Talk:Chaldean/Archive 1
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Asm cc 11:29, 25 October 2006 (UTC){|align="center" width="300" |style="background-color:lightblue; text-align:center;"|This article is being discussed as part of a wider project. Please see Wikipedia:WikiProject Syriac Christianity. |}
Chaldean is a synonym of Chardu,Kardu called also 'the Georgian' for the role in agriculture.This has been one of the first kingdoms in the world.The ancient capital was Calkhu,in gushum(cuneiform inscriptions of the 3rd millenium BCE the country is called Kardunia,also Qi Engur-the country of the Engurs i.e. Mengrelians.This people lived from the Zagros mountains in the East to the Mediterranean and beyond in the Nile basin,in the Iberian peninsula,in the Balkans.They are ancestors to modern-day Kardu-Kartueli nation of the Republic of Sakartuelo and ajacent areas,the Cordoba-Escualdes of the Iberian peninsula,the Cortus of the Cortu Island(Corsica)etc.Their first writing is Gushum(cuneiform),and their several alphabets are known for various purposes.They are indigeneous first population wherever they live in the aforementioned areas and have retained common features,appearence,character,traditional songs,danses etc.user:samqharo@posta.ge 11 Aug o5
- you are looking for the Khaldi article. This page should allow simple disambiguation between (1) Chaldean Christians, (2) Chaldeans=Assyrians/Babylonians in Hellenism, and (3) the Caucasian Chaldeans (Khaldi). dab (ᛏ) 14:13, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
[edit] disambig
there are three main meanings, (1) ancient Babylonian; (2) modern "Chaldeans/Assyrians" (properly, Neo-Arameans); (3) Khaldi. Disambigation should be by these three main meanings, with sublists for derived terms (languages etc.) dab (ᛏ) 08:54, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
It says that modern Chaldeans are ethnically Assyrians, could someone explain this madness to me when the Chaldean civilisation has lasted more than 5000 years since the 3rd millenium bc and the assyrian civilisation much less. As all my sources inform me, I belevie it was the Chaldean army who defeated the Assyrians at the year of 626BC and burned down their capital Nineveh with ease and in doing so, enforced them to relocate their capital and people, and team up with the Egyptians while the Chaldeans were taking over and settling down in today's northern Iraq. If anything, modern assyrians should be ethnically Chaldeans because there is no history of any major assyrian event after the war at Characamish, while on the other hand, the Chaldeans retaliated the power of Persia several times and even served Alexander the Great in Babylon where he died.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Asm cc (talk • contribs).
- you need to say what you mean by "Chaldean civilization". I just said that the term is equivalent to "Babylonian". Your distinction of "ethnic Assyrians" vs. "ethnic Babylonians" is pointless. dab (ᛏ) 11:50, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
Hi my name is Jakov and im a Catholic. The Chaldeans it seems, have existed for many years, however recently poepl are calling them ethnic Assyrians. Is this right can this be proven, and whi is to say that the Chaldens dont exist anymore!!. It was the Chaldeans with the Medes (partially) that destroyed Ninveh!!! But assyrians are considered to still exist. No logic there huh!!!!! The assyrians wrwe forced to go!!!. Not Chaldeans.
THE MILJAKINATOR 22:38, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
- I just can't stop laughing :D Chaldean 23:31, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
I appologise for the misunderstanding, what i was refuting was the first statement in the article where it says Chaldeans are ethnically Assyrians, what you have written about Chaldeans in the discussion is all good. ... —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Asm cc (talk • contribs) 06:58, 26 October 2006.
I dont see what is so funny Chaldean, if you beleive you are so superior why dont you answer my questions, How are today's Chaldeas ethnically Assyrians when the Assyrians were the ones who had to relocate because they lost Nineveh to the Chaldeans and in doing so, left the land for the Chaldeans to settle into, shouldnt it be that today;s Assyrians of iraqi origin be ethnically Chaldeans —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Asm cc (talk • contribs) 07:04, 26 October 2006 .
