User talk:Djwilms/Archive 3

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

Chinese suzerainty over Vietnam

Djwilms, i saw your discussion regarding Chinese suzerainty over Vietnam here [1], and i would like to leave a comment. I personally don't think the Vietnamese tribute missions to China ever ceased during the time from 15th century to 19th century. Perhaps there were some brief times, when the throne changed hand between Ming and Ching dynasties, and also when Vietnam was in political turmoil, as of the transition period of the Mạc Dynasty. Whatever Ming Mang might think, officially he still spent an unusually lavish welcoming party for Chinese envoy when they came to bestow the Ching's blessing to his coronation. As a Vietnamese, I often regard these acts as a diplomatic way of dealing with China, to flatter and feign obedience, to avoid possible military conflict. And as some other authors had pointed out (sorry I can't remember whom), those missions times and again could be considered as trade missions, for the Chinese gave richly gifts with equal values to the tribute, not just with Vietnam, but with all other vassal states of China. I don't know why there is little records exist of those envoys, but I strongly believe the Vietnamese court gave no excuse to China to show their displeasure. As Vietnamese historians often pointed out, Vietnamese leaders understood well that even though they might win militarily, the shear size and might of China would guaranty a complete devastation of the country in the even of a war with China, so it was prudent to save face to China so everybody could live in peace.

You are absolutely correct when saying "Vietnamese don't considered themselves as tributaries in any meaningful sense". China indeed had little, or no saying over our own domestic affairs, and even on the occasions when Vietnam went to war with other China's South East Asia "tributaries". Vietnamse kings often called themselves "hoang de" (emperor) addressing their own subjects or other South East Asia rulers, but used "vuong" (king) when dealing with the Chinese. They simply didn't want to provoke the Chinese. The incident of Franco-Sino war was perhaps the first time a Chinese intervention was called to defend Vietnam against a foreign power aggression. And China went to war to defend its own interests (e.g. protect their southern border and/or annexing provinces in Tonkin). But to use the frequency of tribute missions as evidence of the Chinese's loose suzerainty over Vietnam would be irrelevant. (sorry i can't find a better word instead of "irrelevant", i'm not a native English speaker) But i do hope you will find some other evidence to support your point, and i'm looking forward to reading your book. Tdatnguyen (talk) 21:22, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

Dear Wikisir,

Would I, humble (book)worm in sino-vietnamese history, dare make some suggestions to the honourable scholar Djwilms?

Yes.

(I posted these comments here and discovered later that some of them duplicate those of Tdatnguyen above.)

1. First, you happily mix different terms (tributary, suzerainty, vassalage) which have different meanings in English (for example, there can be a tributary relation of A vis-à-vis B without sovereignty of B over A) – and may even mean different things when applied to different periods of (Western) history. These terms are themselves approximate translations of Chinese (and sino-vietnamese) terms which have themselves changed meaning over time.

2. Second, the subordinate relationship between China and Vietnam is not reflected only by tribute missions sent from Vietnam to China. It included also:

• a. The letters patent (tche-chou) issued by the Peking court to the Annam ruler. Devéria (1880) discusses the issue of the proper translation of tche_chou (footnote 1, p.7)
• b. The very humiliating investiture ceremonies during which the new Annam emperor had to kneel down three times and kowtow nine times in front of the emissaries of the Chinese court. The Chinese even insisted that at each of the nine kowtows, the front of the Annam ruler had to touch the ground. Lê-hiên-tông (1740-1786) could avoid the ceremony for 20 years because his uncle Lê Ý Tông (1735-1740) had resigned and was still alive (the investiture ceremony was usually combined with a ceremony for the former Annam emperor). When he received he imperial investiture in 1761 and tried to do only five kowtows, he was publicly scolded by the celest envoys and had got to comply. He was later sent a blistering imperial decree dated 1762 reminding him that he had better follow the proper étiquette and that his unruly behaviour was pardoned just because “the customs of this price have remained primitive”. Gabriel Devéria The Vietnamese had paid some of the expenses of the imperial emissaries; this was unacceptable, and the decree ordered with the utmost contempt the money to be given back to the Annam envoy.
• c. The imperial seal provided by China to the Vietnamese emperor. When Lê Huyền Tông (1663-1671) asked for the imperial investiture to the new Manchu court, the latter requested Annam to return beforehand the seal given in 1659 by a Ming prince (a kind of unsuccessful de Gaulle) to his father Lê Thần Tông (1649-1662). Lê Huyền Tông dragged his feet for three years (who knows? The Ching may make a comeback!) and returned the seal only in 1666. He could then receive the official investiture.
• d. Plenty of other testimonies of submission, such as the numerous missions to the viceroys of Guangdong and Yunnan.

3. I am very surprised that you could write "In my view, it (i.e., a tributary relationship?) did not exist between the fifteenth and eighteenth centuries." In 1663, the Chinese court requested Annam to send a tribute every three years, a frequency strangely replaced around 1672 by two tributes every six years. Devéria (1880) lists a number of tribute mission sent by Annam before the reign of Gia Long.

4. You say that "no tribute missions are recorded during the reign of Minh Mang". Maurice Durand (1957) provides the details of such a mission (and indications on many others). As for Thiệu Trị, I do not know of his relations – if any - with the Peking court.

5. It seems clear that China’s "suzerainty" over Vietnam had been steadily eroding over the years. China was decaying and too busy with its innumerable revolts, its secret societies uprisings (down with the Ching, bring back the Ming!) and those incomprehensible foreign devils (the gun-toting and the bible-fundamentalist-martyrdom-seekers ones) to deal with its equally petrified southern neighbour. It also seems clear that Tự Đức sudden sinophily was politically motivated. If suzerainty implies control over foreign affairs and limited autonomy, it can be argued that China had lost "suzerainty" over Annam since Lê Lợi.

File:Kowtow.jpg

6. But it also seems that Annam remained a tributary of China until 1874, although mainly – and increasingly - at a symbolic level, and with increasing delays and "oversights" (Thiệu Trị?). Would I dare say that "the Vietnamese considered themselves as formally tributaries, but not as vassals in any meaningful sense"? Yes.

