possibele times for an independent assyrian state.

when are the possible times to create an independent assyrian state with a POD starting in classical antiquity? if this isnt possible just tell me so i can abadon my idea. thanks.
 
What would you call an Assyrian state?
The name had many definitions :located in ancient Assyria, a state of a group pinguistically close to akkadian, or the modern Assyrian population?

Assuming you meant the first, you had natives kingdoms as Osroene or Corduene that could fit your request IOTL.
Now I don't think they considered themselves Assyrians, or that someone actually did at this point : after the fall of their empire, Assyrians seems to not have known a really unified polity.

If you meant a neo-Assyrian empire, the best bet is to butterfly away the Persian rise, and allow a sub-kingdom (regarding Neo-Babylonian Empire) to survive (something not that hard to me, giving that the last ruler of Babylon was an Assyrian).
After a while, you could see a new Assyrian independent kingdom appearing.

Butterflying Persians away would provoke huge butterflies, so it's hard to say what would happen next, at least for me. Someone more knowledgable could probably help.

What's your idea? It could come in hand in order to help you.
 
It's certainly possible, just not very likely.

The Assyrians fought with the Entente in WWI, and were promised some kind of an independent state on the Nineveh plains. These promises were made by junior and mid-level commanders and officials, and thus not considered binding, but in different circumstances Britain and/or Russia might be a more open to the idea of creating Assyria.

EDIT: what I just wrote applies mostly for a post-1900 PoD, and only if the Aramaic-speaking self-designated "Assyrians" of the modern age count.
 
^
What about a less victorious Britain in the Middle-East?

I don't know if it's really fesible, but could things bog down in Palestine and Mesopotamia long enough for that when Central Powers are defeated, UK could only have limited advantages, France even less and these supporting an Assyrian revolt for trying to controlling via proxy a territory they couldn't have by conquest?
 
^
What about a less victorious Britain in the Middle-East?

I don't know if it's really fesible, but could things bog down in Palestine and Mesopotamia long enough for that when Central Powers are defeated, UK could only have limited advantages, France even less and these supporting an Assyrian revolt for trying to controlling via proxy a territory they couldn't have by conquest?

That could work.

Another possibility - the zones of control remain more or less the same, but the Turkish republic for whatever reason keeps up a vaguely revanchist and aggressive foreign policy in the Middle East. In that case - though I don't have much insight into the logic of a 1920s Brit - it seems natural to strengthen the frontier of British control by creating a friendly Assyrian state; otherwise, they'd have a displeased minority near Iraq's border which could in the worst case even be used by Ankara in its efforts to seize the wider Mosul province.
(Turkish-Assyrian cooperation might sound bizarre but it's not that unlikely, as the contacts between Ankara's Ismet Inonu and Assyrian general Agha Petros in 1923 show)
 
What would you call an Assyrian state?
The name had many definitions :located in ancient Assyria, a state of a group pinguistically close to akkadian, or the modern Assyrian population?

Assuming you meant the first, you had natives kingdoms as Osroene or Corduene that could fit your request IOTL.
Now I don't think they considered themselves Assyrians, or that someone actually did at this point : after the fall of their empire, Assyrians seems to not have known a really unified polity.

If you meant a neo-Assyrian empire, the best bet is to butterfly away the Persian rise, and allow a sub-kingdom (regarding Neo-Babylonian Empire) to survive (something not that hard to me, giving that the last ruler of Babylon was an Assyrian).
After a while, you could see a new Assyrian independent kingdom appearing.

Butterflying Persians away would provoke huge butterflies, so it's hard to say what would happen next, at least for me. Someone more knowledgable could probably help.

What's your idea? It could come in hand in order to help you.
i dont really have a clear idea yet. i was hoping a POD that makes the assyrians a buffer for rome/byzantium and parithia/sassasins, but that seems extremely ASB. i dont want to butterfly the persians, but if it comes to that maybe.

It's certainly possible, just not very likely.

The Assyrians fought with the Entente in WWI, and were promised some kind of an independent state on the Nineveh plains. These promises were made by junior and mid-level commanders and officials, and thus not considered binding, but in different circumstances Britain and/or Russia might be a more open to the idea of creating Assyria.

EDIT: what I just wrote applies mostly for a post-1900 PoD, and only if the Aramaic-speaking self-designated "Assyrians" of the modern age count.
how do you give the british and russians an incentive to create an assyrian state? and what resources does the modern assyria area have that would give the british that incentive?
 
i dont really have a clear idea yet. i was hoping a POD that makes the assyrians a buffer for rome/byzantium and parithia/sassasins
By the time Sassanids were a thing, Assyrians ceased to be one.
It's not ASB (Romans having used the name of Assyria for one of their short-lived provinces points that a political entity named as such can exist) but I'm not sure why Romans or Persians would have preferred building out of their traditional client kingdoms another one.

. i dont want to butterfly the persians, but if it comes to that maybe.
A political survival of an Assyrian kingdom (I mean, a kingdom directly issued from Neo-Assyrian Empire) may come to that, I think. It wouldn't be the PoD (that should be more about how the neo-Assyrian Empire fell), though.
 
This topic wanders btw before and after 1900.

Before 1900, Assyrian Empire had many enemies (scythians, Kingdoms of Urartu and Mannai, Babylonia) and its difficult to catch a POD during their existance.

I think that butterflying the civil wars that weakened Assyria after Ashurbanipal death, you can extend the empire life for a while and prevent the assyrian population drop, the enough to get a historical land claim to some of the former realms.
 
Unless you butterfly the genocide or convince all Assyrians to migrate to some place where they can be majority on a viable state, the best that could be hoped for is likely a highly autonomous region in Iraq or an independent Kurdistan.
 
By the time Sassanids were a thing, Assyrians ceased to be one.
It's not ASB (Romans having used the name of Assyria for one of their short-lived provinces points that a political entity named as such can exist) but I'm not sure why Romans or Persians would have preferred building out of their traditional client kingdoms another one.

The Sasanian province of Mesopotamia was called Asoristan as well; it's not a completely absurd name to be used for, say, a successor state or longer-lived incarnation of one of the Aramaic-speaking north Mesopotamian statelets and petty kingdom or a more Aramaized version of the kingdom of Hatra.
 
Top