[edit] Chaldeans are not Ethnically Assyrians
Chaldeans are not ethnically Assyrians as thought by many. People have misunderstood about the Nestorian Church and it's people and belevie that all of members of the Nestorian Church was of Assyrian origin and it's here where many are wrong. The Nestorian Church consisted of the majority of all the Christians in the middle East and Turkey because they were promised protection from the Persian Empire because both the Nestorians and Persians were threatned by the Byzantite Empire which disallowed the practice of the Nestorian faith of Christianity. When the Nestorian Church split apart, there were two rival leaders, Mar Shimun XIII Denha, the leader of the Assyrian Church which was located in Dyiarbakir (today's Turkey, where the Assyrians escaped after the defeat by the Chaldeans, when they were forced to relocate), and Yohanan Soulaqa VII was elected as a Patriach in Alqosh, the leader of the Chaldean Catholic Church (today's northern Iraq, around 300km away from Babylon, well inside the area which Chaldeans conquered and settled in).
There is no 100% guarantee that all of today's Chaldean are of Chaldean origin and the same with Assyrians due to the many war which made so many people relocate, and even when the Chaldeans conquered the Assyrians, there may have been a couple of thousand left hiding in the land of today's northern Iraq.
To conclude with, Most Iraqi Assyrians are Ethnically Chaldeans or must have been of either greek, persian or arab descandent because every single of their towns were heavily demolished and destroyed and the survivors had no choice but to escape to the neighbouring countries. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 124.184.131.93 (talk • contribs)10:17, 26 October 2006 .
The Chaldean church and the Chaldean Language is completely different from that of the Assyrian people. Is there any proof in the pudding to prove the views of the Assyrian people who state that Chaldeans are ethnically Assyrians. The fact is this, if the Chaldeans deterioted the Assyrian people, and burnt down the city of Nineveh causing the Assyrians to flee, how could it be that they exist more then the Chaldeans? It is about time that the Assyrian people stop denying their history and past, accept they got defeated and furthermore do not re-instate that Chaldeans are Assyrians. If the Chaldean and Assyrian people were one people why is it that the Assyrian People don't wish to be called Chaldeans, Why is that the Chaldean people don't wish to be called Assyrians? It just goes to show that they are completely different people, with a different race and religion. I dont see how the two link. Please do not laught as this issue please dont, as this is a very serious issue which needs to be resolved so that the truth is out for the people to know, so that the historical fact and sources are shown and to show that the cracks appear through the bias Assyrian opinion in our world today.
Chaldean_Warrior 17:07, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
- With all due respet, that's where you're wrong, Chaldean_Warrior. The Assyrian and Chaldean languages are both dialects of the Aramaic language, and are very similar; they are both Neo-Aramaic languages, although I think the Chaldean language is more influnced by the Arabic language (sorry if I'm wrong on that last part). The only difference between the modern Assyrian and Chaldean people is that Assyrians are adherents to the Church of the East, and the Chaldeans are adherents to the Chaldean Catholic Church. The term "Chaldean" was used by the Pope in the 17th century to distinguish the two. The fact that Chaldeans don't want to be called Assyrian has nothing to do with the truth; the reason they don't want to be called Assyrian is because for many generations, they have enforced the title designated by the then-Pope and Roman Catholic Church. Also, there are many sources which attest to the significant continued presence of Assyrians throughout Northern Mesopotamia. Please do your reading before you make your accusations.Šarukinu 03:39, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] ≈ You are a shame to the chaldean name asm cc and the person above me ≈
The chaldeans back then were cowards and we chaldeans of today are ehtnically Assyrians, the chaldeans back then were cowards because the only point in time where they could take on the assyrians was when the assyrians had no king and when the chaldeans had a cowardly allegiance with the Medes. And even then when they did take Nineveh it would be Embarassing of the Chaldeans to assume that they did the job, if you go to the british museum, the remains are EVIDENCE OF BARBARIC AND UNCIVILIZED WAY OF taking over a capital, by burning it down. I would like to thank the miljakinator for his comments or should i say FACTS about your allegiance with the Medes. Without them you wouldnt even stand a chance COWARD. And you say that we are ethnically arab, well being a Chaldean (ethically Assyrian) i would have to say that our language is close to arabic than the assyrian is. Also i would have to say that The Assyrians have done so much more than we have, like create a flag before we copied their idea, start schools, tv channels, POLITICAL PARTIES, radio channels, countless clubs, and their NATIONAL celebration of the Assyrian New Year which celebrates the amount of years the Assyrians have been a civilization. In Chicago were i live, there is a Chaldean club were i go to and they are so racially intolerant of Assyrians, their are always fights between the Chaldeans and the Assyrians, because we narrow minded Chaldeans are too arrogant, but we Chaldeans are always going to their new years, and clubs and i have never dealt with any racial comments, only friendliness and kind Christian comments.
