Modern Assyrian Identity Revival

Modern Assyrian identity revival encompasses the multifaceted 19th- and 20th-century process through which certain Eastern Christian communities—particularly those affiliated with the Church of the East and related Syriac-speaking groups scattered across Mesopotamia, Iran, Turkey, and beyond—either adopted or were externally ascribed the ethnonym “Assyrian” as a unifying marker of national, cultural, and ethnic heritage.

Missionary activities, archaeological discoveries, nationalist movements, and geopolitical upheavals drove this revival, often invoking symbolic connections to the ancient Assyrian Empire even as scholars debated and denied historical or ethnic continuity. Critics view the label as a modern construction shaped by Western discourse and absent from pre-modern self-usage, whereas proponents emphasize linguistic ties, geographical proximity, and cultural legacies from antiquity.

Renaming initiatives, identity debates, and political campaigns characterized the process, leading to widespread institutionalization in diaspora communities and entities such as the Assyrian Church of the East.

Ancient Assyrian Empire ended catastrophically with the sack of Nineveh in 612 BC, after which Assyrians as a distinct nation vanished forever from historical records, leaving only archaeological remnants and textual references. Military exhaustion and institutional fragility caused this collapse; already under Sennacherib, armies relied on subject peoples, degrading quality, and by Ashurbanipal’s later years only a shadow of the old fighting force remained, so “degeneracy and disappearance of the army” meant, since “the army was the nation,” degeneracy and disappearance of the nation followed. Nineveh’s fall literally destroyed the Assyrian nation; unlike Babylon and Thebes, which revived national life after destruction, Assyria never rose again because no peace-organization or proper civil system existed, and successors of Tiglath-pileser IV lacked intelligence to build lasting administration, turning the realm into a pure military machine while Egypt and Babylonia retained age-long civil administrations that outlived foreign rule.

Joint Median and Babylonian assaults in the late seventh century BCE left Assyrian urban centers in ruins and imperial power collapsed, causing Assyrians to disappear from history and survive mainly as a negative memory in biblical tradition. Roughly two centuries later Xenophon marched past Nineveh’s mounds without recognizing them, illustrating how completely imperial memory had faded until modern rediscovery. Medes and Babylonians destroyed Nineveh in 608 BC so thoroughly that within one lifetime the Assyrian Empire vanished from the earth; two centuries afterward Xenophon passed unrecognized ruins of the former capital, and with rare exceptions fearsome Assyrian monarchs had been forgotten even by people living on the site. No true Assyrians remained after Nineveh fell—only a half-bred remnant from incessant intermarriage, scattered and incapable of recovery, while walls, moats, and buried palaces endured rather than a continuing Assyrian people.

Collapse accelerated after Ashurbanipal’s death; continuous warfare exhausted manpower while Medes, Scythians, and Chaldeans gathered strength. Nineveh was stormed and ruined in 612 B.C., cities never rebuilt; a final remnant under Ashur-uballit tried to continue from Harran with Egyptian help but was crushed at Carchemish in 605 B.C., after which Assyrians disappeared from history. Bible’s retention of specific Assyrian titles—rabmag, rabshakeh, tiphsar—after disappearance following Carchemish supports textual authenticity, as eyewitness writers would preserve such obsolete terms. Nineveh’s fall created civilizational rupture; capital utterly destroyed and kingdom extinguished, Assyrians disappeared faster than any prominent people before or after; by Xenophon’s day ruins passed unrecognized, leaving only later rediscoveries to reconstruct the once-feared power.

Scripture contrasts Babylon’s permanent desolation with Nineveh’s fate: no prophecy forbids habitation—site is inhabited today, but not by Assyrians—only that Assyrians would vanish and the city never rebuild as a capital, distinguishing later settlement from absence of restored Assyrian people or revived Nineveh. Among ancient Semitic peoples of Western Asia—Arabs, Arameans, Assyrians, Babylonians, Hebrews/Jews, Phoenicians, and in Africa Ethiopians—Babylonians and Assyrians had vanished long since, contrasted with modern recovery of their languages and treasures; Arameans appear but are not said to have vanished, underscoring distinction between extinguished nations and those that persisted.

