mesopotamia, they adjusted some of their deities to have them align with the Sumerian pantheon” (37). She says that the difference between Ashtart and both Ishtar and the Sumerian Inanna is that she does not “manifest or revel in her own sexuality” (38).
In the end though she acknowledges that, “The common belief is that Aphrodite emerged out of Ashtart, thus Ishtar->Ashtart->Aphrodite” (39). In contrast to this, Budin argues that, “While both Ashtart and Aphrodite did evolve from Ishtar, this was a parallel development, although not synchronic; both goddesses evolved separately, developing their own, distinct personae along the way” (40). She continues that “Ashtart clearly maintained the belligerent aspects of Ishtar, while Aphrodite, possibly having more militaristic qualities in Cyprus and very early Greece, maintained the more erotic aspect of the Mesopotamian goddess” (41).
However she says, “It is evident that the Greeks thought of Aphrodite as oriental long before they knew the name Ashtart. Aphrodite appears as “The Cypriot” as early as Homer, and the Syrian by the 6th century (42). In regards to Aphrodite‘s mate Budin says that, “It is universally accepted that Adonis derives from the Near East. His name is clearly a Hellenization of the title Adon, meaning Lord (43).
In regards to the matter of Aphrodite having evolved from earlier more ancient eastern goddesses, Stephanie Budin contends that the Ashtart-Aphrodite syncretism is an exaggeration. She says that, “While it is true that some evidence does show that Aphrodite Ourania specifically was equated with Palestinian Ashtart, alternate data reveal Aphrodite as Anaitis, Atargatis, and even Isis (44).
Stephanie Budin‘s view is very interesting, but she could not deny the many similarities between Aphrodite and the various Eastern goddesses. She mentions many interesting differences, but in her very thoughtful and detailed essay she could not declare that Aphrodite was or is exclusively Greek and there are many more similarities than differences between Aphrodite and the goddesses Inanna, Ishtar, Ashtart, and Ashtoreth.
This essay first discussed the historiography of Aphrodite. Then it reflected on the recently passed Historian Zecharia Sitchin‘s theories about the Annunaki and the goddess Inanna. There was also an analysis of Stephanie Budins Aphrodite-Ashtart syncretism view. According to the evidence found, some scholars attest to that Aphrodite was an epithet for the Sumerian goddess Inanna, who was later called Ishtar by the Assyrians, Ashtart by the Canaanites, and Ashtoreth by the Hebrews.
The truth is that European civilization has been greatly influenced in many ways by the world of the Greeks. It is often forgotten that the Greek civilization, religion, and culture was also largely influenced by other more ancient empires and cultures. When we remember the olden civilizations like those of the Sumerians, Assyrians, Canaanites, and even the ancient Hebrews, we become fairer in regards to history, if that is at all possible.
It has been said many times that as a human race we must know our past in order to know our future. That also includes the distant past of many thousand years ago. To know ones past is to better know ones fate and not just as an individual but as a species. Aphrodite, Innana, Ishtar, Ashtart, and Ashtoreth are all part of that past which leads the human race to its Mother.
1. Paul Friedrich. The Meaning of Aphrodite. (The University of Chicago Press, 1978), 2
2. Andrew Dalby. Venus a Biography. (London: Paul Getty Museum Press, 2005), 11.
3. Friedrich. The Meaning of Aphrodite. (The University of Chicago Press, 1978), 12.
4. Friedrich. The Meaning of Aphrodite. ( The University of Chicago Press, 1978, 13.
5. Dalby. Venus a Biography. (London: The J. Paul Getty Museum Press, 2005), 137.
6. Dalby. Venus a Biography. (London: The J. Paul Getty Museum Press, 2005), 9.
7. Dalby. Venus a Biography. (London: The J. Paul Getty Museum Press, 2005), 10.
8. Zecharia Sitchin. Genesis Revisited. (Vermont, Bear & Company. 2002), 15.
9. Zecharia Sitchin. Genesis Revisited. (Vermont, Bear & Company. 2002), 19.
10. Mark Morford, and Robert Lenardon. Classical Mythology. (New York and London, Longman Publishing Group, 1991), 7.
11. Deborah Boedeker, Aphrodite Entry into Greek Epic, (Netherlands, Bibliotheca Classica Batava, 1974), 4.
12. Stephanie Budin. “A Reconsideration of the Aphrodite-Ashtart Syncretism,” Numen Vol. 51, No. 2 (2004) Published by: BRILL, 108.