And another point i would like to make, the Chaldeans were Fooled by the Medes and destroyed, that just goes to show how gullible the Chaldeans were.
I would like to reinstate my point, WE CHALDEANS OF TODAY ARE NO ETHNICALLY CHALDEAN, BUT CHALDEAN BY RELIGION ONLY, so the only thing that differs us from the Assyrians is that of our Catholicism and their Orthodox. Thus meaning that Chaldean is not a nationality, but a religion, and why they have a flag i dont understand, and to the guy above me who seems kind of lost, its you who has mixed your blood with kurds and persians and ARABS, and lost the battle. We Assyrians, are not gullible, and we are kind hearted ACCEPTING christians, who admire MILJAKINATORS comments. Chaldo gangsta 21:29, 26 October 2006 (UTC) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Chaldo gangsta (talk • contribs)12:43, 26 October 2006.<!
If anyone is a shame to the Chaldeans its you, your mom and your family which has listened to the Assyrians throughout their lifes and not the facts. The Chaldeans were nothing but brave people who challenged the strongest Empire in the world, Yes the Chaldeans did have the Medes on their side, however the Schytians were a known trade and military partner of the Assyrians. What do you mean that the Assyrians didnt have a king, where was Ashurbanipals sons, as I remember, he had two sons heirs to the throne, it wasnt the Chaldean's fault that brothers jealous of each other. And if anyone if were coward, it must have been the Assyrians who escaped cowardly to the plains of Turkey and Assyria and had to relocate their capital. They were threatned by a much smaller populated empire and were still scared of them and joined up with the Egyptian Army at Charcamish and outnumbered the Chaldeans without the help of the Medes with heavily armoured infantry and heavy cavalary when the Chaldeans were the underdogs but still were brave enough to challenge two of the mightiest Empires in the world at once. Asm cc 22:25, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
I am probably more educated than you about this subject, my sources arnt some bias family members or family friends, but assyrialogists and professionals who knows a lot more about this than you. The Medes had the responsobilty to destroy Nimrud and Ashur while the Chaldeans destropyed the mightiest city Nineveh, while they were rebuilding their long lost Empire. Why do you call the Chaldeans cowards, just because they burned down Nineveh, for your facts, the Assyrians demolished Babylon the century before and put it to the grpund and forced the Chaldeans to rebuild it. Well what i call burning of Nineveh is revenge and nothing else, Many years the Chaldeans were under Assyrian control and had to pay uneccesary taxes to the Empire, while they were being treated unfairly. Asm cc 22:36, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] You make me laugh
Firstly, i would like to point out how displeased i am with you about how low a level you have sunk in order to think of a decent comeback by involving my family, which has greatly offended me, i know it is of no use trying to dob you in because i know what your plan b is.
Secondly, If me and my family have listened to the Assyrians all our lives then please explain to me what you mean by FACT, maybe what you can replace it with is OPINION.
Thirdly, the scythians were our very very miniature allies who played a very small role, but the Medes were a much larger and stronger force and were more capable of destroying the Scythians yet like the Chaldeans were to afraid to take on the Assyrians alone.
Fourthly, yes the fact that the two brothers were jealous of eachother and both wanted the throne is true, but at least the throne was worth fighting for, i dont see any Chaldeans fighting over the throne i guess it wasnt as valuable as the Assyrian throne.
Fifthly, the Assyrians didnt cowardly flee to the mountain regions my friend, we used our wit and smarts to preserve our blood, unlike the chaldeans who have just mixed through with the kurds and arabs and persians, what a shame we couldnt preserve their valuable blood.
Sixthly, what was this smaller less populated army, and no matter what it was, our capital was barbarically taken away from us, our men and warriors savagely murdered, how would you expect us to react.
