Author Topic: Can Chaldean really be our true ethnicity?  (Read 11411 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline xnicksomox

  • Junior Member
  • **
  • Posts: 716
Can Chaldean really be our true ethnicity?
« on: July 21, 2011, 06:23:21 AM »
Ok guys before all of you start getting mad again, lol, just explain why it can't be true.

The Assyrian empire fell when the Babylonians (Chaldeans) with the help of some Medes attacked the Assyrians. True or not?

Ok so if the Chaldeans attacked the Assyrians it would mean Chaldean people in the Assyrian empire right? For example there would be Chaldean soldiers to attack Nineveh if they needed to attack it to beat the Assyrians right?

So after the Chaldean empire wins wouldn't it make sense for some Chaldeans to stay in that area while expanding their empire even more? Like if they just won a war would they just all leave and go back to what is now South Iraq? Wouldn't many want to stay in Nineveh where they already were after winning the war?

They can't just leave the area. Someone else would take over right? So can't Chaldeans and Assyrians all be descendants of the Chaldean empire? The last part of our Chaldean/Assyrian dynasty and reign in the Niniveh area?

I think it would make sense for there to be Chaldeans in the place that they conquered the Assyrians.





"The Fall of Nineveh Chronicle describes the events of these years. In 616, Nabopolassar defeated an Assyrian force on the banks of the Euphrates, south of Harran. This suggests that Nabopolassar wanted to block the main road between the Assyrian heartland and its possessions in the west. However, he was forced to retreat when an Egyptian army approached.

Next year, the Babylonian changed his strategy and invaded the Assyrian heartland, where he laid siege to Aššur, the religious capital of Assyria. The Assyrians were able to repel their enemy, but late in 615, the Medes, a tribal federation living in modern Iran, intervened. After the winter, they captured the city, and although Nabopolassar arrived too late to help them, he signed a treaty with their king Cyaxares. The Babylonian historian Berossus tells that the alliance was cemented by a royal wedding: the Babylonian crown prince Nebuchadnezzar married a princess named Amytis.

After a year of inconclusive campaigning, the united Medes and Babylonians laid siege to the Assyrian capital Nineveh in May 612. The siege lasted for three months; in July, the city fell. King Sin-šar-iškun, who had once been in charge of Babylon (above), seems to have committed suicide.

Several campaigns took place in the neighborhood of Harran, from which the last Assyrian king, Aššur-uballit, was expelled. Yet he returned with the army of the pharaoh of Egypt, Necho II (610-595). (King Josiah of Judah, who had tried to conquer the former kingdom of Israel, which had become part of the Assyrian Empire, tried to resist the Egyptians, but was killed at Megiddo.) Necho was defeated too, in 605, by crown prince Nebuchadnezzar, near Carchemish on the banks of the Euphrates. The story is told in the Nebuchadnezzar Chronicle.

In the same year, Nabopolassar, the founding father of the Babylonian Empire, died. His son continued the expansion to the west, where he took over the former Assyrian possessions. It is not entirely clear where and when the border between Egypt and Babylonia was drawn: 2 Kings 24.7 implies that Egypt retired to the Sinai desert and left the Palestine coast in Babylonian hands, but the Greek researcher Herodotus of Halicarnassus (Histories 2.159) suggests that Gaza remained an Egyptian stronghold.

During this phase of the western war, Jerusalem was captured (597), and when its vassal king revolted, the city was captured for the second time (586). Its population was deported to Babylonia: the beginning of the Babylonian Captivity of the Jews. Now, the west was safe; only Tyre resisted, and although the siege lasted many years, it fell in 575."


ܦܪܕܝܣܐ ܗ݇ܘܝܢ ܗ݇ܘܐ ܡܝܘܡܐ ܩܕ݇ܡܝܐ, ܘܦܪܕܣܐ ܒܦܝܫܝܢ ܠܕܪܐ ܐ݇ܚܪܝܐ

ܦܹܪܕܹܣܵܐ ܗ݇ܘܲܢ ܗ݇ܘܵܐ ܡܝܘܿܡܵܐ ܩܲܕ݇ܡܵܝܵܐ, ܘܦܹܪܕܹܣܵܐ ܒܦܲܝܫܝܼܢ ܠܕܵܪܵܐ ܐ݇ܚܵܪܵܝܵܐ

Offline xnicksomox

  • Junior Member
  • **
  • Posts: 716
Re: Can Chaldean really be our true ethnicity?
« Reply #1 on: July 21, 2011, 06:32:39 AM »
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/c6/Median_Empire.jpg


Plus just to add, just because the Capitol of an empire is in South Iraq doesn't mean the empire did not reach North Iraq. And it doesn't mean there weren't any citizens in North Iraq. That's like saying Mesopotamians only existed in Iraq. Both Chaldean and Assyrian empires stretched all over the middle east. You can't just say that because the Capitol is in the south there was no one in the north.
ܦܪܕܝܣܐ ܗ݇ܘܝܢ ܗ݇ܘܐ ܡܝܘܡܐ ܩܕ݇ܡܝܐ, ܘܦܪܕܣܐ ܒܦܝܫܝܢ ܠܕܪܐ ܐ݇ܚܪܝܐ

ܦܹܪܕܹܣܵܐ ܗ݇ܘܲܢ ܗ݇ܘܵܐ ܡܝܘܿܡܵܐ ܩܲܕ݇ܡܵܝܵܐ, ܘܦܹܪܕܹܣܵܐ ܒܦܲܝܫܝܼܢ ܠܕܵܪܵܐ ܐ݇ܚܵܪܵܝܵܐ

Offline xnicksomox

  • Junior Member
  • **
  • Posts: 716
Re: Can Chaldean really be our true ethnicity?
« Reply #2 on: July 21, 2011, 06:45:01 AM »
Ok I found a quote that talks about Chaldean colonization of Assyria and North Arabia after defeating the Assyrian empire.

"Nabopolassar was then involved with a struggle with Egypt for control of the lands he had inherited from the Assyrian Empire. The 26th dynasty had been installed by the Assyrians as a vassal dynasty in 664 BC, and had belatedly tried to help Assyria in its last days. After Assyrian resistance appeared to have ended in 605 BC the Egyptians remained, and attempted to wrest former Assyrian colonies from Babylonia. Nabopolassar was followed by his son Nebuchadnezzar II (604 BC-562 BC), whose reign of 42 years made Babylon the master of much of the civilized world, including the colonisation of Assyria, Aramea (modern Syria), Phoenicia, Israel, Judah, Samarra, parts of Asia Minor and northern Arabia, much of this had been inherited from the Assyrians. [6] Only a small fragment of his annals has been discovered, relating to his invasion of Egypt in 567 BC, and referring to "Phut of the Ionians"."