7. Anyway, are suzerain / vassal proper terms to describe the evolving relationship between China and Annam? One could even consider whether newer terms would be more appropriate. Annam was clearly not a puppet State a satellite State or a client State. There was not a single representative from Peking at the Huê court to influence local policies (or am I wrong?). Protectorate seems inadequate - China did not protect Annam against its neighbours. Buffer state looks awkward. But, after all, China saw Annam as a hedge between the Middle Kingdom and faraway devils.

After having exposed my almost total ignorance of the subject, will the great Wikischolar forgive my impudent impertinence?

Three kowtows and best wishes for your book.--André de StCoeur (talk) 22:57, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

Annam flags

With reference to your questions on flags, you may find the information you look for here in English, here in French and in Vietnamese here. Note that when the British-US force took over briefly Annam, the country was given a new flag. When the anglo-saxons were driven off by the Bigouden the country had still another flag with some variants.

As regards the shade of yellow, the best way is to use colour photographs taken at the time: in a blockhaus near Tuyên Quang, a command post or in this observation station (notice the armoured chariot nearby). Notice also the bullet holes in the uniform of this female soldier. This one waves the yellow flag while sporting a futuristic uniform.

Soldiers use to hide underground, but where easily spotted by the légionnaires because of their flags, as here or here.

Sometimes soldiers used the flag as uniform as these soldiers or that one.

Inscriptions on the flag were designed as threats against French forces or warnings, more warnings or even mockery.

The Long tinh kỳ was used to enroll volunteers. Because of their financial situation There is evidence that Vietnamese generals had flags used for commercial purposes as here or here.

The Vietnamese naval forces also used the yellow flag, as here. Here, one see clearly that the flag of the Vietnamese Admiral is yellow. The flag was also used as a symbol of French domination.

You can also see variants of the flag carried by Tu Duc invading the Paracels, with a variant of the Gia Long flag. The Annam flag flowing over the Paracels.

Finally an interesting picture of a proud Annam cuirassier under the yellow flag and the red flag with a star rushing to stop the invading French navy.

--Touchatou (talk) 22:40, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

Casualties

Sir,

The description of the Battle of Bang Bo (Zhennan Pass) does not fit with the one given in the article on Feng Zicai - note that the latter article does not include any reference, but may have been influenced by the prolific and highly unreliable Mitch Williamson 1884-1885 Franco-Chinese War.

The numbers given in the paragraph “casualties” in Battle of Bang Bo (Zhennan Pass) (146 killed in the five units mentioned) do not tally with the number of casualties on the French side at the top (74 killed, less than the 79 killed in Verdier’s brigade - see Harmant 1892 p.235). Moreover, on 21 August 2009, anonymous "66.108.141.251" has still reduced without any explanation the number to 63 (and other figures as well). I did not revert it because the original figure seems wrong.

More generally, are you sure the numbers of casualties you provide for "the French" include those of Vietnamese units under French command?

--André de StCoeur (talk) 01:20, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

Hi Andre,

French casualties were 74 killed and 213 wounded. The lower figure of 63 dead in the infobox is wrong, and I have amended it accordingly. I'm not sure where it comes from. I thought at first it might be just the French casualties on 24 March instead of on both days, but there were 70 French dead on 24 March, not 63.

The casualty figures include those for the Tonkinese Rifles, who were scarcely engaged. The French used them to bring in the wounded rather than in the front line. Here's a convenient summary of the Bang Bo casualties from my book:

The 2nd Brigade's casualties on 24 March were 70 killed and 188 wounded, bringing its total losses during the two-day battle to 74 killed and 213 wounded. Seven officers were either killed or mortally wounded during the heavy fighting on 24 March, and six more were seriously wounded. The butcher's bill was not quite as bad as at Hoa Moc, but it was worse than in any of the battles of the Lang Son campaign, even Bac Vie. Unsurprisingly, the unfortunate 111th Line Battalion suffered the heaviest losses (31 dead and 58 wounded), but Diguet's Legion battalion (12 dead and 68 wounded) ran it a close second. The 143rd Battalion also suffered appreciable casualties (17 dead and 48 wounded), as did Schoeffer's Legion battalion (12 dead and 34 wounded). There were only a handful of casualties among the Tonkinese riflemen and the two French artillery batteries, but they included chef de bataillon Tonnot of the Tonkinese Rifles, who was wounded.

I don't have Harmant immediately to hand (you mention his figure of 79 dead, I'll need to look at that again), but I have based my casualty figures on a careful comparison of several French primary sources for the battle of Bang Bo, including Harmant: Armengaud, Lang-Son, 40–58; Harmant, La vérité sur la retraite de Lang-Son, 211–35; Lecomte, Lang-Son, 428–53 and 455; Maury, Mes campagnes au Tong-King, 185–203; and Notes sur la campagne du 3e bataillon de la légion étrangère au Tonkin, 32–40. I have also taken into account discussion in secondary sources, including Bonifacy, À propos d’une collection des peintures chinoises, 23–6 and Thomazi's two accounts (Histoire militaire de l’Indochine française, 111–12 and La conquête de l’Indochine, 254–7).

I have seen the grotesque description of Bang Bo in the article Feng Zicai, and I will replace it with an accurate account when I have time.

Thanks for pointing this out. Constant vigilance against the forces of chaos seems to be necessary on Wikipedia.

Djwilms (talk) 01:22, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

Honourable defender of the truth,

Forget about your copy of Harmant, you will never find it the mess you call bookshelves. You can consult it in flip book format here.

I must have double-counted the dead to get 146.

I have used Feng Zicai to finalize the French version fr:Feng Zicai formerly on my French page. Please correct the errors (but don't start an edition war with a billion Chinese nationalists)

Maybe one could compare Zeng and the Bang Bo / Ky Lua affair to Vo_Nguyên_Giap and the 1968 Têt offensive : both endured a bloody defeat which became a victory through the magic wand of politics.