13. Miroslav Marcovich, “From Ishtar to Aphrodite,” Journal of Aesthetic Education Vol. 30, No. 2. 1996, 45.
14. Marcovich, “From Ishtar to Aphrodite,” Aesthetic Education, 45.
15. Marcovich, “From Ishtar to Aphrodite,” Aesthetic Education, 45.
16. Marcovich, “From Ishtar to Aphrodite,” Aesthetic Education, 48.
17. Friedrich. The Meaning of Aphrodite. (The University of Chicago Press, 1978), 13.
18. Marcovich, “From Ishtar to Aphrodite,” Aesthetic Education, 48.
19. Friedrich, The Meaning of Aphrodite, (Chicago Press, 1978), 1.
20. Friedrich, The Meaning of Aphrodite, (Chicago Press, 1978), 22.
21. Paul Friedrich. The Meaning of Aphrodite. (The University of Chicago Press, 1978). 16.
22. Marcovich, “From Ishtar to Aphrodite,” Aesthetic Education, 51.
23. Friedrich. The Meaning of Aphrodite. (The University of Chicago Press, 1978), 199.
24. Dalby. Venus a Biography. (London: The J. Paul Getty Museum Press, 2005), 63.
25. Dalby. Venus a Biography. (London: Getty Museum Press), 63.
26. Dalby. Venus a Biography. (London: Getty Museum Press), 63.
27. Dalby. Venus a Biography. (London: Getty Museum Press, 2005), 63.
28. Stephanie Budin. “A Reconsideration of the Aphrodite-Ashtart Syncretism,” Numen Vol. 51, No. 2 (2004) Published by: BRILL, 95.
29. Budin, “Reconsideration of Aphrodite-Ashtart Syncretism,” 95.
30. Budin. “A Reconsideration of Aphrodite-Ashtart Syncretism,” 95.
31. Budin. “A Reconsideration of the Aphrodite-Ashtart Syncretism,” 95.
32. Budin. “A Reconsideration of Aphrodite-Ashtart Syncretism,” 97.
33. Budin. “A Reconsideration of Aphrodite-Ashtart Syncretism,” 98.
34. Budin. “A Reconsideration of Aphrodite-Ashtart Syncretism,” 98.
35. Budin. “A Reconsideration of Aphrodite-Ashtart Syncretism,” 101.
36. Budin. “A Reconsideration of Aphrodite-Ashtart Syncretism,” 102.
37. Budin. “A Reconsideration of Aphrodite-Ashtart Syncretism, ” 104.
38. Budin. “A Reconsideration of Aphrodite-Ashtart Syncretism,” 107.
39. Budin. “A Reconsideration of Aphrodite-Ashtart Syncretism,” 110.
40. Budin. “A Reconsideration of Aphrodite-Ashtart Syncretism,” 110-111.
41. Budin, “A Reconsideration of Aphrodite-Ashtart Syncretism,” 111.
42. Budin. “A Reconsideration of Aphrodite-Ashtart Syncretism,” 121.
43. Budin, “A Reconsideration of Aphrodite-Ashtart Syncretism,” 122.
44. Budin, “A Reconsideration of Aphrodite-Ashtart Syncretism,” 133.
Boedeker Dickmann Debrah. Aphrodite’s Entry into Greek Epic, Netherlands:
Bibliotheca Classica Batava, 1974.
Budin L. Stephanie, “A Reconsideration of the Aphrodite-Ashtart Syncretism”,‖ Numen Vol. 51, No. 2 (2004), pp. 95-145. Published by: BRILL, http://www.jstor.org/stable/3270523 (accessed October 8th, 2010), Jstore.
Cavendish Richard. Man, Myth and Magic: The Illustrated Encyclopedia of Mythology, Religion and the Unknown. http://www.mindspring.com/~mysticgryphon/inhymn.htm. (accessed October 15, 2010)
Dalby Andrew. Venus a Biography. London: The J. Paul Getty Museum Press, 2005.
Miroslav Marcovich, “From Ishtar to Aphrodite”. ‖ Journal of Aesthetic Education Vol. 30, No. 2, Special Issue: Distinguished Humanities Lectures II (Summer, 1996), pp. 43-59 Published by: University of Illinois Press, http://www.jstor.org/stable/3333191 (accessed October 8th, 2010), Jstor.
Morford Mark, and Lenardon Robert. Classical Mythology. New York and London: Longman Publishing Group, 1991.
Paul Friedrich. The Meaning of Aphrodite. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1978.
Rivkah Harris, “Inanna-Ishtar as a Paradox and Coincidence of Opposite”, History of Religions, Vol. 30, No. 3 (Feb., 1991), pp. 261-278, Published by: The University of Chicago Press, http://www.jstor.org/stable/1062957, (accessed October 12th 2010), Jstor.
Sitchin Zecharia. Genesis Revisited. Vermont: Bear & Company, 2002.
Sophocles, Selected Poems, trans. Reginald Gibbons. (New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 2008), 25.
Wolkstein Diane and Samuel Noah Kramer. Inanna Queen of Heaven and Earth: Her Stories and Hymns from Sumer. http://www.inanna.virtualave.net/inannatext1.html. (accessed October 23rd, 2010).