So it could after all be justified that the Chaldeans were the last to be in Northern Iraq not Assyrians.
ܦܪܕܝܣܐ ܗ݇ܘܝܢ ܗ݇ܘܐ ܡܝܘܡܐ ܩܕ݇ܡܝܐ, ܘܦܪܕܣܐ ܒܦܝܫܝܢ ܠܕܪܐ ܐ݇ܚܪܝܐ

ܦܹܪܕܹܣܵܐ ܗ݇ܘܲܢ ܗ݇ܘܵܐ ܡܝܘܿܡܵܐ ܩܲܕ݇ܡܵܝܵܐ, ܘܦܹܪܕܹܣܵܐ ܒܦܲܝܫܝܼܢ ܠܕܵܪܵܐ ܐ݇ܚܵܪܵܝܵܐ

Assyrian Voice Forum

Re: Can Chaldean really be our true ethnicity?
« Reply #2 on: July 21, 2011, 06:45:01 AM »

Offline xnicksomox

  • Junior Member
  • **
  • Posts: 716
Re: Can Chaldean really be our true ethnicity?
« Reply #3 on: July 21, 2011, 06:59:51 AM »
Nabopolassar's position, and the fate of Assyria was sealed when he entered into an alliance with another of Assyria's former vassals, the Medes, the now dominant people of what was to become Persia. The Medes, and Chaldean ruled Babylonians, together with the Scythians and Cimmerians attacked Assyria in 616 BC, and by 612 BC the alliance had sacked Nineveh, killing Sinsharishkun in the process. Nabopolassar and his allies were now in possession of the huge Neo Assyrian Empire. An Assyrian king Ashuruballit II held out at Harran, resisting until 605 BC, when the remnants of the Assyrian Army and an Egyptian force were defeated at Karchemish. The Chaldeans now ruled all of Mesopotamia, and the former Assyrian possessions of Aram, Phoenicia, Israel, Edom and parts of Arabia, while the Medes took control of the former Assyrian colonies in Iran, Asia Minor and the Caucasus.
ܦܪܕܝܣܐ ܗ݇ܘܝܢ ܗ݇ܘܐ ܡܝܘܡܐ ܩܕ݇ܡܝܐ, ܘܦܪܕܣܐ ܒܦܝܫܝܢ ܠܕܪܐ ܐ݇ܚܪܝܐ

ܦܹܪܕܹܣܵܐ ܗ݇ܘܲܢ ܗ݇ܘܵܐ ܡܝܘܿܡܵܐ ܩܲܕ݇ܡܵܝܵܐ, ܘܦܹܪܕܹܣܵܐ ܒܦܲܝܫܝܼܢ ܠܕܵܪܵܐ ܐ݇ܚܵܪܵܝܵܐ

Offline Rumtaya

  • Mid-Level Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1814
Re: Can Chaldean really be our true ethnicity?
« Reply #4 on: July 21, 2011, 07:25:37 AM »
I dont thikn there was any huge settlements of "chaldeans" in Assyria. The Time was too short and the chaldean-medien dynastie over middle east and specially over Assyria ceased to exist wehen the Persians took over some 60 years.

Beside that you should not forget that the Assyrian Empire had Deportation Campaings, where they have had brought since longer tiem ago Assyrians to Babylon or to Syria. Verca Visa they brought some from those areas who ended up asimiliating into Assyrianess i.e. become Assyrian Citizen.


Offline dok101

  • Junior Member
  • **
  • Posts: 221
  • Gender: Male
Re: Can Chaldean really be our true ethnicity?
« Reply #5 on: July 21, 2011, 07:56:33 AM »
Assyrians, Chaldeans, and Syriacs/Aramaeans are all principally genetically northern Mesopotamian.  I will say it again.  Assyrians, Chaldeans, and Syriacs/Aramaeans are all principally genetically northern Mesopotamian.  All the Youtube threads and Internet posts in the world will not change these facts.  And, by Mesopotamian, I am not referring to the narrow "land between two rivers" definition, by the way.  Do we have Chaldean/Babylonian blood?  It is probable.  Do we have Aramaean blood?  It is probable.  Are Chaldeans and Syriacs/Aramaeans free to identify as they wish?  Absolutely.  I still consider them my brothers and sisters.  Whether they wish to see me differently is their prerogative. 

A recent result, on a genetics DNA blog project page.  He uses Assyrians as one of his examples.  Assyrians here include members of the Syriac Orthodox Church, Assyrian Church of the East, Ancient Church of the East, and Chaldean Catholic Church.  The best fits are the top four.  A caveat from the creator, Dienekes Pontikos:

Quote
The mixed mode should be used with caution, and it shows, more than anything else, how similar apparent "mixes" can be achieved by different combinations of ancestry. Nonetheless, it may prove somewhat useful.

[1,] "Assyrian_D" "0"
[2,] "83.9% Armenians_16 + 16.1% Yemen_Jews" "1.7829"
[3,] "89.1% Armenian_D + 10.9% Saudis" "2.1624"
[4,] "84.3% Armenians_16 + 15.7% Saudis" "2.2884"
[5,] "88.9% Armenian_D + 11.1% Yemen_Jews" "2.2983"

[6,] "83.8% Armenian_D + 16.2% Bedouin" "4.1579"
[7,] "72.2% Armenian_D + 27.8% Syrians" "4.1841"
[8,] "23.4% Georgians + 76.6% Iraq_Jews" "4.2418"
[9,] "76.2% Armenians_16 + 23.8% Bedouin" "4.332"
[10,] "61.5% Armenians_16 + 38.5% Syrians" "4.4019"

Quote
This reaffirms the close relationship of Assyrians to Armenians that has been noticed in the project and by others, and it also shows that Assyrians differ from Armenians in a Southwestern Asian direction, consistent with their Semitic language.

For comparison, here are the Kurds (3 Iraqi, 1 Turkish, 1 Iranian).  The same caveat as above applies.  It does not mean they are actually a recent or ancient mix of the populations listed.