Seventhly, you are just contradicting yourself, first you say that we COWARDLY ran away from you, then you say that we were one of the mightiest empires, make up your mind. Also, the Chaldeans are being hypocryts by saying that we attacked that chaldeans with the help of the egyptians (which is yet to be proven therefore still considered untrue), we were only acting in retaliation to your actions with the assistance of the Medes, as you did to us when we attacked the Babylonian capital.
Eighthly, You are once again contradicting yourself, because we both know for a fact that my sources are the Assyriologists (chaldeology does not exist probably because it isnt worthy enough to be studied) and scholars of Chaldean heritage. I am yet to be informed of you extremely unreliable sources.
Ninethly, you cannot make assumptions like "I am probably more educated than you about this subject" because you are only making a fool of yourself, for all you know, you could be talking to a professor.
Tenthly, i would like to know, and please do not lie because that is shaming your nation and proving to yourself that you are losing, answer me this "WHERE DO YOU GET YOUR OPINIONS (NOT FACTS) FROM?????" what is your very unreliable source. You state that the Medes had the responsibility of taking Nimrud and Asshur and the Chaldeans took on Nineveh, i would be very interested in finding out.
Yours Cuttingly, Chaldo Gangsta Chaldo gangsta 06:32, 27 October 2006 (UTC)
guys, can you tone down this discussion a little bit, stay focussed on the topic and avoid personal remarks? Wikipedia talkpages aren't a forum for random discussions. Either discuss the article itself (or in this case, the disambiguation page), or move this discussion to private channels. dab (ᛏ) 07:32, 27 October 2006 (UTC)
i apologise for the misunderstanding, we are discussing the segment of the article regarding Chaldeans being ethnically Assyrians. I hope you understand. Chaldo gangsta 08:42, 27 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] You got the best discussion, stop with the personal attacks and get to the facts
I find it affending you personal attacking me when you call ma a shame to the Chaldeans when its you, an Assyrian who it to embarresed of his people so he makes an chaldean account to defend them cause he knows them are wrong, who is the one who is a shame to their people now.--- it seems you have alot of grammar problems in this paragraphChaldo gangsta 06:37, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
Secondly, Now that i find out that you were an assyrian, no u didnt listen to assyrians you were bias towards the assyrians instead.
Thirdly, How could you say that the Schytians were a small allie when they were a powerful empire, bias once again, prove with facts, not bias.
Fourthly, Brothers shouldnt fight over the throne thats a shame to the Assyrians, two people, so selfish, they make all their people suffer just because they want the power and no, Chaldea was worth fighting for and that is why the Persians attacked, however, children were raised up to respect their siblings, and not to try to kil them.
Fifthly, I want you to prove to me that our blood got mixed with aravbs and Kurds, see bias again with no facts, The chaldeans stayed back bravely to defend what was there unlike some cowards who fleed because they didnt think that dying for their nation was hounorable.
Sixthly, Facts please, "our capital was barbarically taken away from us, our men and warriors savagely murdered" prove plz, none of my sources tells me anything about this
Seventhly, with the strongest Empire on Earth they were still cowards, maybe behind those fortified walls they had the most advance weapons and shileds, but when there were no walls to protect them anymore, they soon espcaped the same way as chickens run away from the farmers. And yes, Assyria did team up with the Egyptians, and my sources even come from an wikipedia article even check it in the article of the Battle of Carchemish where the Chaldeans were outnumbered but still fought bravely and defeated the enemy
Eightly, give me the name of one of your reliable sources as an assyrialogist, they are most certain assyrians and that says easily how bias they could be
Ninethly, yes i can make assumptions like that im more educated than you in theis area because you are making a fool of yourself by personally attacking me every time you get rocked.
Tenthly, Its called Encyclopedia, maybe Assyrians havnt heard about that, and its also called, history books which clearly shows how the Assyrian Empire was easily defeated.