Babylonian-Assyrian tradition disappeared in the sixth century B.C., language surviving only a few centuries, whereas Syriac-Arameans lost independence in the eighth century B.C. but continued to exist, dialect reviving in the second century A.D. as Christian language; Jewish Aramaic lasted to the eleventh century A.D. as spoken and literary tongue of Palestinian and Babylonian Jews. Assyrian-Babylonian tradition thus faded early as historical nationality and language, while Arameans lived on through enduring Christian and Jewish Aramaic traditions.

Pre-modern Syriac sources never use “Assyrian” as normal self-designation for Syriac Christians; typical labels remain Oromoyo (“Aramean”) and Suryaya/Suryoyo (“Syriac”), with Suryaya becoming standard adjective across periods. Assyria/Assyrian (Othur/Othuroyo) appears in biblical-historical sense for ancient empire and places like Nineveh, as geographical gentilic for Mosul region and Arbela (Erbil/Kirkuk), or rhetorically as enemies of Israel echoing biblical imagery rather than communal self-naming. Syrian Christians (Suryane) shifted from older ethnic frame to primarily religious one; Christianity reordered life around baptism and Eucharist, associating “Aramean” with defeated pagan past and relinquishing it as ethnic badge, though the word survived for language; pagan Harranians kept “Aramean” by binding it to native cult, maintaining nation-plus-religion identity and hopes of restoring earthly polity. Nestorian Iraq’s Suryane quite frequently speak of themselves and their language as Aramean.

Communities linked with Church of the East have been described by outsiders as Syrian (liturgical language), Assyrian, Assyro-Chaldean, Old East Syrian Church, and Apostolic Assyrian Church of the East. Protestant missionaries popularized “Nestorian” to distinguish these Christians from Chaldeans who entered Rome’s communion in the fifteenth century. Equating them directly with Old Testament Assyrians remains inaccurate assumption influencing some nineteenth- and twentieth-century scholarship. Today “Nestorian” is sensitive and often avoided, many Christians using it pejoratively for schism or heresy.

Church of the East endured repression under Abbasid caliph al-Mutawakkil (847–861); ninth-century witnesses like Thomas of Marga’s Book of Governors and references to Ishaq (d. 877) attest intellectual life; Mongols initially favored it, but collapse followed Mongol conversion to Islam in 1295. Survivors escaping Timur’s campaigns fled to Kurdistan mountains; descendants have lived into modern times under the name “Assyrian Christians.” Liturgical language is Syriac; eucharistic anaphoras include those attributed to Theodore of Mopsuestia, Nestorius, and Addai and Mari, the last retaining notably early features.

British contact with East Syriac Nestorians quickened after C. J. Rich’s encounters near Nineveh in the 1820s. Rev. Joseph Wolff carried a Syriac New Testament to England; British and Foreign Bible Society printed and distributed it around Urmi in 1827; European governments protested Kurdish attacks in 1830. American Presbyterians opened long mission at Urmi; Church of England worked through SPCK, sending Ainsworth and later George Percy Badger, who earned goodwill by aiding without doctrinal change and sheltered the patriarch during 1842 massacres. Nestorians appealed to Archbishop Tait in 1868; E. L. Cutts’s inquiry led to Archbishop of Canterbury’s Mission to the Assyrian Christians in 1881, staffed by Rudolph Wahl, Canon Maclean, Athelstan Riley, W. H. Browne, and Canon W. A. Wigram; mission lasted until Great War, headquarters moving from Urmi to Van in 1903.

