|
Post by hukkana on Feb 15, 2022 15:21:52 GMT -5
How did I miss the "Elamite Sebitti" ?
Also trying to look up Taḫšešra/Taḫšešri(š) online brings up literally no hits for me even without the special diacritics.
|
|
|
Post by sheshki on Feb 22, 2022 12:33:06 GMT -5
Through with T \o/
|
|
|
Post by hukkana on Mar 10, 2022 13:40:04 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by sheshki on Mar 21, 2022 20:09:38 GMT -5
Through with U...there is light at the end of the tunnel \o/ 364 tables a ten entries on average so far
|
|
|
Post by hukkana on Mar 23, 2022 12:40:40 GMT -5
Through with U...there is light at the end of the tunnel \o/ 364 tables a ten entries on average so far
Watch them find a second Ashurbanipal's library just to spite you XD
|
|
|
Post by sheshki on Mar 23, 2022 13:32:28 GMT -5
well i already have an eye on another book to incorporate --> "A Handbook of Gods and Goddesses of the Ancient Near East" by Frayne and Stuckey
|
|
|
Post by hukkana on Mar 25, 2022 5:47:20 GMT -5
well i already have an eye on another book to incorporate --> "A Handbook of Gods and Goddesses of the Ancient Near East" by Frayne and Stuckey Ooooh : D
|
|
|
Post by ninshubur on Mar 25, 2022 7:19:38 GMT -5
well i already have an eye on another book to incorporate --> "A Handbook of Gods and Goddesses of the Ancient Near East" by Frayne and Stuckey Have to say I'm not a fan of that book. In many cases it either just reliterates the Reallexikon (the Ninshubur entry is just an inferior bootleg of Wiggermann's from R.!), spreads outdated theories (Hinz's infamous Humban=Napirisha, Pinikir=Kirirsha confabulations which have been debunked first by Vallat in the 1980s and later by Henkelman in the 2000s), or repeats the wildest ideas straight from Helsiniki (Lapinkivi's Kilili theories). Stuckey is also not exactly the most rigorous author, for example in one of her articles on academia.edu one can read: "My instinct is that Shaushka became assimilated into later goddesses, especially Anatolian Kubaba and Cybele." Putting aside the fact the explanation is essentially "it was revealed to me in a dream," rather than reference to any primary sources, Kubaba was hardly "Anatolian" - she was chiefly worshiped in Alalakh and Carchemish - and reading virtually even the most basic source on the Hurrian pantheon, like Archi's excellent overview "West Hurrian Pantheon and its Background," or Taracha's "Religions of Second Millennium Anatolia," would be more than enough to notice that Kubaba and Shaushka are two separate deities. She also isn't much "younger" than Shaushka - first attestations are around 300 years apart (note that Archi assumes Kubaba might go further back to the "Syrian substratum," like Ishara or Astabi, since her name has no plausible etymology in Sumerian, Hurrian or any Semitic language)... I won't even comment on the Cybele part of the statement since that's basically Frazer-worthy. Note that the "remnants" of Shaushka in later sources have been studied by Gary Beckman, Daniel Schwemer, and others, and there is not exactly much in the way of Phrygian mountain goddesses in there. She actually quotes Beckman's article where he discusses this very matter... As far as I am ware, this is barely better than these generic "ALL gods of the world!" books which have been the bane of Wikipedia entries of Mesopotamian deities through much of the past two decades.
|
|
|
Post by hukkana on Mar 27, 2022 11:10:59 GMT -5
As far as I am ware, this is barely better than these generic "ALL gods of the world!" books which have been the bane of Wikipedia entries of Mesopotamian deities through much of the past two decades.
I kinda wanna hear more about this now XD
|
|
|
Post by sheshki on Mar 27, 2022 12:56:12 GMT -5
Ninshubur, since i´m more interested in the transliterated names it should be fine. But thanks for your opinion. Will keep it in mind.
|
|
|
Post by sheshki on Apr 2, 2022 19:06:30 GMT -5
That´s it...through with Z (the signs are not there yet...) I have a few more pdfs to look through, there are several addenda. Paaaarty \o/
|
|
|
Post by ninshubur on Apr 3, 2022 9:08:16 GMT -5
As far as I am ware, this is barely better than these generic "ALL gods of the world!" books which have been the bane of Wikipedia entries of Mesopotamian deities through much of the past two decades.