Yours Cuttingly lol how stupid
124.187.154.39 11:15, 27 October 2006 (UTC)
can you stop the stupid discussion? This is a disambiguation page. If you have anything to contribute to the question of the ethnicity of the modern group, do that at Talk:Assyrian people. I will start removing these rants now. Also, "Yours Cuttingly lol how stupid" isn't just impolite, it is extremely puerile (how old are you, 14?) we are here for polite and erudite discussion. Either do that, citing your sources, or go to some other online forum where flamewars are tolerated. dab (ᛏ) 11:51, 27 October 2006 (UTC)
thank you dab for you comments, as you can see, this user is clearly not used to being polite and well mannered, if you think what i am doing is wrong, i will stop. Note: this comment is being directed towards user-Dab
um asm-cc can i point out that chaldo gangsta has asked you for your sources, you have been too general with your answer by stating history books, i believe it would be more wise to provide him with names, authors, book pages, encyclopaedias arent considered reliable sources when they can be edited (eg wikipedia) if thats where you get all of your facts from.
[edit] DAB we are discussing whether or not chaldeans are ethnically Assyrians
Dear Asm cc,
I believe you should take spelling lessons and learn how to spell, then you should take reading lessons and learn how to read, because not only have you mispelt some words like offending, but you have failed to read the segment of my response where it states that one of my sources is a Chaldean Scholar from Britain. You should also get a dictionary and learn the meaning of the word bias because i believe you have misunderstood it for something else.
The only reason i said you are a shame to the Chaldeans is because you said that Assyrians are ethnically Chaldeans, which is just a narrow minded, unable to think of anything else kind of response or way to start a discussion.
You failed to read the part where i asked you a question, i assume deliberately. Also, if you are the one that brings up the points, why should i be the one who has to prove them, if you say the Scythians helped the Assyrians, if you say they were a powerful army, then you are the one to prove, if you cannot see, you were the first one to bring up the topic about Scythians, not i.
I am not against you saying that about siblings, in fact i agree, it was wrong, but once again you havent proven anything to me, you have just stated an opinion.
You have failed to read the part where i state we used our wit and smarts to preserve our blood in the mountain regions so that the Assyrians of the 21st century being me can be considered purely Assyrian where as the Chaldeans are yet to explain their whereabouts these thousands of years, and are you are yet to prove any part of your comeback. Also you are Contradicting yourself by saying that the Chaldeans honorably died for their nation, if they did, they why do you say they are still around today, shouldnt your ancestors have died with them "honorably and bravely".
You say to me that none of your sources proves that we were savagely murdered, well then, maybe you should reconsider these "sources".
At least we had the brains and technological advancements to build these fortifications, also that isnt a very smart simile, even ask the Miljakinator for his opinion on it. ONCE AGAIN YOU CONTRADICT YOURSELF (dont you ever get enough of this) the whole reason we are debating this is because you are displeased with the reliability of wikipedia, how can you consider wikipedia a reliable source for something when at the same time you are debating with me that it is not. Whos side are you on, Wikipedia or anti-wikipedia, i know im on wikipedias side.
Austen Henry Layard (British founded the remains of Nineveh proving that the Chaldeans were savages PROVING), Nineb Lamassu (Assyrian, also professor at Cambridge university), William Moran (American), Wolfram Freiherr von Soden (German), Benno Landsberger (German one of the most important Assyriologists), Hayim Tadmor (A JEW WHAT BIAS CAN COME FROM A JEW TOWARDS ASSYRIANS). This is but a few of the Assyriologists that i have taken my facts from, they are all graduated intelligent men who most of them do not have a biased opinion, except for the Assyrian.
You asked me to name one i named you six out of the many and provided their background in order to save you the trouble of using the word bias for a millionth time.
Asm CC you did not know me when i had made the comment and when you had written "i am probably more educated than you in this subject" i think you should recondsider your comments.
You are giving me just a mere noun, Encyclopaedia, please provide me with names of these books that "prove" all your "facts".
In your refute you have failed to: read my comments carefully, successfully refute the ones you did read about, define the term bias, spell words correctly.
Also please attempt to control your obviously uncivilised way of communicating, being very impolite and deeply """"affending"""" people.