Late 19th-century Anglicans deliberately adopted “Assyrian” for their mission among East Syriac Nestorians, using it in reports, school charters, and correspondence; term spread into wider English usage—newspapers, missionary journals, and general readers spoke of Assyrian Christians rather than Nestorians. Choice was strategic and pastoral: it emphasized rootedness in old Assyrian heartland, avoided polemical “Nestorian” tied to heresy, and gave dignified ethnonym Western audiences respected, allowing support and reform without reopening doctrinal debates. Community did not historically call itself Assyrian; earlier sources referred to it as Persian Church because catholicoi resided at Seleucia-Ctesiphon in Sasanian Empire, jurisdictions extending deep into Persia and beyond; traditional title was Church of the East using East Syriac rite and language. “Assyrian” thus emerged as modern, mission-driven designation introduced and popularized by Anglicans, gaining legitimacy through long usage and later embraced by many within the community, culminating in modern name Assyrian Church of the East.

Anglican missionaries in the 19th century promoted “Assyrian” for Church of the East members who did not join Roman communion, seeing it as less pejorative than “Nestorian.”. Earlier labels—“Chaldean” for Rome-communion members, “Nestorian” for others—referred mainly to church affiliation and geography, not ancient ethnic descent; modern Assyrians and Chaldeans should not be regarded as direct descendants of ancient Assyrians or Chaldeans.

Asahel Grant explored Assyrian mountains expressly to test claims of Nestorian descent from ancient Assyrians; after on-ground inquiry he found no evidence. American physician and traveler journeyed through northern Mesopotamia into what he called Assyrian mountains, expecting to link contemporary Nestorians to antiquity; after time in ancient Chaldean country he explicitly stated no evidence supported identifications. Ecclesiastical title “Chaldean” for East Syriac Christians originated recently in 1681 when Nestorian prelate at Diyarbakir entered Rome’s communion and was consecrated patriarch of the Chaldeans, creating new Catholic body of “papal Syrians” comparable to papal Armenians or papal Greeks. From observations he treated nineteenth-century ethnonyms “Assyrian” and “Chaldean” as modern overlays rather than proof of direct descent, despite travel focus on Assyrian districts and interest in ancient Assyria.

Early travelers occasionally wrote “Assyrian Christians” to mean Christians in Assyria (e.g., C. J. Rich); some outsiders (Armenians) used forms like Asouri. A. H. Layard popularized tighter linkage, arguing they were descendants of ancient Assyrians—though he did not claim communities called themselves Assyrian. Systematic use developed in second half of nineteenth century around Archbishop of Canterbury’s Mission in Urmia; seeking alternative to stigmatized “Nestorian” and distinct from “Chaldean,” Anglican writers adopted “Assyrian”; by 1870 term entrenched, mission officially named “The Archbishop of Canterbury’s Mission to the Assyrian Christians.” Usage spread in West, though field missionaries inconsistent at first; “Assyrian” as communal label for Syriac Christians is modern and externally driven, arising from nineteenth-century Western—especially Anglican—discourse rather than pre-modern Syriac self-designation.

Anglican work in mid-nineteenth century standardized “Assyrian” for Eastern or “Oriental” Christians, especially those called Nestorians; English clergy began formal contacts in 1840s; in 1870 Archbishop A. C. Tait used “Assyrians” in public appeal for Assyrian Christians Aid Fund; in 1886 Archbishop of Canterbury created mission explicitly to the Assyrians. Choice of “Assyrian” was deliberate—neutral and dignified compared with heresy-laden “Nestorian”; through fundraising, reports, and networks usage spread in English discourse, shifting confessional label toward broader ethnonym.

Anglican engagement with Nestorian Church began after 1868 appeal; Archbishop Tait sent E. L. Cutts to investigate (arriving 1876), leading to Archbishop of Canterbury’s Mission to Assyrian Christians in 1881; early staff included Rudolph Wahl (to 1885), then Canon A. J. Maclean, Athelstan Riley, W. H. Browne; Canon W. A. Wigram worked 1902–1912; headquarters first at Urmia, moved to Van in 1903. The name chosen by Church of England “has tended to come into general use,” so Nestorian Christians were usually called “Assyrians”; Nestorians themselves styled community “Christians” or “Syrians.” Anglican choice sat alongside Danish, Norwegian Lutherans, Baptists, and Russian Orthodox; Russian approach briefly drew Nestorian leaders toward union (1898 delegation to St. Petersburg); by 1900 Russia built Orthodox church at Urmia and opened schools, but influence waned. Rome made church Uniate—retaining rites while conforming to canon law; Protestants preserved it as distinct body, “continuation of the Church of the Persian Empire,” yet reformed doctrine and administration from within; stance sometimes created confused allegiances—Nestorians benefited from Protestant schooling but hesitated to leave historic church (e.g., Nestorius George Malech).