--André de StCoeur (talk) 22:57, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

Hi Djwilms

An article such as "Diplomacy of the Sino-French war" sounds like a great idea indeed. Please go ahead with the edits you see fit!
Here's the template you requested:

Cheers PHG ^{Per Honor et Gloria} 18:00, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

Congratulations on all your hard work

	I have been reading the article you have created entitled Dioceses of the Church of the East and I must say it is an excellent, well-resourced, authoritative historical account of the Assyrian Church of the East. I would like to award you this barnstar on behalf of WikiProject Assyria for writing this eloquent document. Keep up the great work my friend.Best Regards Ninevite (talk) 21:00, 11 August 2009 (UTC) The Barnstar of Assyria

Here are some useful links I found that may be of interest to you.

• http://nestorian.org/
• http://nestorian.org/christianity_arrived_in_japan_.html

The homepage of this website is filled with countless articles that will be helpful towards your expansion of the Dioceses of the Church of the East and related articles you plan to work on in the near future. The second link discusses how the Church went as far as Japan. Perhaps you could write something on that based of the information from the link. The introductory sentence mentions that the church reached as far as China, perhaps this could be changed to Japan. I will let you make the judgment on that since you are the expert in the field. Good Day Ninevite (talk) 21:00, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Hello DJ as far as writing and adding brackets to Syriac text, I can direct you to an expert on wikipedia who is a main contributor to Aramaic Wikipedia. The userpage of this gentlemen is User:334a, He has helped me translate articles before as well as adding intermediate links for Syriac hyperlinks. Unlike me he has multiple Syriac fonts on his computer. I have left him a message, the next time he logs in he should get it. I hope this helps. Ninevite (talk) 17:22, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

Seeing your your most recent article on the church in Salamas, I think this website will be of some interest to you. My cousins back in Iran attend the church. Hope you enjoy. Ninevite (talk) 18:50, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

I am glad to be of service to you, apologies for not responding back quicker, I have been fighting a bad cold lately but I feel much better now. My knowledge is limited on provenance; however I may be of some help for you on the Syriac words. I highly recommend you download the Assyrian fonts on your computer so it will be easier for you to type. Check this link out. This link is an online dictionary of preinstalled Assyrian words where you can copy and paste words that are already written. Check this same link out too all you have to do is write its English equivalent and it gives you the Assyrian translation. I hope this helps, and by the way, if you still plan on writing a new book on the ACOE, I would be one of the first to buy it out my interest. Ninevite (talk) 03:57, 1 November 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Kirkuk (Chaldean Archdiocese)

A tag has been placed on Kirkuk (Chaldean Archdiocese) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be a blatant copyright infringement. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words.

If the external website belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text — which means allowing other people to modify it — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. If you are not the owner of the external website but have permission from that owner, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission. You might want to look at Wikipedia's policies and guidelines for more details, or ask a question here.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Favonian (talk) 09:08, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

November 2009

Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but you removed a speedy deletion tag from Kirkuk (Chaldean Archdiocese), a page you have created yourself. If you do not believe the page should be deleted, you can place a {{hangon}} tag on the page, under the existing speedy deletion tag (please do not remove the speedy deletion tag), and make your case on the page's talk page. Administrators will look at your reasoning before deciding what to do with the page. Thank you. Favonian (talk) 09:12, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

Please don't remove the copyvio tag. As far as I can see, a considerable portion of this article it taken from Wilmshurst's book. If you are in fact Wilmshurst (guessing from you user name) you will still have to settle the copyright issue. Favonian (talk) 09:15, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

I am indeed he, and if you prefer I can always substitute text from an earlier draft of the book, which presumably is not in copyright since it wasn't the final text that appears in the book. But do give me more than five minutes, I'd hardly started setting up the article before the tags started appearing.

What I have been doing recently, in my suite of articles on the Chaldean Church, is substantially modifying the text that appeared in my book by expanding it, reorganising it, adding Syriac names of villages and giving more precise footnotes. I intend to do exactly the same with the Kirkuk article if given a chance.

Djwilms (talk) 09:20, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

I just commented on the issue on the article's talk page. Per AGF, I won't reinstate the copyvio tag right now, but please reword the article so it is not a verbatim copy of the book. Favonian (talk) 09:23, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

OK (per your latest comment) I'm fine with that. The reason why CSD notifications come so early in an article's "life cycle" is because of the new article watch process. It is virtually the only way of catching additions to WP which in some way or another leave something to be desired. If I had paused to check your credentials, I would have sent you a somewhat less formal request. For that I apologize, but I hope you bear the general issue in mind. Favonian (talk) 09:29, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

Church of the East articles

Thanks I'm interested in the Assyrian Church and I see that you've added a lot of material. I also see that you posted on the talk page to the Assyria WikiProject and got no feedback, so I figured I would encourage you here. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 04:54, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

Dear Djwilms, do you remember where the Wilmshurst (pag 316) took the information that Augustine Hindi was consecrated bishop on September 8, 1804 by Isho'yahb Isha'ya Yohannan Gabriel (or Jean Guriel) bishop of Salmas, who in turn was ordained bishop on November 8, 1795 by Yohannan Hormizd ? thank a lot A ntv (talk) 21:35, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

Either Hornus, Tfindji or Giamil, I would guess. I'll see if I can find the reference for you tonight.

Djwilms (talk) 01:22, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

Dear Djwilms, which is the modern name for Gazarda? I cant find a wikilink. A ntv (talk) 08:10, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

The town known as Gazarta d'Beth Zabdai ('the island of Zabdicene') by the East and West Syrians, because it was built on an island in the Tigris river in the district known to the Romans as Zabdicene and the Syrians as Beth Zabdai, is modern Cisre in eastern Turkey (properly spelled with a cedilla below the c), which until the Turkish spelling reforms was commonly known by its Arabic name as Jezira ibn Umar, Jezira, Jazirah, Jazireh or variants thereof. (I think Badger spells it Jezeerah.) It lies roughly midway between Mosul and Diyabarkr (Amid). Typing in Jezira gets you a link to the province of that name, not the town, and I haven't been able to find a Wikipedia article on the town under any of its names. I'm not sure whether any of this is helpful from the point of view of linking it. I'm surprised there's no article on the town, though. I'll do another search when I have time.