[edit] Chaldean in today's language
If we look into the media and in everyday news, Chaldean is reffered to Catholic Assyrians of Iraq. This is a fact. Just go do a google news search. Chaldean 15:52, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
- so? the ancient Babylonians aren't very likely to make the headlines. I don't see how this relates to your reverting the topical arrangement of the disambiguation page. If you insist, we can make the contemporary group nr. (1) and the Babylonians nr. (2), but don't break the threefold disambiguation. dab (ᛏ) 16:51, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
DAB im thankfull that you have taken the time to change that chaldeans are ethnically assyrians, and im extremely sorry for being so rude to you and the rest, it wont be repeated. Asm cc 08:09, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
"Chaldeans" = "Assyrians" = "Syriacs" are an ethnic group. They are defined by (a) their langauge, plus (b) their religion. Which is precisely what the disambiguation note states now. It is not my fault that they do not have an unambiguous ethnonym that identifies them clearly. dab (ᛏ) 13:03, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
- 1. This page is about Chaldeans
- 2. The vast majority of Chaldeans consider themselves ethnic Assyrians. Nobody Chaldean be it in the deaspora or the homeland minds consider themselves 'Aramaic' or 'Aramean'. You are forcing your opinion here
- 3. Dont edit things that you are not completly familiar with. Chaldean 13:56, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
- no, (1) this is a disambiguation page about the several meanings of the term "Chaldean". (2) I've removed the "Aramaic", because this is just a disambiguation page, we shouldn't give any details. "ethnically Assyrian" is just as ambiguous as "ethnically Chaldean". "Aramaic" is just a simple, straightforward and undisputed linguistic classification. (3) same to you, stick to Wikipedia:Disambiguation and WP:RS before you attack me.
-
-
- ethnically Assyrian" is just as ambiguous as "ethnically Chaldean". - This is YOUR opinion, please try to remember this is wikipedia where facts and only facts are represented. Chaldean 19:51, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
-
Chaldean, before you edit anything, dont edit according to what today's Chaldeans consider themeselves, have you asked every single Chaldean in the world, definetly no. Dont follow people's opion, next time you want to edit something i want you to provide facts before you change anything. You belevie that Chaldeans are ethnically Assyrians, well prove it then.
I am a Chaldean and consider myself as Aramaic and all the Chaldeans i know also consider themeselve as Aramaic, so before you think you can read the mind of every singleChaldean, try to stick to the properganda you are enforcing against Dab cause i completely agree with him and what had edited. Why do you think Jesus Christ spoke aramaic, havnt you heard about the exile to Babylon, it was the Chaldeans, who were told by God (as said in the bible) to hold the Israelites as captive due to them ignoring the sabath day.
And when you argue, dont give me your or other people's opinion or what you think is true, provide facts, dont say, most Chaldeans regard themselve as Assyrians, do you know most of the Chaldeans, Your argument contain no proof but only opinions and thats it Asm cc 10:20, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
- . You belevie that Chaldeans are ethnically Assyrians, well prove it then. - the way we prove things here in wikipedia is by providing sources. Did you check the source on this page? Where it says '1', go to it and read it. Only unbaised sources are accepted at wikipedia, and the one I presented is an unbaised one. Now you ask have you asked every single Chaldean in the world, definetly no. - I have been born and raised in Atoor, and I have went from all differnt Chaldean villages from Alqosh to Tel Keppe to Baghdida back up to Zakho, and the vast majority of Chaldeans consider themselves Assyrian. If you dont believe this, then I urge you to travel to back to your roots and do your own research. The opinion of the deaspora simply does not matter. Chaldean 17:36, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
User Chaldean really does make a good point asm cc, he has providing us with sources that then provide us with facts, as it is done here on wikipedia Banipal753 02:35, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Conformity
I'm not sure what happened to this page, but it's been butchered. Firstly, it doesn't conform with MOS:DP in that the first words in bullets aren't capitalized, there are periods, sentence structure varies, etc. Secondly, disambiguation pages are supposed to be arranged according to similar categories, not periods of time. Thus, this page should be arranged according to languages/people/etc., not modern/ancient/whatever. For example, modern Chaldean Neo-Aramaic and the Urartian language should both be under "languages", not separated for some untold reason. --334 17:34, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
No one gives a damn about periods. The Assyrians and Chaldeans suffer persecutions and theri women abducted and raped on a frequent basis. Please, YOU do not butcher this page about grammar and style. Go ahead, delete, I'll keep on adding this message as a reminder.
I can assure you, the people who wrote MOS:DP "give a damn" about grammar. This is a disambiguation page, not a place to discuss what's happening to Chaldeans or push a particular POV. If you don't care that the article is incorrect from a stylistic perspective, that's fine. That's your opinion. Don't tell us it's fact by shoving it down our throats. --334 15:52, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] PEOPLE PLEASE!