The label “Assyrians” for Christians of northern Iraq and southeast Turkey applies mainly to Nestorians/East Syrians and is fairly recent, dating from late nineteenth century; American and British missionaries built schools, introduced first printing press, fostering cultural consciousness. Excavations of ancient Nineveh encouraged some Nestorians to link themselves to ancient Assyrians and articulate national program (“we are one people; we should restore the Assyrian kingdom”); Syriac Orthodox largely kept distance. Cultural continuities with ancient Mesopotamia exist, yet antiquity’s Assyrians were assimilated into many peoples over time; no direct line can be drawn to today’s Nestorians, even if modern groups adopt Assyrian name symbolically.

Modern ethnoreligious use of “Assyrian” is “invented tradition”—revived ancient appellation taken up in nineteenth–twentieth centuries from Western scholarly and missionary discourse, not unbroken continuity with ancient Assyrians. European and American missionaries, diplomats, archaeologists routinely used “Chaldean” and “Assyrian” for East-Syriac Christians in Urmia and upper Mesopotamia; external usage gradually appropriated by East Syriac community itself. Key drivers lay in intensive engagement with American evangelical missionaries, language reform, autoethnographic writing, push for national literature—processes making modern national identity imaginable and compelling. Result was self-consciously modern Assyrian identity whose label derives primarily from Western sources but adoption enabled by local social and ideological dynamics.

Christians long labeled “Nestorians” in church polemics, later called Assyrians in Western usage, belong to Church of the East whose Christology was condemned at Ephesus in 431; situated among Jacobite villages north of Mosul (notably Telkayf), settled in Tiyari and Hakkari regions as independent tribal groupings. Modern ethnic project gathered different Syriac Christian streams under Assyrian banner; after arriving in United States in 1916, Naum Faik changed identification and called on “Nestorians, Chaldeans, Maronites, Catholics, and Protestants” to remember shared past, blood, and language, exalt name of the Assyrians, and unite to secure Assyrian rights.

Communities historically self-named in Aramaic as Suroye/Suryoye (modern/classical Syriac); neighbors called them Suryani (Arabic, Kurdish) and Süryaniler (Turkish). Western scholars long translated Suryoye as “Syrians,” rendering many Assyrian and Syriac elites rejected because it confused them with citizens of Syria. To avoid confusion, elites in late Ottoman and early American contexts promoted “Assyrian”; Naum Faik (1916) urged readers of Bethnahrin in America to adopt national label Assyrian in English precisely to distinguish from “Syrians.” Choice fits broader name debate; in diaspora elites first insisted they were not Turks, Arabs, or Kurds; then many stated they were not Othuroye (Assyrians) but Suryoye; later alternative articulated as Syrianer or Arameans. Choosing Assyrian in Europe and United States “kills two birds with one stone”: prevents confusion with Syrians and signals distinct national identity among immigrant minorities; young, secular elites advanced usage, anchoring claims for international recognition as people with cultural, linguistic, and religious rights.

Label “Assyrians” generates persistent confusion because names and identities do not always map onto each other; up to 19th century people primarily called themselves Suryoye/Suryaye. Term “Assyrians” popularized mainly by Western researchers; contemporary scholars often prefer “Syrians” or “Arameans.” Within churches, Syriac Orthodox call themselves mostly “Syrians/Syriacs”; Chaldean Catholic followers prefer “Chaldeans.”