[1,] "Kurd_D" "0"
[2,] "16.6% Greek_D + 83.4% Iranians" "2.3315"
[3,] "86.9% Iranians + 13.1% Tuscan" "2.5281"
[4,] "88.8% Iranians + 11.2% North_Italian" "2.6272"
[5,] "15.1% C_Italian_D + 84.9% Iranians" "2.6277"
[6,] "88.1% Iranians + 11.9% N_Italian_D" "2.6515"
[7,] "85.7% Iranians + 14.3% O_Italian_D" "2.7208"
[8,] "86.2% Iranians + 13.8% Romanians_14" "2.827"
[9,] "85.6% Iranians + 14.4% Tuscan_X" "3.0083"
[10,] "85.9% Iranians + 14.1% TSI" "3.0386"

Offline mrzurnaci

  • Special Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5755
  • Gender: Male
    • Zurnaya's Youtube
Re: Can Chaldean really be our true ethnicity?
« Reply #6 on: July 22, 2011, 12:47:00 AM »
Chaldean CAN be our true ethnicity, but you must remember that historians and scholars all agree that Assyria and Babylonia were sister-states meaning they shared the same language (Akkadian) religion (Assur and Marduk) clothing, and technologies for that matter. Throughout the Neo-Assyrian empire, the Assyrian kings always put Babylon in high regard, for example how Sennacherib destroys Babylon and then he is assassinated, and then his successor son rebuilds Babylon, in which Assyrians strive for unity by maintaining Babylonian loyalty.

The Chaldeans were said that they originated from the Arameans who were deported to Babylon and mixed with the locals because they "appeared" at the same time the Arameans arrive at babylon, but for some reason according to the scholars, the Chaldeans were very "pro-Akkadian" because during the Assyrian empire when we switched from Akkadian to Aramaic, the Chaldeans re-established Akkadian as a language of culture and administration until the Persians re-instated Aramaic.

But according to historians, the word "Chaldean" AS A PEOPLE, hasn't been used since Babylon was taken by the First Persian empire.
Also according to Historians, Greeks and Jews used the name "Chaldean" to be synonymous as "Babylonian" which is kind of like calling the Italians Romans.

Offline xnicksomox

  • Junior Member
  • **
  • Posts: 716
Re: Can Chaldean really be our true ethnicity?
« Reply #7 on: July 22, 2011, 04:31:26 AM »
Mrzurnaci I don't understand what you mean by Chaldean isn't a name for people. Even if Chaldeans did split from Assyrians then for 500 years people have been using that name.

Also isn't Italy what's left of the Roman Empire? Same people, same language?
ܦܪܕܝܣܐ ܗ݇ܘܝܢ ܗ݇ܘܐ ܡܝܘܡܐ ܩܕ݇ܡܝܐ, ܘܦܪܕܣܐ ܒܦܝܫܝܢ ܠܕܪܐ ܐ݇ܚܪܝܐ

ܦܹܪܕܹܣܵܐ ܗ݇ܘܲܢ ܗ݇ܘܵܐ ܡܝܘܿܡܵܐ ܩܲܕ݇ܡܵܝܵܐ, ܘܦܹܪܕܹܣܵܐ ܒܦܲܝܫܝܼܢ ܠܕܵܪܵܐ ܐ݇ܚܵܪܵܝܵܐ

Offline 7ayruta

  • Junior Member
  • **
  • Posts: 441
  • Gender: Male
Re: Can Chaldean really be our true ethnicity?
« Reply #8 on: July 22, 2011, 06:13:12 AM »
The way you put it up, then there is a fair chance. However, you made a mistake by calling Chaldeans; Babylonians. Babylon and Assyria were 2 Akkadian states. Never has the Babylonian emperors reffered to Babylon as Chaldean. Chaldeans only ruled over Babylon for a short period after they had migrated into it and gained power. All the kings of Babylon refered to their army as "The army of Akkad" and you will see that in almost every tablet speaking of their wars.

As mrzurnaci also mentioned, the Babylonians were like the other half of the Assyrians and vice versa. Same people.

Chaldeans being a normadic tribe who migrated into Babylon is not the same as we see today and it is completely ridicilous to defend the split in our nation. So if the half of all Chaldeans, or whatever, started calling themselves Sumerian for 500 years .. Would that make them Sumerian? - Would YOU accept them as being Sumerian? I guess not.

As far as I know, Assyrian records go further back than Chaldean? I haven't yet seen a 20 year old father who had a 50 year old son  :blink:
- Of course, I might be wrong because maybe some Chaldean tablets that our older than the Assyrian/Babylonian ones just haven't been found, however, I highly doubt that  :)


Quote
Also isn't Italy what's left of the Roman Empire? Same people, same language?

Italians agree upon their prescent nationality and their past, aswell.
ܦܠܚܗ ܕܐܠܗܐ
ܚܪܘܬܐ ܠܐܬܘܪ ܟܒܝܫܬܐ  

Offline mrzurnaci

  • Special Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5755
  • Gender: Male
    • Zurnaya's Youtube
Re: Can Chaldean really be our true ethnicity?
« Reply #9 on: July 22, 2011, 01:02:06 PM »
Mrzurnaci I don't understand what you mean by Chaldean isn't a name for people. Even if Chaldeans did split from Assyrians then for 500 years people have been using that name.

Also isn't Italy what's left of the Roman Empire? Same people, same language?
all I'm saying is that the word Chaldean as an ethnicity disappeared after Persia conquers Babylonia until the Schism of 1552 revived the name "Chaldean" as an ethnicity for us (Native Mesopotamian people).

Babylonia was annexed to the First Persian empire in 539 BC and the Schism of 1552, which created the Chaldean Catholic Church (obviously) happened in 1552; what I'm saying is "Why did the name "Chaldean" disappear until 1552?" especially for 2,091 years?

Also according to historians, Chaldeans were very conscious of their heritage and revived Akkadian which is known as the Assyro-Babylonian language instead of Aramaic is was becoming more common in the middle east at the time. Not only that but they also revived much of their "Sumero-Akkadian" culture which was "born" when the Akkadian empire split into Assyria north and Babylonia south; like the American Civil War U.S., Union north and the Confederate South.
« Last Edit: July 22, 2011, 01:14:34 PM by mrzurnaci »

Offline xnicksomox

  • Junior Member
  • **
  • Posts: 716
Re: Can Chaldean really be our true ethnicity?
« Reply #10 on: July 22, 2011, 01:07:37 PM »
Well nowadays everyone uses Chaldean and Babylonian interchangeably. This is probably because the Chaldeans ruled the Neo Babylonian empire, which was when they actually defeated Assyria and controlled the land, fending off Egyptian attacks. Also because the word "Chaldean" was used for the astronomers who were subject to the Babylonians.
ܦܪܕܝܣܐ ܗ݇ܘܝܢ ܗ݇ܘܐ ܡܝܘܡܐ ܩܕ݇ܡܝܐ, ܘܦܪܕܣܐ ܒܦܝܫܝܢ ܠܕܪܐ ܐ݇ܚܪܝܐ

ܦܹܪܕܹܣܵܐ ܗ݇ܘܲܢ ܗ݇ܘܵܐ ܡܝܘܿܡܵܐ ܩܲܕ݇ܡܵܝܵܐ, ܘܦܹܪܕܹܣܵܐ ܒܦܲܝܫܝܼܢ ܠܕܵܪܵܐ ܐ݇ܚܵܪܵܝܵܐ

Offline 7ayruta

  • Junior Member
  • **
  • Posts: 441
  • Gender: Male
Re: Can Chaldean really be our true ethnicity?
« Reply #11 on: July 22, 2011, 04:31:41 PM »
Well nowadays everyone uses Chaldean and Babylonian interchangeably. This is probably because the Chaldeans ruled the Neo Babylonian empire, which was when they actually defeated Assyria and controlled the land, fending off Egyptian attacks. Also because the word "Chaldean" was used for the astronomers who were subject to the Babylonians.