As the son of a Chaldean and an Assyrian (I'll prove it -dakhe wouto? sheme eele emanuel - how are you my name is emanuel) I feel obliged to say this to all my fellow Chaldo-assyrians - stop fighting over IMAGINARY SCRAPS OF FOOD! No one really cares what name we apply to ourselves so much as who we are. We are all native Iraqi's. Thats all that matters. If you want a fight, go to the land of death, our ancient homeland, also known as Iraq.
[edit] Chaldean Iraqis
Okay,as a reader I typed in "Chaldean" to find out about the people we in Michigan call "Chaldean Iraqis." We have the largest Arab population in the United States, slightly over 1 million people, but some people confuse "Arab" with Muslim. Our newspapers are always sure to tell readers that a large portion of our "Arabs" (middle easterners) are "Chaldean Iraqis" or "Chaldeans" which are also described as more Christian (in number) than Muslim. Uh, I don't see any of this on the disambig page. All I see are ancient civilizations and languages. What about the modern people who live outside the Middle East and call themselves (or are called by the news media) Chaldeans? Should this be added?? There's a reference but no link on the Michigan page under Demographics. 'splainin' needed! Gaviidae 08:59, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ CHALDEANS are not ARABS!!!!!!!!!! CHALDEANS ARE NOT ARABS!!!!!!!!!!
- Apparently the link I was looking for was not there on 1 December but it's back and now I see it. Assyrian 82.93.133.130 19:52, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
Why dont you just call the Franks the Britons, or the Chinese the Mongols, see they are both different people, and so are Arabs and Chaldeans, If you are so sure that Arabs are Chaldeans answer me these and you will surely know that Chaldeans and Arabs are two different people. Where did the Chaldeans originate from and where did the Arabs originate from. You talk about modern people, stop stereotyping people then, yes there are Christian Arabs but they are not Chaldeans nor are they Assyrians, they are Christian Arabs, who originated from Arabia and invade Iraq in the 6th century AD. When someone talk about Chaldeans and Assyrians they dont talk about the Christians in Iraq, they talk about the indegenous of Iraq, and when people talk about Arabs, (well at least those who dont sterotype (the people with some intellegence)) they dont talk about muslims, they talk about the people who Invaded the land of today's Iraq in the 6th Ad. Both Assyrians and Chaldeans have achieved splendour things which their people of today shoould be very proud of today, and not let people sterotype them as Arabs. Both empires once had the most powerful empire on Earth, and expanded their nations enourmosly.
Asm ccc 06:01, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Chaldean Population In Michigan
User Gaviidae reported there are over 1 million arabs in Michigan and that Chaldeans make up the majority. This is not true. There are more Muslims in Michigan than Chaldeans. I just checked www.michigan.gov census information and Michigan has over 10 million residents. Although the census information does not say how many Chaldeans there are in Michigan, because Chaldeans are "counted" as whites, so there is no real way to tell. My estimate is no more than 350,000 chaldeans in Michigan and I think the number is actually smaller, more like 200-250,000. Remember most of the Arabs in the Dearborn area are Muslim, not Chaldean. Chaldeans are also seen as "Middle Men" like the Koreans in Los Angeles. A Middle Man is an ethnic group that serves the lower class, this is done in the Detroit area through supermarkets, party stores, gas stations, etc. Sometimes there is racial tension between the Chaldeans and the black communites they are serving, because of this middle position. Gaviidae also reported "Chaldeans are not Arabs." Again, not true. We are Arab, I am an Arab-American. We speak a dialect of Aramaic and are from the Middle East. I don't think I am better than any other Arabs. I guess if you really want to get technical we are "Indo-European", just like Greeks and Armenians. Also I would like to add it is very dissapointing to to see Chaldeans and Assyrians fighting here. We should celebrate our similarities not our differences. Also, someone earlier said there is a Chaldean night club in Chicago where Assyrians and Chaldeans fight, name the club, because I doubt that is true. If anything it is Assyrians OR Chaldeans fighting WITH Muslims. Also I would like to add some Chaldeans I know supported the Iraq invasion in the beginning but almost all disapprove now. I am proud to say I was against it from the beginning and I can't wait for the Bush administration to be tried for war crimes, crimes against humanity, misleading the public...Fight the Bush Dynasty people, and the occupation of Palestine!!User:Detroitchaldean|Detroitchaldean]] 03:40, 29 December 2006 (UTC)DetroitChaldean
-
- Man you are completely lost. We are neither indo-european nor Arab. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 12.15.7.70 (talk) 18:04, 29 December 2006 (UTC).