Found it! Cizre (with a z, not an s).

Djwilms (talk) 08:38, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

Dear Djwilms, I kindly ask you to check the content of my new articles Rabban Hormizd Monastery, and Rabban Hormizd (Saint) (as per George Percy Badger, I'm tring to add new articles on often cited issue - I'm looking for material about Fiey and Tfinkdji).

I'm going on with wikification of articles of you, and I would suggest to create a new catergory "Dioceses of the Church of the East" and to remove those articles from "Bishops of the Assyrian Church of the East" and "Chaldean bishops".

In order to go on with the Articles on the lives of Patriarchs of the Shimun line after Abdisho Maron, I've bought the Beltrami La Chiesa caldea nel secolo dell'unione, but unfortunatly the more sources I get the more un-matching data I found. Thus I cannot proceed. Perhaps it is better not to have a single article for each Patriach, but a general Article on the whole line.

As last issue, if you have time, can please have a look to Abraham Shimonaya, an Article that has been created by some editor with an automatic translation from de:Abraham Shimonaya. I cant read German, thus I cannot end the copyedit work of the Article because I've not understood the whole story A ntv (talk) 18:33, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Djwilms. You have new messages at Favonian's talk page.
Message added 10:39, 16 November 2009 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Favonian (talk) 10:39, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Picture of Oscar de Négrier

Hello my friend

On page fr:Discussion:Oscar_de_Négrier user Kilom691 kindly indicated that a picture of your superhero was available here. I have posted it on Wikipedia Commons, but I am not too sure about the copyright and the "categories"

Djwilms' idol

. --André de StCoeur (talk) 23:53, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

Merci, my old. As a matter of fact, I possess that very issue of Le Petit Journal, so might get around to scanning the cover at higher definition.

Talking of the great slaver, do you know anything about the controversy that surrounded his escape from Metz after Bazaine's capitulation in 1870? I have another issue of Le Petit Journal which shows de Negrier making short work of two Prussian uhlans who foolishly got in his way. There were allegations from the Germans that he had broken his parole. It's not really relevant to my Sino-French War book, but I'm just interested.

Djwilms (talk) 01:14, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

Seert (Chaldean Diocese)

Thanks for this excellent article ;). In future, could you use inline citations? Thanks, Ironholds (talk) 19:45, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

Excellent, thanks :). I tend to write entire articles at a time and then paste them in inlines and cats attached, but I can see the advantages to your method - my method takes so long my backlog is enormous, while you will at least have something at every redlink by the time I'm done with one. Ironholds (talk) 12:45, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Tonkinese Rifles

Thanks for your comments. You have created a well written and researched article on a not very well known subject in the best Wikipedia tradition. It will be a long time before I can bring the post-1890 part of the tirailleurs' history up to the high standard that you have set - but I will do my best! Regards Buistr (talk) 02:13, 11 December 2009 (UTC).

Hi Djilms. Further to our earlier exchange, I notice that you and Carl Logan have discussed whether tirailleurs or rifles should be the default term for the varigated "native" infantry regiments of the defunct French Empire. I wonder if a final conclusion was reached on this - as you may have noticed I have more or less alternated between the two desigations in the additions I have made to your article. I have had a number of communications with Carl over the years regarding French military articles - and in particular those relating to the Armee d' Afrique.

The correct translation of tirailleurs is a difficult one - "Rifles" is undoubtedly the most popular one but I have also seen "Skirmishers", "Levies" and "Sharpshooters" used. Even "Light Infantry", although that clearly clashes with the misnamed "Joyeux" of the Infanterie Legere d' Afrique. My personal preference would be for "Tirailleurs" but I will be happy to go along with any decision that may already have been made. Regards Buistr (talk) 03:53, 14 December 2009 (UTC)

I think both of us have been busy on other things, and we haven't taken the debate any further. My preference remains for Tonkinese (Annamese, Senegalese, etc) Rifles, on the grounds of accessibility. I believe that 'Rifles' remains the instinctive 'default' formulation most English-speaking readers are going to type in if they're looking for information. I'm perfectly happy to gloss that, so that the article might be titled 'Tonkinese Rifles (tirailleurs tonkinois)'. But I think the use of the French word tirailleur is out of place in an article title in an English-language encyclopedia, many of whose readers do not know French. Although I can see very clearly where Carl is coming from in his arguments for tirailleur, it would not occur to me, even though I am familiar with the structure of the French colonial forces, to type in 'Senegalese tirailleurs' as my first search choice.

Djwilms (talk) 02:01, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

Eastern Church dioceses in 1220

Hi Djwilms, I have been working on the List of religious leaders in 1220 article; I don't know why 1220 was created specifically, it was there before I got to it, but it has been an interesting challenge to find all the bishops and archbishops and occasionally lesser officials in 1220. I haven't had much luck with the non-Roman Catholic ones though. I see that you are familiar with the sources for the eastern churches, so if possible, would you be able to add to the 1220 article? Adam Bishop (talk) 15:37, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

Nestorianism

Heya, if you have time, there are some discussions at Talk:Nestorianism which I think you'd find very interesting.  :) --Elonka 21:35, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, Elonka. I have immediately put my two-pennorth in. 'East Syrian' might be the best way out, though I would prefer to go with 'Nestorian', provided it is made clear that we are using the term purely because of its convenience and historic associations.

Djwilms (talk) 03:08, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

Church of the East

Hey Djwilms, the new article Church of the East is up. Far from done, but I think it's alright for a start. I'd appreciate your input.--Cúchullain ^t/c 03:43, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

Dear Cuchullain,

This is so much better than the crud that was there before. Well done!

I've just had a quick skim through the article. Although the structure and general allocation of space to particular topics now works very well, thanks to your efforts, the content of the article (which you inherited) still needs a fair bit of work. I've noticed that it contains a lot of factual errors. For example, I've just made an edit to a sentence on the Nestorian Stele to make it clear that it does NOT list the names of scores of prominent Christians in China. Most of the names listed on the stele are those of unimportant monks. However, these mistakes can be fairly easily put right. Most of the errors I have spotted do not seem to be pushing an Assyrian nationalist POV, but have arisen from pure carelessness, and I would be happy to correct them at the rate of about one a day. I will also try to give some better references in some cases.