That's not a reason for defending it. You're only helping to dig the grave of umtan. The fact that others do it is not a justification to help splitting the nation by keeping 1000 different names.

Try to answer my question: So if the half of all Chaldeans, or whatever, started calling themselves Sumerian for 500 years .. Would that make them Sumerian? - Would YOU accept them as being Sumerian? I guess not.
ܦܠܚܗ ܕܐܠܗܐ
ܚܪܘܬܐ ܠܐܬܘܪ ܟܒܝܫܬܐ  

Offline mrzurnaci

  • Special Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5755
  • Gender: Male
    • Zurnaya's Youtube
Re: Can Chaldean really be our true ethnicity?
« Reply #12 on: July 22, 2011, 06:37:47 PM »
Well nowadays everyone uses Chaldean and Babylonian interchangeably. This is probably because the Chaldeans ruled the Neo Babylonian empire, which was when they actually defeated Assyria and controlled the land, fending off Egyptian attacks. Also because the word "Chaldean" was used for the astronomers who were subject to the Babylonians.
yes but Mesopotamians stopped using the name "Chaldean" for over 2000 years until 1552

Offline xnicksomox

  • Junior Member
  • **
  • Posts: 716
Re: Can Chaldean really be our true ethnicity?
« Reply #13 on: July 23, 2011, 03:40:23 PM »
You can prove that Mesopotamians stopped using the name Chaldeans until 500 years ago just as easily as proving Assyrians stopped using that name until 500 years ago ;)


7ayrutha but there is proof of Chaldeans before the 1500's. Just like proving Assyrians were there we could prove Chaldeans were there.
ܦܪܕܝܣܐ ܗ݇ܘܝܢ ܗ݇ܘܐ ܡܝܘܡܐ ܩܕ݇ܡܝܐ, ܘܦܪܕܣܐ ܒܦܝܫܝܢ ܠܕܪܐ ܐ݇ܚܪܝܐ

ܦܹܪܕܹܣܵܐ ܗ݇ܘܲܢ ܗ݇ܘܵܐ ܡܝܘܿܡܵܐ ܩܲܕ݇ܡܵܝܵܐ, ܘܦܹܪܕܹܣܵܐ ܒܦܲܝܫܝܼܢ ܠܕܵܪܵܐ ܐ݇ܚܵܪܵܝܵܐ

Offline xnicksomox

  • Junior Member
  • **
  • Posts: 716
Re: Can Chaldean really be our true ethnicity?
« Reply #14 on: July 23, 2011, 03:50:46 PM »
BTW when Americans split from Britain and after the Revolutions Americans were called American. The British did not continue calling them British. Sometimes a split is a split.

My opinion is that until our PRIESTS (even though many here aren't religious and hate the churches for splitting us) have to be the ones to talk about our problems and unite us through religion. Because Chaldeans are religious and will never accept the Assyrian name unless you were Catholic. And BTW the Chaldeans are the majority of our people and everyone here probably knows. So if you really want to be united ask your priests to help you out. (Now you see I have a point ;))

BTW one of your bishops tried to do this but none of your stubborn Assyrian priests wanted to help him. Maybe that's why he decided to convert to Catholicism. Because you guys obviously are 2 faced saying you would like to unite but when the time comes you run away.

Chaldean Catholic Church - 1,500,000 adherents

Assyrian Church of the East - 70,000


You guys are only like 2 Chaldean villages combined. And you know how many villages we have ;)
ܦܪܕܝܣܐ ܗ݇ܘܝܢ ܗ݇ܘܐ ܡܝܘܡܐ ܩܕ݇ܡܝܐ, ܘܦܪܕܣܐ ܒܦܝܫܝܢ ܠܕܪܐ ܐ݇ܚܪܝܐ

ܦܹܪܕܹܣܵܐ ܗ݇ܘܲܢ ܗ݇ܘܵܐ ܡܝܘܿܡܵܐ ܩܲܕ݇ܡܵܝܵܐ, ܘܦܹܪܕܹܣܵܐ ܒܦܲܝܫܝܼܢ ܠܕܵܪܵܐ ܐ݇ܚܵܪܵܝܵܐ

Offline xnicksomox

  • Junior Member
  • **
  • Posts: 716
Re: Can Chaldean really be our true ethnicity?
« Reply #15 on: July 23, 2011, 03:55:57 PM »
Blame your own people not ours. In our Church in San Diego we accept the Assyrians and Mar Bowai. We are brothers and sisters and share the same language. I accept that he calls himself Assyrian and he respects me as a Chaldean but we are in unity. That's what I meant when I said we don't actually have to change names just to be united.
ܦܪܕܝܣܐ ܗ݇ܘܝܢ ܗ݇ܘܐ ܡܝܘܡܐ ܩܕ݇ܡܝܐ, ܘܦܪܕܣܐ ܒܦܝܫܝܢ ܠܕܪܐ ܐ݇ܚܪܝܐ

ܦܹܪܕܹܣܵܐ ܗ݇ܘܲܢ ܗ݇ܘܵܐ ܡܝܘܿܡܵܐ ܩܲܕ݇ܡܵܝܵܐ, ܘܦܹܪܕܹܣܵܐ ܒܦܲܝܫܝܼܢ ܠܕܵܪܵܐ ܐ݇ܚܵܪܵܝܵܐ

Offline Rumtaya

  • Mid-Level Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1814
Re: Can Chaldean really be our true ethnicity?
« Reply #16 on: July 23, 2011, 04:53:00 PM »
BTW when Americans split from Britain and after the Revolutions Americans were called American. The British did not continue calling them British. Sometimes a split is a split.