Modern Assyrians habitually call themselves Syriacs or Suryayi (Surayi), in formal documents “The Church of the East” or simply “The Easterns”; rarely call themselves “Nestorians” and resent it as nickname. “Syrian” functions as religious label shared with Jacobites, not racial or national term. In England fashion lately arose to use “Assyrian,” partly to distinguish from Jacobites, partly from supposition of descent from subjects of Shalmaneser and Sardanapalus; usage unsafe and undesirable because people never used it, lineage mixed, Assyria only one province within wider realm of Church of Seleucia and Ctesiphon. Modern Assyrians most likely mix of races, probably including Kurds; claim of direct descent from ancient Assyrians unproven, writers often confusing people with Assyrian Empire itself; none of inhabited territory properly called Assyria, maps sometimes misassigning Kurdish mountains to it.

On “Chaldean,” name never given to this people until Latin missionaries came to Mosul; Latins applied it to distinguish Roman Catholic converts from Jacobites, whom they continued to call “Syrians.” In own old books “Chaldeans” meant astrologers against whom they bore old enmity; title properly belongs to Roman Catholic Uniats of Mosul, not modern Assyrians. Recurrent confusion in learned and popular writing cites tendency for “Nestorians … under the name of Chaldeans or Assyrians” to be confounded with most learned or powerful nation of Eastern antiquity. To avoid ambiguity authors prefer “Syrians,” and when distinction from Jacobites needed, “Eastern Syrians.”

Syriac Orthodox in southeast Turkey can be seen both as religious and ethnic minority: own church, distinct national-cultural identity neither Turkish nor Kurdish, largely descended from old populations of Mesopotamia. Late-antique church landscape featured Aramaic/Syriac-speaking communities on Roman and Persian sides; Christological disputes in fifth–sixth centuries produced parallel traditions: East-Syrian/Nestorian Church in north of present-day Iraq, condemned at Ephesus (431) for clear distinction of Christ’s two natures; Syriac Orthodox (often called “Monophysites”) in southern Turkey, resisting Chalcedon (451) by affirming one united divine-human nature; patriarch later settled in Damascus, communities across Turkey, Syria, Lebanon, Iraq, Europe, Americas.

In 1820 James Rich of British East India Company proclaimed discovery of “Assyrian Christians”; Europeans adopted label for Church of the East—eventually some community members did too; Frazee calls this unfortunate addition to already misleading Catholic title “Chaldean,” producing confusing pair of names for related but distinct bodies. British and American missionaries distributed Bibles and catechisms, tried to explain doctrine; positive consequence was new attention to vulnerability to Kurdish depredations. American Presbyterian Eli Smith encountered Chaldean bishop at Khosrowa—elderly man in long Kurdish cape, green turban, ragged sheepskin pelisse—whose poverty struck despite Roman education and some Western familiarity.

Rome attempted to stabilize Mosul area by recognizing Yuhanna Hormizd as Chaldean catholicos in Mosul while approving Rabban Hormizd monastery’s constitution under Jibra’il Denbo; tensions followed: Bishop Yusuf Audo shifted to Al-‘Amadiyah; two apostolic visitors dispatched to reconcile factions; in May 1832 Denbo and two companions cut down by Kurdish raiders. Rome then established permanent Latin apostolic vicarage in Mosul; when Patriarch Yuhanna resigned shortly before death on 16 August 1838, synod chose Niqula Zaya, Rome confirmed April 1840, though he insisted on residing in Persian see.

During Great War Nestorians sided with Allies from triumphant arrival of Russian armies; sufferings endured from then on are well known (Oeuvre d’Orient, 1935). At peace treaty signing, Eastern Christian committee of Catholics and non-Catholics worked to obtain independent Christian territory; committee and proposed state adopted name “Assyro-Chaldean,” new term justifiable with good definition but vague enough to include all Christians of various Eastern rites in those regions except Armenians, who had particular historical and personal aims (Oeuvre d’Orient, 1935). Committee failed; in opposition to “Chaldean,” Eastern Syrian Nestorians were called “Assyrians,” also new term, confusing many Europeans following minority question in the East, even from strictly Catholic viewpoint; term allowed absolutely erroneous official statements by important and necessarily well-informed figures (Oeuvre d’Orient, 1935).