- And let's keep it relevant and discuss improvements that can be made to this article. Baristarim 04:37, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
You dissapoint me a lot detroit chaldean, even my daughter which is only eight years old knows all the difference between an arab and a chaldean. How is it possible that Chaldeans are arabs when the Chaldeans go back to the 3rd millenium bc in Ur and the arabs around 800bc. Assyrians, Syriacs and Chaldeans are all unbelievable ancient. What you are trying to say detroit Chaldean is that a much older tribe such as the Assyrians and Chaldeans derives from a people much less in age, why dont you just say that someone's son is older than his father, cause it sounds very stupid.
Asm ccc 05:49, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] I am Chaldean. I am Assyrian. I am Syriac. I am an Aramean. I am not Arab. I am not European. I am not Asian.
Some of you people living amongst me in the diaspora are completely lost. Read the article above mine. Dude, you whoever wrote it, don't know anything about your people. We are in no way shape or form "Indo-European" though there may be slight chanes of some who may have some anscestory. Our language is semitic related to Hebrew and Arabic. Start reading something. We are not Arab though according to the definition by the Arab league we are if we either speak Arabic or come from an "Arab" country. However their definition is for their own political aims. We are Syriac Christians and speak modern forms of Syriac/Aramaic. You may call yourself Chaldean if you belong or had ancestory that belonged to the Chaldean church. You may call yourself Aramean if you speak Aramaic. You may call yourself Syriac if for the same reason. You are Assyrian however because that was our original homeland after the conquest of Sumer and Akkad by Sargon the Great. Understand that. He was our first King that united the lands of ancient Mesopotamia. We are not Arab. Do some reading please. I don't think you are very educated in this field. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 12.15.7.70 (talk) 18:13, 29 December 2006 (UTC).
If you believe that Chaldeans and Assyrians are the same people let me ask you one thing, why did they go to war against each other numerous times, why did the Assyrian kings, even the famous Ashur Banipal want to put an end to Merodach Baladin of Chaldea. I know its hard to differ from todays Assyrians and Chaldeans due to the long time they have lost their independance and also due to the invasion of other empires, and the muslims forcing the people of today's iraq to migrate north, but saying that they were all Assyrians in the first place just because they took control of all the land of sumeria first doesnt make sense at all. I also belivie that both Assyrians, Chaldeans and the syriacs derived from the same people (and now have become two seperate people), but why put them under the name of Assyrians, that is what i call bigot. The Medes and the Persians derived from the same people and at the end they are all called Irani, not medes nor persians. I want the Assyrians and the Chaldeans to unite once again just like the way they did under the nestorian church, but if they are to be called Assyrians, i dont know how that will work.
Asm ccc 05:42, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Simple Semantics
You are right, we are not Indo-European, although our culture is closer to them than it is to the Caucasians. Customs, food and way of life are very similar, although the Iraqi food is spicier due to the direct trade route Iraq has with India. Unfortunetly for us when you fill out a college application or census information there will be no choices for "Chaldean, Aramaic, or Syriac". So we will never know how many of us there really are. There are no choices for "Arab" either, rather the country, like India, or Pakistan. I guess I am lost in this aspect, but you did clear some of that up. I've done plenty of reading, I have a college degree, my major was not Middle Eastern Studies sorry to say. Of course you have the right to say "Chaldeans are not Arabs", and I understand WHY you are saying it, but that bumps you into the Caucasian category, because remember there is no acknowlegment of Syriac people in modern U.S. census, college or any other acedemic, or government info. (There are estimations, usually done by "one of us") So my point is, I identify closer to Arab Americans and Indo Europeans than the Caucasians, I hope that makes SOME sense. Maybe discussions like these will change things.20:28, 30 December 2006 (UTC)Detroitchaldean