The article Nestorianism now looks much better too. You've obviously been busy while I was on holiday last week.

Djwilms (talk) 02:14, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XLVIII (February 2010)

The February 2010 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 22:15, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

Patriarchs of the Church of the East

Dear PHG,

Any chance of you doing me a template along the lines of this one for the patriarchs of the Church of the East? I still haven't worked out how to create templates. Could you just do me a quick skeleton, without the Catholic imagery, with the same row headings, and with the title Patriarchs of the Church of the East? I'll edit it and take it from there. Cheers.

Djwilms (talk) 08:03, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

Hi Djwilms! Long time no see! Here's the skeleton you requested. Best regards! Per Honor et Gloria ✍ 08:27, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

Coordinator elections have opened!

Voting for the Military history WikiProject coordinator elections has opened; all users are encouraged to participate in the elections. Voting will conclude 23:59 (UTC) on 28 March 2010.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 21:41, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

Moses bar-Kepha

"Just a suggestion, but I would have thought that the spelling Mushe Bar Kepha (or Mushe bar Kepha) was more common nowadays than Moses Bar-Kepha, and I wonder whether you might consider changing the name of the article accordingly."

I didn't create this page; I just added some material to it!

I don't think most (any?) literature in the English-speaking world would refer to Mushe Bar Kepha, so a change of name would merely hide the article from those looking for info. But by all means place this spelling in brackets after the normal name! Roger Pearse (talk) 16:18, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

Church of the east

Dear Mr. Djwilms,
for the post 1552, please see our intro for Chaldean Catholic Church. I have included a link to a very good book that you can probably find on google books. Here is the book. Please keep in mind that we have many Assyrian and Chaldean nationalists warring over this issue. In the article mentioned above, we have tried to be neutral. Please make sure to consider this.
best regards, --Tisqupnaia2010 (talk) 05:52, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

--Tisqupnaia2010 (talk) 05:52, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

Your Chaldean stuff is much better than its Nestorian equivalent in Assyrian Church of the East, and it's also at about the right length for inclusion in the main Church of the East article. What is needed, I think, is an expansion of the Chaldean Catholic Church article to about twice its present length and the transfer of the present stuff to the Church of the East article. I'll see if I can find time to work on this in the next few weeks.

I've got Baum and Winkler, thanks, but I'd rather use sources like Tfinkdji, Giamil, Tisserand and Wilmshurst.

Djwilms (talk) 07:48, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

your input to the article about the Chaldean Catholic Church would be appreciated. I would like to invite you to add a note to the discussion page stating your opinion of the article. I hope that a person with your credentials would be able to convince Assyrian Nationalists to reconsider vandalizing the neutrality of the article.--Tisqupnaia2010 (talk) 09:14, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

An extinct church?

Can you make anything of this article? Sorting through the edit history, it looks like it was originally an abstruse attempt to (1) conflate some passages in primary sources to make it appear that the Indian church was connected to the Syriac Orthodox patriarchate rather than the Nestorian by way of a West Syrian "Orthodox Church of the East", and (2) to bolster the claims of the Malankara Orthodox Syrian Church regarding the title of Catholicos of the East. Later another editor came in and added a bunch of material concerning what is actually known about Christianity in India, which had the effect of making the article appear to be well referenced. A Google Books search returns nothing relevant to the subject of a phantom Oriental Orthodox church. Probably something that will need to be AFD'd, but I thought I'd check around before doing that.--Cúchullain ^t/c 19:20, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XLIX (March 2010)

The March 2010 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 21:37, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

Removal of Unsourced Allegations and Opinions

Hi there,

I have removed reference in the article on the Sino-French War that contained nothing more than unsupported allegations and opinions (e.g. reference to Chinese field commanders inflating enemy casualties). As you aptly noted, any such article must include proper citation, preferably from both sides and from neutral, third party sources. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 38.97.80.100 (talk) 16:01, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Hi,

See my response to your comments in the discussion section of the Battle for Bang Bo (Zhennan Pass). This has to be resolved the way I suggested. We must remove all *opinions* such as whether the Chinese or French sources were more reliable, etc. *unless* of course you make clear that such were certain commentators' *opinion.* You will then have to cite the names of such commentators. That's how you do your research as any college professor worth his money would've told you.

To make things easier, here's my demonstration. Instead of saying "the Chinese figures of French casualties were exaggerated," you should say "in commentator X's opinion, the Chinese overestimated the number of French casualties, for reason Y, see citation Z." To make things look more impartial, preceding that statement you should also say, "French sources generally estimate the casualties at A, see citation B; Chinese sources, on the other hand, estimated the casualties at C, see citation D."

Anything short of completely objective will be taken as evidence of your sinophobic prejudice. Since by then you will be challenging the fundamental soundness of Chinese sources without evidence for the falsity of every single one of such sources. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.216.104.245 (talk) 12:56, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

Okay, here's the deal. I left your remark that the Chinese may have exaggerated French casualties. However, you must provide citation supporting that contention and add that such opinion was in fact an opinion held by the historian who wrote the source cited. The material cited could be your unpublished manuscripts. This is to comply with wikipedia's requirement that all "[e]ncyclopaedia content must be verifiable." —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.216.104.245 (talk) 03:56, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

Cochinchina Campaign

Hi there. Are you still going to work on this? YellowMonkey (vote in the Southern Stars and White Ferns supermodel photo poll) 02:40, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

Casualty of bombardment of Tourane

According to this source, the Vietnamese casualty was up to 10,000 dead. Should we trust it? 71.177.75.140 (talk) 00:24, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

Schism of 1552

Schism of 1552 is very nice. You should nominate it for a DYK. ^{şṗøʀĸɕäɾłäů∂ɛ:τᴀʟĸ} 10:18, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : L (April 2010)

The April 2010 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 19:16, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : LI (May 2010)

The May 2010 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 21:01, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

You are now a Reviewer

Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, is currently undergoing a two-month trial scheduled to end 15 August 2010.