Nestorians, Eastern Christian population long based in Hakkari mountains between Lake Van and Lake Urmia, lived under Ottoman rule but dealt directly through patriarch Mar Shimun, influenced by Russia and Dominican and Anglican missions (Oeuvre d’Orient, 1935). Over centuries some communities reunited with Rome and became Chaldeans, Catholic church with own patriarch and bishops; most Iraqi Catholics belonged to this group, roughly sixty to eighty thousand at the time (Oeuvre d’Orient, 1935). During and after First World War mixed Eastern Christian committee tried to obtain independent Christian territory, adopting vague umbrella label “Assyro-Chaldean” covering many Eastern Christian groups except Armenians; effort failed (Oeuvre d’Orient, 1935). Eastern Syrian Nestorians began to be called “Assyrians,” another new label; these terms led Western observers, diplomats, and churchmen to confuse identities and make erroneous official claims (Oeuvre d’Orient, 1935). About sixty thousand Nestorians worldwide then (not counting Indian Nestorians), around thirty thousand in Iraq until 1933; League of Nations mission in 1924 examined case but promised solutions did not materialize; after 1933 crisis with Iraq many wished to leave for Syria (Oeuvre d’Orient, 1935). Recent political and ecclesiastical names “Assyro-Chaldean” and “Assyrian” blurred distinctions among Eastern Christians and generated misunderstanding in European and official discourse (Oeuvre d’Orient, 1935).

In British discussions about Mesopotamia and Nestorian resettlement, community was now generally called Assyrians; by 1920s–1930s references in The Times, Hansard, Keesing’s Contemporary Archives, Headway, and Great Britain and the East filed under “Assyrian” rather than “Nestorian”; patriarch raised no objection to either name (Vine, 1937). Development shows missionary origin of term’s spread via Church of England and administrative-media routinization making “Assyrian” default Anglophone heading, even as local self-designations remained “Christians” or “Syrians” (Vine, 1937).

1920s–1930s saw rise of common Assyrian identity, struggle for Assyrian homeland, turn away from Western missions—fundamentally new phase compared with prewar history of Church of the East (Wilmshurst, 2000). For most of 1318–1913 period church commonly called “Nestorian,” faithful “Nestorians” (or “Chaldeans” for those entering Rome’s communion after 1552); “Nestorian” could be abuse by opponents, pride among defenders (e.g., ‘Abdisho‘ of Nisibis 1318, Patriarch Eliya X of Mosul 1672, Patriarch Shem‘un XVII Abraham 1842), or neutral descriptor (Wilmshurst, 2000). To avoid modern stigma, theologically neutral “East Syrian” used, “traditionalist” for post-1552 non-Catholic branch (Wilmshurst, 2000). Modern ethnonym “Assyrian”—used today roughly as “East Syrian” for non-Catholic branch—not in use for most of period, avoided for historical accuracy (Wilmshurst, 2000). “Chaldean,” first applied by Vatican in 15th century to Catholic converts from Church of the East in Cyprus, occasionally used by Catholic patriarchs of Amid in 18th century, entered common currency after 1828 with union of Mosul and Amid patriarchates; earlier centuries prefer “Catholic” (Wilmshurst, 2000). On transliteration, where Syriac and Arabic forms differ, Syriac form given (reflecting Syriac sources, especially manuscript colophons), spellings standardized—e.g., Denha, not Dinkha (Wilmshurst, 2000).

Proper technical name for Mar Shimun’s flock is “Nestorians,” used universally since fifth century and often accepted by them in devotion to “the Blessed Nestorius” (Fortescue, 1913). Growing Anglican habit of avoiding “Nestorian” criticized; label need not imply agreement with condemned heresy, group not founded by Nestorius anyway (Fortescue, 1913). Alternatives—“Persian Church,” “Turkish Church”—vague; “East Syrian Church” closer but imprecise because many different East Syrian bodies (Fortescue, 1913). Newly adopted “Assyrian Church” worst of all; they are “Assyrians in no possible sense”: inhabit only corner of territory once ruled by Assyrian Empire, also covered by Babylonian Empire—if logic followed, why not “Babylonian Church”? No one can specify mixture of blood; some Nestorians may carry old Assyrian blood, so do many other Mesopotamian sects; empire ended centuries before Christ, tiny modern sect cannot inherit name of vast vanished state (Fortescue, 1913). “Assyrian Church” neither old, accepted, nor common—recent fad among handful of Anglican sympathizers (Fortescue, 1913). “Chaldean” belongs to Uniate body: they call themselves Chaldeans; liturgical book Missale chaldaicum; head bears style Patriarcha Babylonensis Chaldaeorum (Fortescue, 1913). Hence “Chaldean” for Catholic counterpart, “Nestorian” for non-Uniate, “East Syrian” when broader confessionally neutral term needed (Fortescue, 1913).