My opinion is that until our PRIESTS (even though many here aren't religious and hate the churches for splitting us) have to be the ones to talk about our problems and unite us through religion. Because Chaldeans are religious and will never accept the Assyrian name unless you were Catholic. And BTW the Chaldeans are the majority of our people and everyone here probably knows. So if you really want to be united ask your priests to help you out. (Now you see I have a point ;))

BTW one of your bishops tried to do this but none of your stubborn Assyrian priests wanted to help him. Maybe that's why he decided to convert to Catholicism. Because you guys obviously are 2 faced saying you would like to unite but when the time comes you run away.

Chaldean Catholic Church - 1,500,000 adherents

Assyrian Church of the East - 70,000


You guys are only like 2 Chaldean villages combined. And you know how many villages we have ;)


You do a mistake my dear. Assyrians are not only Church of the East. :)...Get away from that poison alike thinking. You can NEVER split people EXACTLY according to their "real" background within churches. :)

Its like trying to divide a unkown city with a population of 100 000 living in 10 suburbs each suburb has 10 000 people....you just take a pen and circle 8 suberbs put them together and circle the other 2 suburbs and put them together. And according to this speeration you say ahh this one are now Chaldeans and the other one are Assyrians.

Also forget about tracing anyone back to pure Assyrian roots, pure aramean roots, pure chaldena roots, pure whatever roots. It just does not work. :)

Those are definitly all parts of our history, but we should go for hard facts. And my dear our forefathers called themselves "Suraye" which does NOT mean "christian", but as scientists have proofed ASSYRIAN. :)

The number 70 000 is very low and wrong. Only former Khabour Assyrians make up to 50 000. :)

Again, stop dividing this nation according to Churches!

Offline mrzurnaci

  • Special Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5755
  • Gender: Male
    • Zurnaya's Youtube
Re: Can Chaldean really be our true ethnicity?
« Reply #17 on: July 23, 2011, 05:41:48 PM »
nick, i dare you to ask any non-Assyrian this.

there's two guys, they both have the same language, same writing used in that language, they cook and eat the same type of foods, one guy celebrates a culture that is perfectly similar to the other guy, they are both christians (you may exclude this religious question), and they both come from the same region and both of them regard that region as their homeland and call themselves indigenous to it, one calls himself Assyrian, and the other; Chaldean, are they the same ethnicity/race?

Offline xnicksomox

  • Junior Member
  • **
  • Posts: 716
Re: Can Chaldean really be our true ethnicity?
« Reply #18 on: July 23, 2011, 09:10:40 PM »
Nope I'm sorry my information happens to add both the Old Church of the East (in Iraq) and the Assyrian Church of the East. However you are right that it does not have the part that speak Western Syriac. The Syriac people do not all call themselves Assyrian though so I cannot add it. This actually does mean there are a few thousand extra Assyrians (only a few thousand extra). So lets just say your number rose to 80,000 (which is actually 10,000 extra not a few) you will never catch up to Chaldeans. Even "Aina" an Assyrian oriented site says Chaldeans are about 45% of all our people (Chaldean, Assyrian, Syriac, and Aramaen), it also states that Chaldeans are the majority, followed by Syriacs, then Assyrians.
ܦܪܕܝܣܐ ܗ݇ܘܝܢ ܗ݇ܘܐ ܡܝܘܡܐ ܩܕ݇ܡܝܐ, ܘܦܪܕܣܐ ܒܦܝܫܝܢ ܠܕܪܐ ܐ݇ܚܪܝܐ

ܦܹܪܕܹܣܵܐ ܗ݇ܘܲܢ ܗ݇ܘܵܐ ܡܝܘܿܡܵܐ ܩܲܕ݇ܡܵܝܵܐ, ܘܦܹܪܕܹܣܵܐ ܒܦܲܝܫܝܼܢ ܠܕܵܪܵܐ ܐ݇ܚܵܪܵܝܵܐ

Offline xnicksomox

  • Junior Member
  • **
  • Posts: 716
Re: Can Chaldean really be our true ethnicity?
« Reply #19 on: July 23, 2011, 09:13:54 PM »
Consider this though mrzurnaci the churches basically had a revolution without an actual war correct? The Americans split from the British correct? Explain why Americans can do what the Chaldeans did except get away with it? Just because of an actual war? Even if we split from you we are the majority so unless u bend your morals to match ours the Chaldeans will always be more well known.
ܦܪܕܝܣܐ ܗ݇ܘܝܢ ܗ݇ܘܐ ܡܝܘܡܐ ܩܕ݇ܡܝܐ, ܘܦܪܕܣܐ ܒܦܝܫܝܢ ܠܕܪܐ ܐ݇ܚܪܝܐ

ܦܹܪܕܹܣܵܐ ܗ݇ܘܲܢ ܗ݇ܘܵܐ ܡܝܘܿܡܵܐ ܩܲܕ݇ܡܵܝܵܐ, ܘܦܹܪܕܹܣܵܐ ܒܦܲܝܫܝܼܢ ܠܕܵܪܵܐ ܐ݇ܚܵܪܵܝܵܐ

Offline mrzurnaci

  • Special Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5755
  • Gender: Male
    • Zurnaya's Youtube
Re: Can Chaldean really be our true ethnicity?
« Reply #20 on: July 23, 2011, 10:04:27 PM »
Consider this though mrzurnaci the churches basically had a revolution without an actual war correct? The Americans split from the British correct? Explain why Americans can do what the Chaldeans did except get away with it? Just because of an actual war? Even if we split from you we are the majority so unless u bend your morals to match ours the Chaldeans will always be more well known.
Who said they got away with it? people in early America were Germans, Dutch, French etc. British were 2rd or 3th largest minority in early America

The reason theirs more "Chaldeans" then "Assyrians" is because we were fighting the Turks, Kurds, and Arabs so you guys could live.

also tell me this Why do Chaldeans in Iraq call themselves Assyrian?
« Last Edit: July 23, 2011, 10:06:22 PM by mrzurnaci »

Offline Unity

  • Junior Member
  • **
  • Posts: 39
  • Gender: Male
Re: Can Chaldean really be our true ethnicity?
« Reply #21 on: July 23, 2011, 10:41:22 PM »
BTW when Americans split from Britain and after the Revolutions Americans were called American. The British did not continue calling them British. Sometimes a split is a split.

My opinion is that until our PRIESTS (even though many here aren't religious and hate the churches for splitting us) have to be the ones to talk about our problems and unite us through religion. Because Chaldeans are religious and will never accept the Assyrian name unless you were Catholic. And BTW the Chaldeans are the majority of our people and everyone here probably knows. So if you really want to be united ask your priests to help you out. (Now you see I have a point ;))

BTW one of your bishops tried to do this but none of your stubborn Assyrian priests wanted to help him. Maybe that's why he decided to convert to Catholicism. Because you guys obviously are 2 faced saying you would like to unite but when the time comes you run away.