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under pending changes. Pending changes is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial. The list of articles with pending changes awaiting review is located at Special:OldReviewedPages.

When reviewing, edits should be accepted if they are not obvious vandalism or BLP violations, and not clearly problematic in light of the reason given for protection (see Wikipedia:Reviewing process). More detailed documentation and guidelines can be found here.

If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. Courcelles (talk) 03:01, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Hong Kong Morris

An article that you have been involved in editing, Hong Kong Morris, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hong Kong Morris. Thank you.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Ohconfucius ^¡digame! 05:18, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

Ahatallah

Hey Djwilms, if you get a chance, could you look at the brewing fiasco at Ahatallah? It may be slightly out of your area, but as a published author on the Church of the East, combined with your knowledge of the Syriac Orthodox Church, I think your opinion would be most valuable. The talk page will show you exactly the way the debate is going.--Cúchullain ^t/c 14:06, 26 June 2010 (UTC)

Hi, Cuchullain.

Here's my own take on Ahatallah, from my forthcoming book:

The Saint Thomas Christians remained within the fold of the Catholic church for the next six decades, but during this period they grew increasingly restive. The Syrians quite liked the conciliatory Jesuit bishop Francis Roz (1600–24), who showed some sensitivity to their age-old traditions, but they disliked his successors Stephen Britto (1624–41) and Francis Garzia (1641–59), who did not. Under Garzia’s episcopate they began to complain that the few privileges and exemptions granted them at the synod of Diamper were being infringed. In 1650 they secretly wrote to the Mosul patriarch Eliya IX Shem‘on (1617–60) and his Kochanes counterpart Shem‘on XI (1638–56), and also to the Jacobite patriarch in Antioch and the Coptic patriarch in Alexandria, asking for a Syrian bishop to be sent to them. Two years later a Syrian bishop, Cyril Ahatallah, duly arrived. Originally a Jacobite bishop of Damascus, Ahatalla had formally converted to Catholicism in 1632 and had consequently been drummed out of the Syrian Orthodox church. In 1650 he was living in Cairo, at something of a loose end, and was shown the letter from the Saint Thomas Christians by the Coptic patriarch. Seizing his opportunity, he persuaded the Mosul patriarch Eliya IX Shem‘on to consecrate him metropolitan of India and China (his Catholicism apparently being no bar to this appointment) and sailed to India to seek his fortune. On his arrival in Meliapur in 1652 he was promptly arrested by the Portuguese as a schismatic, in that his claims infringed the pope’s authority, and deported to Lisbon to be questioned by the Inquisition. He seems to have died in Paris in 1659 while being taken to Rome for further questioning.

As far as I can see, it agrees fairly closely with what's in the article (I've just skimmed it), but the article doesn't mention Ahatalla's consecration by the Nestorian patriarch Eliya IX (unless I've missed it somewhere).

My immediate comment is that the article is one of the best-written 'Syriac' articles I have yet seen on Wikipedia (your work, perhaps?), and that it seems to be stating the facts fairly and moderately.

Take a look at my paragraph to see if my understanding agrees with yours. If it does, I might be able to suggest some more sources for Ahatalla. I've not actually read the book that is at the centre of dispute, and I'll need to do some digging to unearth the sources I used for my paragraph. There were several, I know.

Djwilms (talk) 01:25, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

I have now ordered Neill's book (both volumes) in order to bring myself up to speed on this issue. I have in fact read Neill's History of Christian Missions (part of the Pelican History of the Church), which covers India in some detail, and no doubt his position is the same in both books. I'll try to find the sources (a) for Ahatalla's consecration by Eliya IX and (b) for the report that he died in Paris in 1659. I know I have consulted several sources, including a couple of learned journal articles, for Ahatallah. I thought it was now common ground that he was not put to death in India, and that allegations to the contrary were just inflammatory rumours put about by the Syrians. Evidently not. I'm not quite sure why there is all this talk about a Catholic bias. A scholarly bias, perhaps, and an interest in establishing the truth and overturning hoary old legends, but that's quite a different matter. Djwilms (talk) 01:21, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

The contention over the article, is due to the sources, which Neill, had considered. Since the sources, are Portuguese, a question about its reliability comes to picture. Also, it makes one to ponder, as to why many historians, have never tried to dig the past of Ahathullah. Is that because of the reliability of the sources??? Neill and Vadakkekara who are quoted as sources, are priests. Also, the area of operation of Neill in India, was the state of Tamil Nadu. You would be knowing, how different each states in India are. Neill has good ground knowledge about the State of Tamil Nadu, however most of the data about kerala, is collected from various sources.

Where we need good sources are

1. Eventually he requested to return to Syria, where he vowed he would bring the Syriac Orthodox Patriarch of Antioch, Ignatius Hidayat Allah, into communion with Rome.

2.Ahatallah was certainly unsuccessful in converting the Patriarch before his death in 1639. After that point, he apparently began claiming he was Hidayat Allah's rightful successor, and began styling himself "Ignatius", the name traditionally born by Syriac Orthodox Patriarchs.

3.However, the Jesuits extended considerable kindness and freedom to him, and allowed him to meet with Zachariah Cherrian Unni and two other members of the Saint Thomas Christian clergy. (I dont know from where Neill got these names, in some books the the christian deacons named Itty and Thommen met him). Also considerable kindness????

4.In reality, it appears that Ahatallah did in fact reach Goa, and was then sent on to Lisbon with the ultimate goal of having his case decided in Rome. Evidently, however, he died in Paris in 1655, before reaching Rome. Do we have good sources, to throughly say, he died in Paris.

Portuguese sources are generally not trusted, because of the catholic biasedness. That is why we had a heated debate. All we want to know is, whether all the authors who talk about ahathualla's background, loops back to the portuguese documents. Thanks a ton for your interest in this matter. Hope you now, have more clarity on the issue. CosmasIndi (talk) 12:52, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

This is very clearly blocked user and sockpuppeteer Fyodor7. Fyodor, I can assure you that Djwilms knows how to evaluate sources, and has a much less skewed view than you do about which ones are "generally not trusted". Please stop trying to avoid your block.