Mosul’s annual Fast of Nineveh contrasts living memory with obliterated past; apart from this fast and few earthen mounds, no visible links exist between modern Nineveh and terror-inspiring city of antiquity (Luke, 1925).

Research on Assyrian genocide riddled with terminological pitfalls rooted in Ottoman millet system classifying by religion rather than ethnicity, so ethnic labels like “Assyrian” largely absent from official sources (Gaunt, 2015). Syriac Orthodox appear as Süryani or Yakubiler (from Jacob Baradeus), Chaldean Catholics as Keldani, Church of the East as Nasturiler—echoed in older discourse as “Jacobites” and “Nestorians” (Gaunt, 2015). Neighbors and later traditions added exonyms: Armenians called them aisori (entered Russian); late-nineteenth-century Anglo-Saxon missionaries popularized “Assyrian,” typically for Church of the East; many American and German sources used umbrella “Syriacs” (Gaunt, 2015). Same people surface in archives under different names depending on language, confessional lens, or missionary agenda; effective scholarship requires cross-walking labels across Ottoman Turkish, Armenian, Russian, German, and English materials, attending to transliteration variants and confessional baggage, recognizing “Assyrian” gained broader ethnonymic currency relatively late (Gaunt, 2015).

English term “Assyrian” has shifted meaning over time and across institutions, creating persistent confusion; in academic English it points to ancient Assyrians of Assur, but nineteenth-century Protestant missionaries applied it loosely to range of Eastern Christian communities, including—misleadingly—some labeled “Nestorian” (Özdemir, 2012). During and after World War I British army continued loose usage, naming mountain Nestorian auxiliaries “Assyrian Levies” (Özdemir, 2012). “Syrian/Syriac Christian” in English covers several Eastern churches (usually not so-called Nestorians) inconsistently; in Turkish and Arabic Süryani denotes Syrian Christians, sometimes extended to Nestorians (Özdemir, 2012). Some modern Eastern Christian nationalists use “Assyrian” as notional ethnonym for political purposes (Özdemir, 2012).

Short Christian Science Monitor note from September 1953 comments on mid-century terminology for East Syriac Christian refugees: “Assyrian” misapplied label arising after World War I, when survivors of Ottoman-era massacres fled to Iraq and were assisted under League of Nations trusteeship supported by Britain, Iraq, and League; piece situates naming issue within contemporary discussions of funding and politics surrounding refugee aid and associated publications (Christian Science Monitor, 1953).

Syriac Christians from northern Iraq sometimes give sons names like Sennacherib or Sargon and consciously identify with ancient Assyrians, calling themselves “Assyrians” (Athoraye) rather than “Syriacs” (Suraye); identification fostered by Anglican missionaries working with Nestorian Church in nineteenth century and later encouraged by British in late 1940s (Dalley, 2005).

Later trajectory of East-Syrian Iraqis aligns with modern naming shift: from nineteenth century Western missionaries and writers popularized “Assyrian” for non-Catholic heirs of Church of the East; by early twentieth century many descendants publicly identified as Assyrian (Crone and Cook, 1977).

