Talk:Assyro-Chaldeans

All this creation of new articles and making every article where Assyrian is renamed to Syriac is wrong. Its exaggerating and Pylambert keep on his fight with exluding Assyrians from their ancient Assyrians. Everythings gone too far and this article is so not needed with more.

I think the Chaldean article suits this one perfectly.

The term Chaldean encompasses both designations.

You tell me to stop adding the same information as in the Chaldeans article yet you do the same only from older posts.

First off, I have a question, are the

Assyro-Chaldeans the same people? You keep on pasting all the text from the Chaldeans page into this one. Also, why do you keep logging in and logging out? --Khoikhoi 05:48, 22 December 2005 (UTC)[reply

]

These terms were created to reunite Assyrians and Chaldeans as one people. The united states Census lists Syriac/Assyrian/Chaldean as the same ethnicity. There is no difference between Assyro-Chaldean and Chaldo-Assyrian or Chaldean. Read the link on Chaldeans by Rev Sarhad Jammo.

I seem to have some trouble with those terms. It can be only one of the two. Granted there are some cases where there is a large overlap, like many ethnic Jews will be also Jewish in a religious sense, but there are enaugh cases either direction than warrant a distinction. If a "Chaldean" converts to being a Muslim is he no longer "Chaldean"? Agathoclea 16:22, 1 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

As the ethnic and religious identities are very intertwined in most post-ottoman countries, an Assyrian/Chaldean/Chaldo-Assyrian/Syriac or an Armenian or a Georgian or a Greek or a Bulgarian is either a Christian or a nonbeliever of Christian origin, but there are Hemshins (Muslims who speak armenian but don't consider themselves as Armenians), Lazs and Ajars (Muslims who speak georgian but don't consider themselves as Georgians), Muslim Pontics (Muslim who speak the pontic greek language but don't consider themselves as Greeks) and Pomaks (Muslims who speak bulgarian but don't consider themselves as Bulgarians). There are also macedonian-speaking Muslims (Torbeshis), serbo-croatian speaking Muslims (Bosnians and Goranis). All these ethnic groups are islamized and thus don't feel like belonging to the same group as their non-islamized brethren. But I 've never heard of an equivalent for Muslims who would speak a neo-aramaic dialect, except those around Ma'lula in Western Syria, a few hundreds maybe, where the ethnic identity is Arab and not Assyrian/Chaldean/Chaldo-Assyrian/Syriac. --Pylambert 18:02, 1 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You are correct about the effects of milet during the Ottoman period, and that religion was the major factor of belonging to one or not. There are Muslims of Assyrian and Chaldean stock in eastern Turkey, nortern Iraq and the diaspora: they have an Arabic name, which is on the tip of my tongue. --Gareth Hughes 18:17, 1 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]