Djwilms, I think it is well established that Ahatallah wasn't killed in India. Neill (volume 1, p. 319) indicates that this was the rumor in India at the time, and it spread more widely in the scholarly literature after it was repeated as fact by Maximilian Müllbauer in the 19th century. You can still find it mentioned in some modern works, but most give it no credence or deny it outright. However, I think it would be good to have additional sources supporting a few of the major contentious points in the article, especially Ahatallah having converted to Catholicism.--Cúchullain ^t/c 13:31, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

Hi Sir, Came to know, that , a document in Vatican, authored by Pope Alexander VII, mentions, that, [Ahathulla]] was a non catholic Patriarch. The Syrian Jacobites in India, maintain, that, Ahathulla was the same Ignatius Hidayat Allah, who actually went missing.

Recollect something a catholic friend told me, that most of the articles and documents about the saint thomas christians preserved in lisbon and vatican, are out of bounds for the saint thomas christians from India. Several Syro-Malabar Catholic's (which is is eastern christan church, under the patriarch of rome) did try, to access the archives in lisbon and vatican and were turned down. My friends brother is a catholic priest, he got the info from him. Do you by any chance know anything about these?.

Also, User:Cuchullain made a comment that I was haranguing you [[2]], I certainly didnt do anything as such. Am sorry, if you have felt so. We are finally breathing fresh air, to have found someone knowledgable in this area. CosmasIndi (talk) 17:43, 2 July 2010 (UTC)

Diacritics in Vietnam-related articles

There is a discussion at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Vietnam#Diacritics that you may wish to to contribute to. Colonies Chris (talk) 09:05, 4 July 2010 (UTC)

Hi—I'm curious; does your objection to using diacritics extend to article titles, or do you simply object to their use throughout an article? I'm trying to judge whether we can claim consensus on the use of diacritics specifically in article titles. --dragfyre_ʞןɐʇc 21:59, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

I'm sorry to say that I'm against the use of diacritics in article titles as well as in the main body of the text. It seems to me that the principle should be convenience and common usage in English. As far as convenience is concerned, spattering an article with diacriticised names does not improve its readability, and puts off non-specialist readers. As far as common usage in English is concerned, most English-language books on Vietnam spell Vietnamese place names without diacritics (e.g. Lang Son, Vung Tau). Most atlases do the same. The only advantages of giving a place name with diacritics are to indicate its correct pronunciation and to indicate how the Vietnamese spell it. This is best done by glossing the name when it first appears in the body of an article. The same principle, incidentally, should also apply to the names of persons.

Djwilms (talk) 01:19, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

Hey, no reason to apologize—IMO your contributions are invaluable and are helping to move us forward. I've cleaned up the "In a nutshell" section in the diacritics discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Vietnam#Diacritics. When you get the chance, please indicate your support or opposition to each consensus point to allow us to determine which points have the most support. I've also added a note to the effect that, for now, these points do not constitute a formal proposal, but just indicate where we're at in our discussion. --dragfyre_ʞןɐʇc 14:33, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

Shemon of Ada and the Saint Thomas Christians

Hi Sir,

Regarding your discussion about, whether the COE ceased to exist in India, after Portuguese period. When the Portuguese, was at the helm of the affairs controlling the Arabian sea, they were very careful , in allowing vistors to India. The Chaldean Mar Joseph, the brother of Sulaqua, was kept at Goa, for an year, for monitoring his faith and then allowed to kerala. Upon arrival in Kerala he preached Nestorian faith, he was taken out of kerala for questioning (probably to Rome or Lisbon)

Later during the time of Dutch, one Mar Gabriel was send to Kerala to reclaim the faithful, am not sure, if he was Chaldean or Assyrian. He mostly tried to win back the Orthodox group, i believe and the Orthodox group called the antiocheans for help, in dealing with him.

During the time of Joseph Audo, Mellus and Rokkos, were send to again win back the Syrian Christians…

Am sure, you already know all these. Also most of the catholic books never talk about Assyrian church, infact, they only use the word Chaldea. Recently read in some catholic websites, were they call Timothy I (Nestorian Patriarch), Chaldean patriarch Timothy I who lived in 8th century. The versions of the Jacobite Orthodox and Nestorians (called Chaldeans in India) are not widely available online, and they do not have sufficicent English books. I would be happy to assist, if you would like to hear differnt versions, than those already available in market. Thank you.Cosmas Indii (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 13:49, 22 July 2010 (UTC).

Lord, give it a rest, Fyodor.--Cúchullain ^t/c 14:17, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

Offer to review Taiwan articles

I notice you're asking for reviews of some of your articles. I'm happy to do this with any Taiwan-related articles against the Good Article criteria, but you will have to formally submit them (via WP:GAN) before I can review them for the GA classification. If you do happen to nominate any articles, please just drop me a line on my talk page and I'll check them out. Taiwantaffy (talk) 06:51, 30 July 2010 (UTC)

Cooperation on the Sino-French War?

Hi, I am writing to you regarding your on-going wiki project on the Sino-French War. I am currently a MPhil student of East Asian Studies at University of Cambridge, and my MPhil thesis is about the representation of the Sino-French War,under the guidance of Prof. Hans van de Ven. I am about to finish my thesis in a week, and came across the wiki pages you contributed to the Sino-French War. I was surprised by the high quality of these pages and I really appreciate your efforts in continously editing and improving these pages. I would like to help you with this project. I am a Chinese native speaker, but went to college in the U.S. and am currently pursuing my graduate degree in Britain. I started my research on the Sino-French War about one year ago, and have been working with a number of primary resources such as communications between Robert Hart and James Duncan Campbell, the memorials to the Qing court, and copies of French official documents stored at Guangxi Archive, China. I think that I can potentially help with the project by editing the pages you created with reference to these primary resources. As to the secondary materials, you might want to look at Shao Xunzhen's book Zhongfa Yuenan Guanxi Shimo (邵循正 《中法越南关系始末》） - I think that is the most important academic book on the diplomacy between China and French on the Vietnam issue, far better than 龙章's book. Another book worthwhile to read is Huang Zhennan's Zhongfa zhanzheng guankui（黄振南《中法战争管窥》）. The author painstakingly cross-examined a great number of Chinese resources with French resources and offered a new pesperctive on the military history of the Sino-French War. Anyway, I am more than happy to learn that I am not the only person in this planet who studies the Sino-French War. I look forward to hear back from you. Falcon Fang (talk) 04:51, 1 August 2010 (UTC)