“Assyrians today may be Kurds, Turks, etc., with little possibility that these people have some of the ancient Assyrian blood-lines” (Abraham, 1984). “The Assyrians of today are not related to the ancient Assyrians at all—racially, ethnically, nor historically” (cited by May Abraham from Dr. Kretkoff) (Abraham, 1984). Ancient Assyrian language died out while communities spoke Aramaic/Syriac; Joseph argues today’s “Assyrians” use wrong name, should call themselves Chaldeans, and what is called modern Assyrian should be called Aramaic (Abraham, 1984). In U.S. context “Assyrian” functioned as umbrella category grouping Chaldeans, Jacobites, and Church of the East members from Iraq, Syria, Iran, Turkey, Kuwait, and Lebanon, who also used multiple everyday languages (Abraham, 1984). “Assyrian” presents modern, label-driven umbrella rather than biologically or historically continuous identity from antiquity (Abraham, 1984).

Modern Assyrian movement in Sweden gained strength in 1970s when immigrants from southeastern Turkey and northern Syria began identifying as Assyrians (Karlsson, 1986). Ancient Assyrian Empire destroyed in 612 BCE; with its fall Assyrians disappeared as political and ethnic entity (Karlsson, 1986). Groups today calling themselves Assyrians do not originate from that ancient population but descend from Syriac-speaking Christian communities emerging centuries later in Mesopotamia, belonging to Syriac Orthodox and Chaldean Catholic churches, speaking Aramaic rather than ancient Assyrian (Karlsson, 1986). Designation “Assyrian” has no direct ethnic continuity with Assyrian Empire; use in modern times mostly coincidental, result of later historical developments and church traditions rather than unbroken ethnic lineage (Karlsson, 1986). Evolution of these Christian communities saw Church of the East, Chaldeans, and Syriac Orthodox develop from early Mesopotamian Christianity; Syriac language replaced earlier local tongues and became major liturgical language (Karlsson, 1986). Linguistically modern Assyrian or “Syriac” language not derived from ancient Assyrian tongue but from Aramaic; ancient Assyrian cuneiform and Semitic language vanished long before Christ; modern Assyrians speak various Neo-Aramaic dialects heavily influenced by Arabic and other regional languages (Karlsson, 1986). Term “Assyrian” gained new meaning in nineteenth and twentieth centuries as part of nationalist revival among Syriac-speaking Christians, particularly in diaspora, seeking to unite different Syriac Christian groups under common historical label, using name “Assyrian” to evoke grandeur of ancient empire and assert continuity and identity in modern times (Karlsson, 1986). Modern Assyrians not ethnically descended from ancient Assyrians but cultural and religious heirs of ancient Mesopotamian Christianity who adopted Assyrian name as historical and symbolic identity rather than ethnic one; “Assyrian” today cultural and ecclesiastical designation used to express unity and heritage, not literal continuation of ancient people (Karlsson, 1986).

In 1993 leaders of Ancient Church of the East in Iraq petitioned Ba’ath authorities to register church simply as Church of the East rather than Ancient Eastern Church, presenting change as confessional designation and explicitly distancing it from ethnic label (A Request to the Ba'ath Authorities, 1993).

Alphonse Mingana, born near Mosul in 1881, came from Chaldean community—branch of Nestorians accepting Rome’s authority (Mingana, 1937). Native language Arabic; ecclesiastical language Syriac, vernacular modern descendant of Syriac (Neo-Aramaic) (Mingana, 1937). Educated at Lycée St. Jean in Lyon, returned to Mosul to study at Syro-Chaldean Seminary run by French Dominicans for two Syriac-speaking Uniate churches (Chaldean and “Syrian”) (Mingana, 1937). From 1902 to 1910 taught Syriac, directed Dominican press, traveled on seminary’s behalf, collected about 70 Syriac manuscripts (20 on vellum, later burned during First World War), edited/published Syriac texts (including Narsai’s works, earning papal doctorate) (Mingana, 1937). Chaldeans represent Catholic, Rome-united stream of historic East-Syrian tradition; “Assyrian” modern label applied to non-Catholic heirs; Assyrian as ethnonym presented as recent usage, while Chaldean denotes Uniate branch (Mingana, 1937).

Sweden’s Liberal Party believed it championed extinct Assyrian people and Middle Eastern Christians, but in practice efforts concerned Syriac Orthodox Christians specifically, one of smallest churches in region (Karlsson, 2024).