Talk:Assyro-Babylonian religion

What's with the Bible and Babylon?

I may be mistaken, but Nimrod was not a babylonian (nor sumerian nor assyrian) god, there was a time when they called Gilgamesh "nimrod" but the two are not the same, and Gilgamesh isn't exactly a god, he was a demigod. But if that's who it is referring to, and he counts as a god, then can I just change that to gilgamesh? Then it won't take me to a bible story, and instead to Gilgamesh? Abdishtar (talk) 15:04, 14 February 2010 (UTC)

At first I was just going to take issue with Nimrod, but with a closer look there seems to be other issues. I am not just going delete anything unless I understand the reasons better why they were posted. But these deities aren't referenced nor can I find a reference for them: Adramelech As Shalla, the Assyrian goddess of grain Anasas, god of medicine Nishraeli Nisroch

I am not certain if As Shalla is supposed to mean Shala? or the goddess of grain Ashnan. As for Adrammelech, I can't find anything outside abrahamic demonology and biblical sources for him. And I can't seem to find anything on Anasas nor Nishraeli, but I don't want to assume they don't exist based on that. I mainly used the google search engine and google books as well as scribd to find references, but its not turning up. And absolutely nothing turns up for Nishraeli. Nisroch is also a judeo-christian enitity --Abdishtar (talk) 16:06, 14 February 2010 (UTC)

I hope this isn't premature, but I've been gone since February and no one has responded, nor posted a source for the deities allegedged. So I'm going to delete them, at least until a source is found. I looked everywhere and couldn't find one thing. I've searched libraries and bought a few new books as well. I'm sure someone will post it back up with a reference to Adramelech, As Shalla, Anasas, and Nishraeli if I don't find it down the road with citations. Abdishtar (talk) 02:22, 11 August 2010 (UTC) As for Nisroch, he's from Judeo-christian lore, and if he is to be identified with an Assyro-Babylonian deity, let his name be listed under that deity and not as a seperate one. Abdishtar (talk) 02:25, 11 August 2010 (UTC)

Seperating Assyro-Babylonian religion

I propose that the article: Assyro-Babylonian religion be divided into the articles Babylonian religion and Assyrian religion; I also propose that the article Babylonian mythology then be merged with the Babylonian religion article.

Justifications:

• Babylonian mythology evolved and changed throughout the history of Babylon, from the Old Babylonian Period to the conquest of Babylon by the Assyrians, to the "Chaldean" Empire.
  • It is therefore misleading and inaccurate to lump the mythologies of Assyria and Babylon together as if they were always identical. Marduk and Assur, the heads of the Babylonian and Assyrian pantheons, respectively, demonstrate a clear differentiation.

• The interrelationships between the various Mesopotamian mythologies and religions are poorly represented in the current Assyro-Babylonian article.

• The current article relies heavily on sources from the 19th and early 20th century that may now fall under WP:FRINGE; dividing these articles would provide a good opportunity to examine this possibility.

• This step would allow the Mesopotamian mythology article to be modified to fulfill its proper function as an overview of the mythologies and general religious practices of peoples in Mesopotamia. As it stands, the article is comprised of poorly sourced descriptions that overstep the level of detail you want in an article summing up an entire category of religions spanning several millennia. Contrast this with the Ancient Semitic religion article which, while clearly flawed, provides a better, summary-oriented perspective.

NJMauthor (talk) 20:09, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

I think you misunderstand WP:FRINGE. You are most welcome to add more recent sources. Such as Dalley (2002), which rather than expanding upon you happen to have removed. But before we have substantial material on the differences between Assyrian and Babylonian religion, it makes little sense to split the article.

I do not think you have read a lot about the topic. Far from being "a clear differentiation", Marduk and Assur were in fact identified explicitly. This is also not about "Assyria and Babylon" any more than it is about "Assur and Babylonia". It is about Assyria and Babylonia, empires which both encompassed the same region, the Fertile Crescent, successively. It is impossible to treat the subject as consisting of two independent topics. What would be possible, of course, would be a WP:SS structure with dedicated sub-articles on regional cults, but before we can think of that, we will need a lot more material.

I fully agree with you that these articles are in a mess and need attention. The attention they need, however, does not consist in random splitting into even more articles in bad shape. The attention should involve pooling such material as we have and build on that, ideally by people with a decent overview of the topic and knowledge of and access to the relevant literature. --dab (𒁳) 11:05, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

Why did you not comment during the month between my above posting and yesterday? It could have avoided this whole mess if people had disputed my proposal. I certainly waited a good amount of time.

"Marduk and Assur were in fact identified explicitly." The transition is relevant, not the attributes. And Assur *is* given *some* attributes different from Marduk, I shall support this in the upcoming draft.

It is impossible to isolate the religions from their historical and cultural contexts, but it is not impossible to distinguish the differences and to identify differences large enough to warrant two articles. I will draft two articles over the next few weeks and we'll try again after I display them. Please respond promptly so I know how to proceed. NJMauthor (talk) 20:44, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

what "mess"? I don't see you have lost any work you did. Of course it is possible to "distinguish the differences and to identify differences large enough to warrant two articles". The point is, somebody needs to sit down and do it. This is hours and hours of work even for a specialist with good knowledge of the field. Please do draft your articles, please do expand coverage of these topics, but please do it properly. The normal course of action is buidling articles bit by bit and go the way of WP:SS once they grow large and clean enough to branch them out. Every so often, we get very good editors who present ready-made good articles. If you are such an editor, I will thank you ever so much and do my best to preserve your work. Just splitting out articles with copy-paste of the low quality material that is already here is not helpful. --dab (𒁳) 08:55, 31 March 2010 (UTC)