Another enthusiast, and a better book than Lung Chang's: how splendid! I live and work in Hong Kong, but by the happiest of coincidences I will be flying back to the UK tomorrow evening for a three-week holiday. I will be staying with my parents in Northampton, and have a car in England, so I could come over to Cambridge one day to meet you if it didn't distract you from completing your thesis (I remember the feeling well). Perhaps you would like to write to me at this email address: davidwilmshurst@yahoo.com. If you let me have your contact telephone number, I will give you a call when I'm back in England.

I too had that feeling that I was the only person on the planet who studies the S-F War.

Djwilms (talk)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : LIII (July 2010)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter: Issue LIII (July 2010) Front page Project news Articles Members Editorial

Project news New parameter for military conflict infobox introduced; Preliminary information on the September coordinator elections	Articles Milhist's newest featured and A-Class content
Members July's contest results, the latest awards to our members, plus an interview with Parsecboy	Editorial Opportunities for new military history articles
To stop receiving this newsletter, or to receive it in a different format, please list yourself in the appropriate section here.

This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 21:21, 18 August 2010 (UTC)

1873 Tonkin expedition

Since you're interested about the 19th century French war in Vietnam, do you have sources about the 1873 French intervention in Tonkin? If yes, I would like you to create an article about it. 69.234.192.27 (talk) 20:22, 26 August 2010 (UTC)

I'll try to get round to it shortly. I have translated Captain Thomazi's chapter in La Conquete de l'Indochine (written in 1930 or thereabouts) on the 1873/4 intervention, and could do worse than upload that for a start. The facts are all there, but the interpretation would need to be edited for objectivity.

Djwilms (talk) 01:41, 27 August 2010 (UTC)

BTW, as we know, the French made 3 invasions of Vietnam, in 1858, 1873, and 1883. We have articles about the first and third invasions. And as for the second invasion, when you create an article about it, could you find an name for it that doesn't NOT include the date. Because the tiitles of the article Cochinchina Campaign and Tonkin Campaign don't include the dates, so it would be cooler if the title of the article about the second invasion also don't include the years. Moreover, for the 1873/4 expedition, was it a French failture? 69.234.192.27 (talk) 04:09, 29 August 2010 (UTC)

Modern Assyrianism

Hello Djwilms, I read the excerpt from your forthcoming book The Martyred Church on my friend's talk page and I think it's rather good.

The claim to descent from the ancient Assyrians was first made at the end of the nineteenth century. The Christians living around Mosul always knew that they were living in what had once been Assyria, because the Bible (particularly the Book of Jonah) told them so. For several centuries there was a Nestorian diocese of Nineveh, and the Nestorian metropolitans of Mosul styled themselves metropolitans of 'Athor', Assyria. But it did not occur to any Nestorian Christian before the end of the nineteenth century to regard himself as an Assyrian. We know the names of thousands of East Syrian bishops, priests, deacons and scribes between the third and nineteenth centuries, and there is not a Sennacherib or Ashurbanipal among them. All this changed with the excavation of the ruins of Nineveh by Austin Layard in the 1840s. Layard’s spectacular discoveries made the ancient Assyrians fashionable. In 1881 the authorities of the Church of England decided to call their mission to the Nestorians ‘The Archbishop of Canterbury’s Mission to Assyrian Christians’ because nobody had heard of the Nestorians but everyone knew about the Assyrians. In turn, this first, official use of ‘Assyrian’ did much to popularise the term among the Nestorians themselves. They were quick to appreciate the fact that they enjoyed far higher visibility as ‘Assyrians’ than as Nestorians. By the end of the First World War the term ‘Assyrian’ was in widespread use, and was regularly used in the diplomatic exchanges of the 1920s. Wigram’s book The Assyrians and Their Neighbours (1929) further entrenched the term. The result, in the 1920s and 1930s, was a vogue for Assyrian Christian names. A male child might still be called Awdisho (‘Abdisho‘) or Dinkha (Denha), but as often as not he would have a brother named Sargon or a sister named Semiramis.

I wondered if it would be possible to cite this in an article yet? On a separate note, I must remark on how impressive your prolific contributions to Wikipedia are. Superb work. ܥܝܪܐܩ (talk) 20:02, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

I'll be more than happy to be of any help to you, Dr. --Tisqupnaia2010 (talk) 08:57, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

This theory has been utterly debunked. There is no proof whatsoever that the indigenous Mesopotamians were wiped out, if so, show it? Simo Parpola and others have clearly shown the existence of Assyrian names from late antiquity onwards. How many modern English are called Aethelstan and Offa? None, oh, cant be English then!

Assyria existed as an entity until the 7th century AD.

Armenian, Persian, Georgian and Russian records show the use of the name Assyrian well before the 19th century.

These anti Assyrian arguments are poorly researched, arrogant and somewhat racist to be honest. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.106.116.120 (talk) 01:12, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXI, March 2011

Your Military History Newsletter Project News: From the editors Articles: The month's featured and A-class Milhist content Members: Contest results, A-class medal recipients Editorial: Dank helps you see what article writers want from reviewers

To stop receiving this newsletter, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. BrownBot (talk) 01:36, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXII, April 2011

Your Military History Newsletter Project News: From the editors Articles: The month's featured and A-class Milhist content Members: Contest results, A-class medal recipients Editorial: Buggie111 discusses neutral point of view

To stop receiving this newsletter, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. BrownBot (talk) 22:15, 17 May 2011 (UTC)