Chaldean Catholic Church - 1,500,000 adherents

Assyrian Church of the East - 70,000



You guys are only like 2 Chaldean villages combined. And you know how many villages we have ;)

Whats the point of the numbers you posted? You can't deny the fact that more than 90% of Chaldeans call themselves Arabs!  In other words, modern Chaldeans reject [or they are ashamed of] their ethnicity by speaking Arabic and as I mentioned above, they call themselves Arabs [or Iraqi/Arab Christians]. On the other hand, I have never heard or seen one Assyrian speaking as much Arabic as the Chaldeans. Plus, Assyrians do not deny or reject their ethnicity and they never call themselves Arabs or Kurds. In fact Assyrians are very proud of their ethnicity and they want to let everyone know that "Assyria lives and Assyrians still exist"

Back to the numbers:
I am sure there are more Assyrians than 70,000, because a large number of Assyrians are turning to Atheism and others are attending other churches.

Conclusion:
I believe there will never be a Chaldean, Assyrian and Syriac state until we become united and strong.

Sorry if I made spelling mistakes, I am in a hurry and I have to go.
Khaya Atour oo Babel! :) :wavetowel:
I am Aramean

I am Assyrian

I am Chaldean

I am Mesopotamian

I AM BETH NAHRIN !!!

Offline mrzurnaci

  • Special Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5755
  • Gender: Male
    • Zurnaya's Youtube
Re: Can Chaldean really be our true ethnicity?
« Reply #22 on: July 24, 2011, 12:58:16 AM »
yes im tired of seeing Arabic on Assyrian related articles in Wikipedia. I always delete it.

Offline xnicksomox

  • Junior Member
  • **
  • Posts: 716
Re: Can Chaldean really be our true ethnicity?
« Reply #23 on: July 24, 2011, 01:23:56 AM »
Chaldeans never call themselves Arab. I don't know who told you this because I'm sure that you've never met a Chaldean that says he's Arab. We say Iraqi Christian to the white people who just really shortly wanna know who we are. If they want to know more we describe it as Mesopotamians speaking the language of Christ and the 1st Christians. You are highly mistaken.

Second you say the number for Assyrian is higher because of conversion? LMFAOO you think Chaldeans don't convert? Conversion happens with everyone and isn't a big deal.

3rd Chaldeans in Iraq do not call themselves Assyrian. Especially not the main villages. I've never met anyone from Shaqlawa or Ankawa but I assume even they say they are Chaldean. The only people in Iraq that call themselves Assyrian are the Assyrians whose villages/tribes are close to Iraq.
ܦܪܕܝܣܐ ܗ݇ܘܝܢ ܗ݇ܘܐ ܡܝܘܡܐ ܩܕ݇ܡܝܐ, ܘܦܪܕܣܐ ܒܦܝܫܝܢ ܠܕܪܐ ܐ݇ܚܪܝܐ

ܦܹܪܕܹܣܵܐ ܗ݇ܘܲܢ ܗ݇ܘܵܐ ܡܝܘܿܡܵܐ ܩܲܕ݇ܡܵܝܵܐ, ܘܦܹܪܕܹܣܵܐ ܒܦܲܝܫܝܼܢ ܠܕܵܪܵܐ ܐ݇ܚܵܪܵܝܵܐ

Offline xnicksomox

  • Junior Member
  • **
  • Posts: 716
Re: Can Chaldean really be our true ethnicity?
« Reply #24 on: July 24, 2011, 01:33:43 AM »
Also when the revolution happened it was most definitely not only a 3rd British people lmfaooo. I don't know where you live but I guess they don't teach you American history very well though. The 13 colonies were MOSTLY British people, who moved to the New Land because they did not like their new king. After the revolution and America gaining its own name is when others started migrating.

Same concept applies to Chaldeans and Assyrians (if Chaldeans really did split. I used to believe it but I am now unsure because history tells the story differently then you guys would like to
admit).

Chaldeans split from the Assyrian Church and started their own. They were Assyrian in ethnicity but since they split and made a whole new name for themselves (revolution) their ethnicity is now the new name, Chaldean. Just because the revolution was done through church it doesn't mean the split was only religious.


Also I would love to point out that you said "speak the same language". Well I'm sorry because Chaldeans don't speak "Assyrian" if Syriac/Aramaic was ever renamed due to how different we speak modernly it would be called Chaldean not Assyrian because again Chaldeans are the majority and we all know it ;)

So in conclusion I speak Chaldean Aramaic not "Assyrian".
ܦܪܕܝܣܐ ܗ݇ܘܝܢ ܗ݇ܘܐ ܡܝܘܡܐ ܩܕ݇ܡܝܐ, ܘܦܪܕܣܐ ܒܦܝܫܝܢ ܠܕܪܐ ܐ݇ܚܪܝܐ

ܦܹܪܕܹܣܵܐ ܗ݇ܘܲܢ ܗ݇ܘܵܐ ܡܝܘܿܡܵܐ ܩܲܕ݇ܡܵܝܵܐ, ܘܦܹܪܕܹܣܵܐ ܒܦܲܝܫܝܼܢ ܠܕܵܪܵܐ ܐ݇ܚܵܪܵܝܵܐ

Offline mrzurnaci

  • Special Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5755
  • Gender: Male
    • Zurnaya's Youtube
Re: Can Chaldean really be our true ethnicity?
« Reply #25 on: July 24, 2011, 02:14:16 AM »
Also when the revolution happened it was most definitely not only a 3rd British people lmfaooo. I don't know where you live but I guess they don't teach you American history very well though. The 13 colonies were MOSTLY British people, who moved to the New Land because they did not like their new king. After the revolution and America gaining its own name is when others started migrating.

Same concept applies to Chaldeans and Assyrians (if Chaldeans really did split. I used to believe it but I am now unsure because history tells the story differently then you guys would like to
admit).

Chaldeans split from the Assyrian Church and started their own. They were Assyrian in ethnicity but since they split and made a whole new name for themselves (revolution) their ethnicity is now the new name, Chaldean. Just because the revolution was done through church it doesn't mean the split was only religious.


Also I would love to point out that you said "speak the same language". Well I'm sorry because Chaldeans don't speak "Assyrian" if Syriac/Aramaic was ever renamed due to how different we speak modernly it would be called Chaldean not Assyrian because again Chaldeans are the majority and we all know it ;)

So in conclusion I speak Chaldean Aramaic not "Assyrian".

