Talk:Mesopotamian mythology/Archive 1

message: The original Talk page for this article has been destroyed and the history page truncated..
"Mesopotamian Mythology" is the correct title. I agree. The title implies the oral tradition that developed in the early Sumer culture that was continued as oral tradition or written down in texts (e.g. Gilgamesh). Babylonian mythology/religion was developed after writing.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.136.39.204 (talk) 21:16, 8 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, definitely move it. "Assyro-Babylonian" is a dumb name. If it's general, it should be "Mesopotamian", and if it's specific, it should be either "Assyrian" or "Babylonian". In fact, we already do have a page on Babylonian mythology. —Keenan Pepper 02:50, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: Who is responsible for "This accounts for the origin of most of the world as we know it according to the a summary of most of the myths."  This is eronious, a POV and needs removal.
John D. Croft 16:58, 26 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Drastic Editing Needed 

message: * You need to decide whether the Sumerian or the Akkadian (Assyrian-Babylonian) names of the deities should be used in the text. At present, names of Sumerian and Akkadian deities are mixed together; Utu/Shamash, Inanna/Ishtar and Nanna/Sin. 
* While there are firm archaeological support for a good description of Sumerian gods and their temples, you should be cautious when dealing with Sumerian mythology. With few exceptions, all religious literature -the myths- known to us were written down in the Old Babylonian period, and later (Enuma elish, Athrahasis, the Gilgamesh epic).
--JFK 19:52, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Suggestions 

message: I inserted this article Mesopotamian mythology into the Template:Ancient Mesopotamia, and replaced it with the odd choice Nibiru (see Template talk:Ancient Mesopotamia. I think this article makes a good starting point in the mythology section of the template with a lot of valuable entries. --JFK 16:43, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Template of Ancient Mesopotamia 

message: While I support having a general Mesopotamian mythology page, it seems that such a page should be truncated into sections dealing with Sumerians and Babylonians, at least.  They're two different time periods and have different takes on the myths that are shared at all.  Perhaps the Mesopotamian mythology page could be a general overview, while detailed accounts of the myths could be provided in Sumerian mythology and Babylonian mythology respectively. --Krishva 06:40, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: They should be demerged as happened on http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sumerian_mythology&oldid=8136846, the fact that Marduk is the head honcho to the Babylonians and Enlil was to the Sumerians is also another point. Most likely if you asked a Sumerian who Marduk was they would answer, What are you on drugs or something!!!. Enlil Ninlil 21:09, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Or, maybe, if you asked the Man in the Moon how much cheese he exported each year, you would get the answer: "go get yourself an ice cream"! Said: Rursus ☻ 13:27, 17 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Suggestion in dealing with various cultures, etc. 

message: I stated this on the babylonian mythology page.  But this page really does a poor job of dealing with "mesopotamian myhtology".  It treats it as a single unified mass.  But 3rd millenium mythology, 2nd millenium mythology, nand 1st millenium mythology are different balls of wax.  Sumerian and Semitic deities are presented beside one another, and, in some cases (erroneously sometimes) simply declared equivalent.  Ishtar might have her roots in the cult of Inanna, but she's hardly an identical character.  The prominence of inanna for sumerians is not similar to the prominence of ishtar for babylonians/assyrians.  Similarly, greeks thought of Ares entirely negatively, but the romans thought of mars often quite positively.  You would not equate Mars with Ares; they simply aren't the same person, despite serving SIMILAR functions in the pantheons.
I think this article needs expanding, from assyriologists/sumerologists, or division into 'sumerian" and "semitic" mesopotamian mythologies, including some kind of chronology.  Marduk/Ashur are head honchos in the 2nd millenium onward, but only to those cities (Babylon, Ashur/nineveh/calach) where the cults were located.  And during times when those cities were at the heads of great empires.  What about, as someone points out, the Enlil dominance during much of sumerian dominance of the south?  Dumuzi and Tammuz, Enki and Ea, these gods lose in importance greatly in the transition to semitic deities.  (H)Adad is not the same as Ninurta/Ningirsu.... 
what about the pre-anthropomorphic sumerian deitis?  Imdugud for instance?  Anzuu?   
This mish-mashery obliterates any change of transformation.  it would be like presenting christianity, and judaism, as one religion, with a couple different terms, and no sense of the historical development, one from the other, then both inside themselves... :(  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.52.182.179 (talk) 06:55, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Different view 

message: For example, the Biblical account of the creation of man as well as Noah's flood resemble the Sumerian tales very closely, though the Sumerian myths were written many centuries earlier than the Tanakh (Old Testament).
Citation needed? (ApostleJoe (talk) 20:22, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I think so. It would be easier to say that Noah's flood resembles similar Mesopotamian myths thought to [citation needed] originate in the Sumerian myth of Zi-ud-sura/Utnapishtim. But still citations would be good. Said: Rursus ☻ 18:29, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

text: That would be good. Would you please go vote against merging Babylonian mythology with Mesopotamian mythology, HERE if you wish? Separating the mythologies would be preferable because of the long time span, I think. Said: Rursus ☻ 18:34, 20 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Er...

message: What do you think of the theory based on geographical data and numerics as promoted by Prof. Emilio Spedicato, of University of Bergamo, Italy, that the Garden of Eden was really located in Hunza Valley of Northern Pakistan ?
Please check the following two very interesting articles by him :--
1. "Geography and Numerics of Eden, Kharsag and Paradise: Sumerian and Enochian Sources Versus the Genesis Tale": URL: http://itis.volta.alessandria.it/episteme/ep7/ep7-eden.htm
2. "EDEN REVISITED: GEOGRAPHY, NUMERICS AND OTHER TALES (REVISED VERSION", URL: http://www.unibg.it/dati/persone/636/419.pdf
Does his theory warrants a mention of it anywhere in the Wiki article ?--Monmajhi (talk) 16:22, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Garden of Eden in Hunza Valley ?? 

message: I would like to know how ths mythology came to an end? Was it because of christian persecution at the same time as in Rome! Enlil Ninlil (talk) 08:53, 22 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: End

message: Substituted at 23:44, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Assessment comment