By Abbey Mikha
Harmony manifested within the Aboriginal peoples spirituality and spirituality was intertwined with every aspect of their being. Harmony was therefore omnipresent in the Aboriginal way of life. The ancient Aboriginal peoples understood that to be in harmony with all things was not only the most divine way to live, but for them the only way to live. Their sacrament was one of being in harmony.
Harmony was the vine at the centre of their circle which is life that branched out and touched many aspects of their existence, shaping the ways in which they interacted and related to nature with compassion, creating balance within their autonomous non-hierarchical social organization and embodied within their respect for the individual identity of their children.
Harmony shaped the ways in which the Aboriginal peoples interacted with and related to nature with compassion. They had a deep, close, spiritual connections to their land, to the extent that it was tied to their own identity.
In the article Bkejwanong it said that the Aboriginal peoples wanted to protect their land, their Mother Earth, which they believe to be their soul. It also said that Aboriginal peoples retained values, traditions, and knowledge that are inspired by the principle of living in harmony with the natural world. This being a primary ethic in their civilization embodied within their love for the earth and all its creations. If one crop was not available for them, others were used and they never over exploited one specific resource because they believed that the Creator held them responsible for the natural world. A Cree Proverb describing these preservationist attitudes states:
“Only when the last tree is cut; only when the last river is polluted; only when the last fish is caught; only then will they realize that you cannot eat money.”
The Aboriginal peoples valued nature more than the accumulation of riches. In the article Bkejwanong it also said that they believe, “We are spiritual beings, as such, our sources of life are all around us – the four elements of Earth, Water, Air and Fire.” These elements were sacred and respected by the Aboriginal peoples who lived life compassionately at one with them.
The autonomous non-hierarchical social organization of the Aboriginal peoples was balanced because humans were at the centre of all things, rule was communal, and women had high degree of status and were allowed to take part in decision-making. Like for example the sister of Joseph Grant Mohawk who had a lot of power and influence in the Iroquois society. In the article Bkejwanong it said that a strong feature of the Aboriginal culture was that emphasis on community, on sharing resources through good and bad times, and on group decision-making through consensus. When the masculine and female psyches and essences were animate in such an atmosphere harmony was mediating.
Harmony was additionally embodied within the Aboriginal peoples respect for the individual identity of their children. In Eleanor Leacock’s article Le Jeune noted that, “Aboriginals cannot endure in the least those who seem desirous of assuming superiority over others and that they place all virtue in a certain gentleness or apathy.”
He also stated that, “Aboriginals cannot bear to have their children punished or even scolded.” These sentiments are interrelated with Aboriginals child rearing ways since they did not practise corporal punishment. Other societies use this sort of punishment because they want to shape the identity of their children by forcing them into submission restricting the child’s identity and personality. This contributes to a climate of violence, leaves a negative impression on children who are the most sensitive beings of all humankind and implies that society approves of their physical violation. Aboriginals instinctively knew this to be unhealthy and unnecessary to shape the psyches of their children in such a way. This lack of need for control of their childrens identities and superiority over them, speaks of confidence the Aboriginal peoples had in their identity as a nation and in the potential identity of their children within that nation. They knew their children’s individuality would shape themselves naturally more positively without their unnecessary intimidating interferences. A child after all is an innocent being and should be treated with benevolence.
In a society where generosity is of the highest value harmony cannot but be a pre-eminent melody and for the Aboriginal peoples harmony was as much a part of life as wind is a part of spring. Balance within the Aboriginals autonomous non-hierarchical social organization was achieved through an incarnation of harmony within the equality between genders in a community where rule was communal. Aboriginal peoples were part of the cycle of the earth. They lived life in love with nature and in that love abided harmony. Harmony was also found within the respect the Aboriginal peoples had for the individual identity of the most defenceless of souls, their children. These variables all gave witness to an advanced consciousness that embraces the ethos of equality for all.
In modern days it is a great achievement when an ethos is made into law. For the Aboriginal peoples the ethos of equality did not need to be made into law, it existed, as surely as birds own no castles other than the wilderness but one can still hear compassion in their voices when they sing for all of humankind. Authority and culture for the Aboriginal peoples was not based on gender, or even age, but also good will, civility, humanity, and harmony is at peace in such values...
Eleanor Leacock’s, Montagnais Women and the Jesuit Program for Colonization. An article from a class about Aboriginals.
Jacob Deans, Bkejwanong The Place Where the Waters Divide. An article from a class on Aboriginals of Canada.
To get Abbey's newsletter please add your email to the contact form bellow. Thank you!
Abbey is a writer and blogger interested in humanitarian issues. She is also a defender of her Assyrian nation, from a young age spreading the Sacred Assyrian Message.
All articles at the Assyrian Thinker website are the copyright (©) 2016 Abbey Mikha