I think I know more history than you... What about all the Dutch people who lived in New York, which was New Amsterdam, prior to British control, and the French people who lived in central united states, what happened to them? and the Hessians who fought with the british against the yankees

changing your name can't change your ethnicity.... that's like a black man from the Igbo ethnicity decides to call himself a Mexican of the Mestizo ethnicity

BUT I think what your saying/asking is "Can we use Assyrian AND Chaldean; both synonymously to refer to our Ethnicity?"

if that's the question then yes, but it will be confusing for non-Assyro-Chaldos

also language professors teaching Aramaic in the U.S. (and Israel) label Assyrian Neo-Aramaic or "the Urmi dialect" and Chaldean Neo-Aramaic or "the Alqosh dialect"

source
Quote
Otto Jastrow, 1997, "The Neo-Aramaic Languages", The Semitic Languages, pp. 334-377 to see the similarities and differences between Chaldean Neo-Aramaic, represented by the dialect of Aradhin (Alqosh), and Assyrian Neo-Aramaic, represented by the dialect of Urmi.

If there's a difference between the two, tell me what is the difference?
« Last Edit: July 24, 2011, 02:27:36 AM by mrzurnaci »

Offline xnicksomox

  • Junior Member
  • **
  • Posts: 716
Re: Can Chaldean really be our true ethnicity?
« Reply #26 on: July 24, 2011, 04:16:09 AM »
Ahh see again you are talking about AFTER the American Revolution when it had been its own country. During the time of the revolution it was strictly British ;)


Yeah I agree with those professors but why don't you take a look at the "language " part of the forum where all you Assyrians argue that Assyrian is its own language. I AM THE ONE who said we speak Aramaic and our dialects are Chaldean Neo-Aramaic and Chaldean Neo-Aramaic, not you ;)

And there are VERY VERY many differences between Alqosh Sureth and Urmi "Suret" starting with the fact that we use the "Dh" and "th" sound not "d" and "d" for example "mathwatha" and "matwata". Second Chaldean Aramaic is influenced by Arabic while Assyrian Aramaic is influenced by Persian. For example sunglasses= Shoosha (Assyrian) and Munadher (Chaldean). Also lots of grammar for example "I am"= "Hon" (Assyrian) and "Eewin" (Chaldean)
ܦܪܕܝܣܐ ܗ݇ܘܝܢ ܗ݇ܘܐ ܡܝܘܡܐ ܩܕ݇ܡܝܐ, ܘܦܪܕܣܐ ܒܦܝܫܝܢ ܠܕܪܐ ܐ݇ܚܪܝܐ

ܦܹܪܕܹܣܵܐ ܗ݇ܘܲܢ ܗ݇ܘܵܐ ܡܝܘܿܡܵܐ ܩܲܕ݇ܡܵܝܵܐ, ܘܦܹܪܕܹܣܵܐ ܒܦܲܝܫܝܼܢ ܠܕܵܪܵܐ ܐ݇ܚܵܪܵܝܵܐ

Offline davidb

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 4092
  • Gender: Male
Re: Can Chaldean really be our true ethnicity?
« Reply #27 on: July 24, 2011, 04:47:15 AM »
The further along we go, the less intelligent this argument becomes.


Offline xnicksomox

  • Junior Member
  • **
  • Posts: 716
Re: Can Chaldean really be our true ethnicity?
« Reply #28 on: July 24, 2011, 05:35:25 AM »
The more I see comments like that, the more I consider the writer less intelligent.

Hey that was a very good argument davidb I totally see your point. ;)
ܦܪܕܝܣܐ ܗ݇ܘܝܢ ܗ݇ܘܐ ܡܝܘܡܐ ܩܕ݇ܡܝܐ, ܘܦܪܕܣܐ ܒܦܝܫܝܢ ܠܕܪܐ ܐ݇ܚܪܝܐ

ܦܹܪܕܹܣܵܐ ܗ݇ܘܲܢ ܗ݇ܘܵܐ ܡܝܘܿܡܵܐ ܩܲܕ݇ܡܵܝܵܐ, ܘܦܹܪܕܹܣܵܐ ܒܦܲܝܫܝܼܢ ܠܕܵܪܵܐ ܐ݇ܚܵܪܵܝܵܐ

Offline davidb

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 4092
  • Gender: Male
Re: Can Chaldean really be our true ethnicity?
« Reply #29 on: July 24, 2011, 06:25:15 AM »
Say what you will. I'm basing my comment on what I am seeing and what I have seen, while you're just trying to get a cheap shot.

I would never waste my time arguing with someone who bases their argument on information they get from wikipedia.

Offline xnicksomox

  • Junior Member
  • **
  • Posts: 716
Re: Can Chaldean really be our true ethnicity?
« Reply #30 on: July 24, 2011, 06:30:41 AM »
My information isn't from Wikipedia and you'd know that if you gave it a little thought because if I remember correctly I was the only one on this whole site who posted links to my proof. But people never read my proof anyway and disregarded links.
ܦܪܕܝܣܐ ܗ݇ܘܝܢ ܗ݇ܘܐ ܡܝܘܡܐ ܩܕ݇ܡܝܐ, ܘܦܪܕܣܐ ܒܦܝܫܝܢ ܠܕܪܐ ܐ݇ܚܪܝܐ

ܦܹܪܕܹܣܵܐ ܗ݇ܘܲܢ ܗ݇ܘܵܐ ܡܝܘܿܡܵܐ ܩܲܕ݇ܡܵܝܵܐ, ܘܦܹܪܕܹܣܵܐ ܒܦܲܝܫܝܼܢ ܠܕܵܪܵܐ ܐ݇ܚܵܪܵܝܵܐ

Offline Rumtaya

  • Mid-Level Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1814
Re: Can Chaldean really be our true ethnicity?
« Reply #31 on: July 24, 2011, 09:34:11 AM »
@xnicksomox


Whats your intention? Assyrians are represented as a NATION in all various church sects. However it is not the case for the other groups. You are stuck into some stuff that is more of a church identity. Did you not consider my example? Just making circling up some suburbs and call the people in the two different circled area by different name.

The language was in our language always called "surayit". We describe ourselves since over 2000 years as Suraye.

I am wondering if your a supprotive towards an Assyria in the North or support a growing Kurdistan Region that would cover even the last assyrian stronghold in the nineveh plain.

