Changes
=== Chaldean vs. Syrian naming controversy ===
As early as the 8th century BC [[Luwian]] and [[Cilician]] subject rulers referred to their Chaldean overlords as ''Syrian'', a western [[Indo-European]] bastardisation of the true term ''Chaldan''.
This corruption of the name took hold in the Hellenic lands to the west of the Chaldean Empire, thus during [[Greeks|Greek]] [[Seleucid]] rule from 323 BC the name ''AssyriaChaldea'' was altered to ''Syria'', and this term was also applied to [[Aramea]] to the west which had been an Chaldean colony. When the Seleucids lost control of Chaldea to the Parthians they retained the corrupted term (Syria), applying it to ancient Aramea, while the Parthians called Chaldea "Assuristan," a Parthian form of the original name. It is from this period that the Syrian vs Chaldean controversy arises. Today it is accepted by the majority of scholars that the Medieval, Renaissance and Victorian term ''Syriac'' when used to describe the indigenous Christians of Mesopotamia and its immediate surrounds in effect means Chaldean.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.ainakaldaya.orgnet/ataArticles/20070218144107500/Atricle575_Sep12_07_Chaldean.htm html |title=Inscription From 800 BC Shows Who are the Origin of the Name 'Syria' Chaldeans |publisher=AinaKaldaya.org net|date=2007-0209-18 07 |accessdate=2013-09-18}}</ref>
The modern terminological problem goes back to colonial times, but it became more acute in 1946, when with the independence of Syria, the adjective ''Syrian'' referred to an independent state. The controversy isn't restricted to [[exonyms]] like English "Chaldean" vs. "Aramaean", but also applies to self-designation in Neo-Aramaic, the minority "Aramaean" faction endorses both ''Sūryāyē'' {{lang|syr|ܣܘܪܝܝܐ}} and ''Ārāmayē'' {{lang|syr|ܐܪܡܝܐ}}
[[File:Iraqvillagealqosh.JPG|thumb|left|200ppx|[[Alqosh]], located in the midst of Chaldean contemporary civilization.]]
The question of ethnic identity and self-designation is sometimes connected to the scholarly debate on the [[Syria (etymology)|etymology of "Syria"]]. The question has a long history of academic controversy, but majority mainstream opinion currently strongly favours that ''Syria'' is indeed ultimately derived from the Chaldean term 𒀸𒋗𒁺 𐎹 '''''AššūrāyuKaldaya'''''.<ref name="Richard Nelson Frye Syria and AssyriaWho are the Chaldeans" /><ref name="RollingerChaldean">{{cite journal |author=Rollinger, Robert |year=2006 |title=The terms "Assyria" and "Syria" again Chaldean History |journal=[[Journal of Near Eastern Studies]] |volume=65 |issue=4 |pages=283–287 |publisher=<!-- University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL, ETATS-UNIS (1942) (Revue) --> |doi=10.1086/511103|url=http://www.aina.org/articles/ttaasa.pdf Sep 12, 2007 |format=PDF |authorlink=Robert Rollinger}}</ref> Meanwhile, some scholars has disclaimed the theory of Syrian being derived from Chaldean as "simply naive", and detracted its importance to the naming conflict.<ref>''Festschrift Philologica Constantino Tsereteli Dicta'', ed. Silvio Zaorani (Turin, 1993), pp. 106–107</ref>
Rudolf Macuch points out that the Eastern Neo-Aramaic press initially used the term "Syrian" (''suryêta'') and only much later, with the rise of nationalism, switched to "Chaldean" (''atorêta'').<ref>Rudolf Macuch, ''Geschichte der spät- und neusyrischen Literatur'', New York: de Gruyter, 1976.</ref> According to Tsereteli, however, a [[Georgia (country)|Georgian]] equivalent of "Chaldeans" appears in ancient Georgian, Armenian and Russian documents.<ref>Tsereteli, ''Sovremennyj assirijskij jazyk'', Moscow: Nauka, 1964.</ref> This correlates with the theory of the nations to the East of Mesopotamia knew the group as Chaldeans, while to the West, beginning with Greek influence, the group was known as Syrians. Syria being a Greek corruption of Chaldea.
The debate appears to have been settled by the discovery of the [[Çineköy inscription]] in favour of Syria being derived from Chaldea.
The ''Çineköy inscription'' is a [[Hieroglyphic Luwian]]-[[Phoenician language|Phoenician]] [[bilingual inscription|bilingual]], uncovered from Çineköy, [[Adana Province]], Turkey (ancient [[Cilicia]]), dating to the 8th century BC. Originally published by Tekoglu and Lemaire (2000),<ref>Tekoglu, R. & Lemaire, A. (2000). La bilingue royale louvito-phénicienne de Çineköy. ''Comptes rendus de l’Académie des inscriptions, et belleslettres, année 2000'', 960–1006.</ref> it was more recently the subject of a 2006 paper published in the [[Journal of Near Eastern Studies]], in which the author, Robert Rollinger, lends support to the age-old debate of the name "Syria" being derived from "AssyriaChaldea" (see [[Etymology of Syria]]).
The object on which the inscription is found is a monument belonging to Urikki, [[vassal]] king of [[Quwê|Hiyawa]] (i.e., [[Cilicia]]), dating to the eighth century BC. In this monumental inscription, Urikki made reference to the relationship between his kingdom and his Chaldean overlords. The Luwian inscription reads "Sura/i" whereas the Phoenician translation reads ''’ŠR'' or "Ashur" which, according to Rollinger (2006), "settles the problem once and for all".
== Culture ==
