Talk:Babylonian mythology

Vfd.

 * Delete. Despite all the pretty lines, this is nothing but a list of links. RickK 22:54, Oct 31, 2004 (UTC)
 * Merge and Redirect to Sumerian mythology gK 23:59, 31 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * It was marked VfD 15 minutes after creation. Give it a chance - especially if author cites sources that (I assume) contain more than just a table. Forseti 00:18, 1 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep The has potential.--Josiah 01:26, 1 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep. Inherently encyclopaedic.--Gene_poole 04:59, 1 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep. Needs a lot of work, but topic is encyclopedic, and content will probably catch up eventually. --Improv 08:31, 1 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep. &mdash; siro  &chi;  o  10:19, Nov 1, 2004 (UTC)
 * comment (not a vote) I find tree structures (like the Family Tree of the Greek Gods which this was based on) easier to remember than the paragraphs of text I'm reading now explaining it, and hoped it could be usefull to others also. I still know very little about Babylonian mythology (which differs from the Sumerian, tho the relationship is complex) (I haven't even read the Enûma Elish yet), and am also not yet solid on the time frames/geography/history involved; thus I may not be able to expand this article beyond a stub any time soon. &mdash; Jeandré, 2004-11-01t22:48z
 * Keep. -Sean Curtin 01:27, Nov 2, 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep - could be quickly massaged into a useful page. Charles Matthews 22:35, 2 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep - However, if the author wants to compile a family tree of these ancient gods, it may require much more checking than a simple alphabetical list. I like this subject. I wish this list may become really useful to researchers one day. -- Toytoy 01:23, Nov 5, 2004 (UTC)

End moved discussion, see vote history.

The result of the debate was keep: 1 delete vote, 1 merge and redirect vote, 8 keep votes, and 1 comment. &mdash; Jeandré, 2004-11-13t17:55z

16 months later...
...the article does not provide much information, except referring to other articles. The article Mesopotamian mythology has the same contents as would be expected in Babylonian mythology. There is little justification in keeping both. --JFK 19:14, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

a different view
Sumerian Mythology is so dissimilar to Semitic Mythologies that sprang from it. If it werent', i doubt i'd have a degree in assyriology... (e. semitic religions were my focus). It would be like merging christianity with judasim on wikipedia. Despite similarities, they are really quite different religions/mythologies. And like christianity say, the semitic versions of the mythologies change dramatically from the earliest attestation until their engulfment by persians, greeks, romans, and so on.

This article should, if anything, be expanded to contain that information and distinct semitic character, and the sumerian article should likewise be expanded to contain that distinct sumerian character, and the "mesopotamian mythology" article should simply refer to those two articles. Perhaps yet more articles on West Semitic religion and its inclusion/influence on mesopotamian religion. The cult of Hadad for instance!

But this is just one assyriologists opinion.

Who will step up to make the article worthy of its continued separate existance! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.52.182.179 (talk) 06:43, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

Serious concerns about the VfD
I'm not sure why this tree is published and live as it is clearly wrong in many obvious ways. For example, Ea is Enki, yet listed as two people, while his half brother and sister - Ninhursag(f) or Enlil(m) - who made up the ruling three with Enki/Ea, are not listed at all. This is so far off being ready, it's virtually pointless it being live, sorry.

If you like, I can create a more complete (or at least accurate and useful) tree, but it won't be limited to just Babylonian, as Babylonian, Akkadian and Sumerian (and even Egyptian) have such a major cross over its more useful to show them all together.

Either way, the current one needs to come down. Guy.shrimpton (talk) 12:26, 19 January 2015 (UTC)

Help: Anyone who has read the book outside google books: Treasures of Darkness by thorkild Jacobsen
I understand that there are variations in texts that I may be unaware of, but if we are going to describe texts such as the enuma elish, can we stick to the story, and reference what you are talking about? I mean really. The King translation of the Enuma Elish is outdated as well, and I would recommend that translation to no one. Its obsolete. Also, some of what the user posted and attributed to the king translation just isn't in the link/translation they referenced. Also, if I have any errors, do help me by correcting me, as I am trying to clean up the mythology of the ancient near east's articles, they are in serious need of help. Also, after the point where Anshar sends Anu and Ea to pacify Tiamat, I had to use the King translation even though I didn't want to. So if anyone could help me out and fix the second part if any of it was inaccurate, it would be greatly appreciated. Abdishtar (talk) 22:46, 4 February 2010 (UTC) 16:46 27 January 2010

Assyro-Babylonian?
Shouldn't this be merged with the "Assyro-Babylonian" religion page? 121.223.67.39 (talk) 09:00, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Please don't merge this page with anything. Cowgod14 (talk) 16:51, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

I disagree with both speakers. I think there should be separate articles on Sumerian, maybe Akkadian, Assyrian and maybe Babylonian mythology, since the mythologies seems to undergo many changes during the 2000 years (?) it was vindicated. That said, other stubby articles regarding any of those mythologies, could be merged, if suitable.  Said: Rursus   ☻   18:18, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

I agree; there needs to be separate pages for Sumerian, Akkadian, Babylonian, and Assyrian mythologies. NJMauthor (talk) 23:07, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

While they are largely identical, there is a significant number of differences both linguistically and theologically to keep them seperate. Abdishtar (talk) 22:46, 4 February 2010 (UTC) 16:36, 27 January 2010

Further Explanation
What do the "...."'s mean on some of the entries? Unknown names or something else? Anyway, it should be included in the article --210.14.96.246 (talk) 08:30, 8 August 2010 (UTC)