« Last Edit: July 24, 2011, 09:35:23 AM by Rumtaya »

Offline mrzurnaci

  • Special Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5755
  • Gender: Male
    • Zurnaya's Youtube
Re: Can Chaldean really be our true ethnicity?
« Reply #32 on: July 24, 2011, 04:02:20 PM »
Ahh see again you are talking about AFTER the American Revolution when it had been its own country. During the time of the revolution it was strictly British ;)


Yeah I agree with those professors but why don't you take a look at the "language " part of the forum where all you Assyrians argue that Assyrian is its own language. I AM THE ONE who said we speak Aramaic and our dialects are Chaldean Neo-Aramaic and Chaldean Neo-Aramaic, not you ;)

And there are VERY VERY many differences between Alqosh Sureth and Urmi "Suret" starting with the fact that we use the "Dh" and "th" sound not "d" and "d" for example "mathwatha" and "matwata". Second Chaldean Aramaic is influenced by Arabic while Assyrian Aramaic is influenced by Persian. For example sunglasses= Shoosha (Assyrian) and Munadher (Chaldean). Also lots of grammar for example "I am"= "Hon" (Assyrian) and "Eewin" (Chaldean)

Dialectal differences do not make a different language if that was the case, then VERY dialect of Arabic would be it's own language like Iraqi Arabic, Egyptian Arabic and so on.

Also, the way I say "I am" in my dialect, I say "eewin" as well, but my mom doesn't speak Chaldo Dialect.
Just because Chaldean aramaic has more spirantization than Assyrian aramaic doesn't make it a different language, it makes it a different dialect
again, if that was the case then every dialect might as well be another language.

The basis of a language is it's grammar, why is Neo-Aramaic different from Syriac? mostly grammar because Syriac is a dialect of middle aramaic,

Offline xnicksomox

  • Junior Member
  • **
  • Posts: 716
Re: Can Chaldean really be our true ethnicity?
« Reply #33 on: July 24, 2011, 04:25:57 PM »
Yes but Assyrian is supposed to be Urmi so "Hon" is the right way in Assyrian Aramaic.

Just so you know I'm not saying we speak different languages. I was actually the one who started 2 topics about how we speak Aramaic not Assyrian.

"xnicksomox: Alex it's because they're stubborn and like everything to be Assyrian. There's no "extra" Akkadian words in the Assyrian dialect. However many there are for you, it's the same for the Chaldeans/Aramaens. The Syriac name, AS IT SAYS IN THE PESHlTTA, is "coined by the Greek". Just because we've been using it for a long time doesn't mean it's correct. The Assyrians would not even WANT to change it because they say it means Assyrian. So why would they correct the Greek? It was a good thing for them. Just because the Greek did it a ling time ago doesn't mean its correct. I like Alex's example of Arabic as well. Do you guys understand Arabic spoken in Tunisia? No! But they don't rename it "Tunisian" or "Iraqi". Arabic is Arabic. Sane with English and Spanish.I love how I posted like 10 links and only 3 or 4 were wikipedia so not "most". How many do each of you have? ZERO! :D Btw I think we can agree sometimes wikipedia us actually accurate. It's pretty obvious in proof, fact, and examples that we ALL speak Aramaic. Not "Assyrian" or "Chaldean"."

Lol
ܦܪܕܝܣܐ ܗ݇ܘܝܢ ܗ݇ܘܐ ܡܝܘܡܐ ܩܕ݇ܡܝܐ, ܘܦܪܕܣܐ ܒܦܝܫܝܢ ܠܕܪܐ ܐ݇ܚܪܝܐ

ܦܹܪܕܹܣܵܐ ܗ݇ܘܲܢ ܗ݇ܘܵܐ ܡܝܘܿܡܵܐ ܩܲܕ݇ܡܵܝܵܐ, ܘܦܹܪܕܹܣܵܐ ܒܦܲܝܫܝܼܢ ܠܕܵܪܵܐ ܐ݇ܚܵܪܵܝܵܐ

Offline mrzurnaci

  • Special Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5755
  • Gender: Male
    • Zurnaya's Youtube
Re: Can Chaldean really be our true ethnicity?
« Reply #34 on: July 24, 2011, 06:17:40 PM »
Yes but Assyrian is supposed to be Urmi so "Hon" is the right way in Assyrian Aramaic.

Just so you know I'm not saying we speak different languages. I was actually the one who started 2 topics about how we speak Aramaic not Assyrian.

"xnicksomox: Alex it's because they're stubborn and like everything to be Assyrian. There's no "extra" Akkadian words in the Assyrian dialect. However many there are for you, it's the same for the Chaldeans/Aramaens. The Syriac name, AS IT SAYS IN THE PESHlTTA, is "coined by the Greek". Just because we've been using it for a long time doesn't mean it's correct. The Assyrians would not even WANT to change it because they say it means Assyrian. So why would they correct the Greek? It was a good thing for them. Just because the Greek did it a ling time ago doesn't mean its correct. I like Alex's example of Arabic as well. Do you guys understand Arabic spoken in Tunisia? No! But they don't rename it "Tunisian" or "Iraqi". Arabic is Arabic. Sane with English and Spanish.I love how I posted like 10 links and only 3 or 4 were wikipedia so not "most". How many do each of you have? ZERO! :D Btw I think we can agree sometimes wikipedia us actually accurate. It's pretty obvious in proof, fact, and examples that we ALL speak Aramaic. Not "Assyrian" or "Chaldean"."

Lol

lol i guess i didnt read your stuff a little more clearly, Yes our language is Aramaic with a dash of Akkadian, so calling it Assyrian would be wrong because Assyrian or Chaldean language would be technically be Akkadian and since we don't use Akkadian grammar anymore so yea.

hon? u mean Hawin ܗܘܢ that means "I is" lol, eewin ܐܝܗ݇ܘܢ (not sure on spelling) is "I are" "I am" is ana ܐܢܐ

 

History of the Chaldean Church: A Confusion of Religion With Ethnicity

Started by ASHOORBoard Religion and Spirituality

Replies: 4
Views: 744
Last post December 22, 2015, 08:57:02 AM
by Neon
Is it true ?? Surayeh khillon auydaleh

Started by assyriangoddessBoard News & Current Events

Replies: 5
Views: 1758
Last post March 10, 2006, 06:23:35 PM
by X e n a
is it true

Started by assyrian_dudeBoard Chit Chat

Replies: 9
Views: 832
Last post March 08, 2006, 06:18:55 PM
by Valantina
"Allah or Jesus" True Story

Started by LovemoonBoard Culture & History

Replies: 19
Views: 3152
Last post December 30, 2005, 01:06:31 AM
by BLUEICE
a song i posted on chaldean chat loool

Started by J-ROKBoard Chit Chat

Replies: 7
Views: 1059
Last post January 02, 2006, 01:07:41 PM
by Assyrian G Fo Lyfe