I kinda wanna hear more about this now XD
Some choice mistakes spawned by such publications: - Until recently, the Gunura page claimed that the deity in mention is male and the husband of Ninisina (sic)
- Amasagnudi misspelled as "Amasagnul" and labeled as a "fertility goddess"; Amasagnudi is attested once as Anu's sukkal in place of usual Ninshubur/Papsukkal/Ilabrat according to Paul-Alain Beaulieu, not as a deity of any agricultural importance
- At least 2 separate articles were dedicated to various vintage spellings of Hebat, treated as if they were separate deities because of a shoddy book like that
- Hendursaga and "Endursaga" as two separate deities, based on a single book, again of this variety
|
|
|
Post by us4-he2-gal2 on Apr 4, 2022 20:21:56 GMT -5
ninshubar: As for the work under discussion, "A Handbook of Gods and Goddesses of the Ancient Near East" I can tell you a bit about that as I was a student under Frayne and did some grunt work on this book (just spot reading in places). You are amazingly astute with what it actually does and what it fails to do - you've clearly examined it with a broad understanding of existing material for the study of ancient Near Eastern religion. What I can add to that is some idea of what the project was trying to do in the first place which, of course, goes a long way toward explaining its final form. Well, the project was originally the idea of Johanna Stuckey. Stuckey was a retired professor of English at the time, never a ANE specialist. She was a friend of Frayne's but not through Mesopotamian studies. Stuckey's involvement with Mesopotamia was mainly limited to writing articles about Inanna / Ishtar for her feminist webzine matrifocus. Feminists are really only interested in Inanna, of course. But somehow Stuckey, from the interest she received from matrifocus, got the idea to create a guide to Mesopotamian gods and goddesses to the general public. Frayne acquiesced to the idea of co-writing the work (really, he did all the work and she proofread and edited) on account of their friendship and for other reasons. He never actually intended on doing any original research on the gods or goddesses since it was intended as a general level reader for the public - a summation and simplification of what one might find in authoritative existing works. This is also the reason the book contains no special characters like š ṭ ṣ which are the hallmark of a normal Assyriological publication. On the level of a work for the general public, I think it serves its purpose - it is a handy quick reference to get a quick summary and a list of more authoritative works. In any case, after your critique of this work which is quite exacting I have to revise my notion that you are a devoted layman and assume instead that you are a retired orientalist. Sheshki - Congratulations on completing your long running cuneiform god names project A 5 year effort puzzling over the writing of some 3800 god names that is some saga of an enenuru thread! A testament to the habitual nature of Sheshki and to the enormity of the Mesopotamian theological imagination at the same time. I was pondering the fact that initial fluency in a language is sometimes held to require some 3000 to 4000 words be memorized. It may correspond on some level that the Mesopotamians had to imagine some 3000 to 4000 deities to serve as the divine counterparts to all known physical and cultural phenomena. In any case, thanks for your work it will be interesting to see in what ways the data may be stored.
|
|
|
Post by ninshubur on Apr 9, 2022 12:01:53 GMT -5
In any case, after your critique of this work which is quite exacting I have to revise my notion that you are a devoted layman and assume instead that you are a retired orientalist. I am not a professional and probably younger than most people on the forum, actually; closest I come to being involved in the field professionally is editing wikipedia (you can see my efforts here; it's an ongoing Sisyphean task, though). I'm pretty sure I'm some 40 years away from retirement, give or take a few years. I am glad I give a good impression, though. I personally do dislike this type of Inanna publications a lot, primarily because they completely divorce her from any context whatsoever. Indeed, you can get the impression that in some of them Inanna is just an ~exotic~ addition to Greek mythology, and you will never read about Nanaya, Ninshubur or Ishara in them, let alone more minor or esoteric related deities. Mesopotamia does not matter, I guess because Iraq is not a cool enough country for its antiquity to deserve relevance in the public perception, and the only parts which occasionally do reach it (Inanna, Ereshkigal, Epic of Gilgamesh, Enuma Elish) end up completely divorced from any context whatsoever and misinterpreted beyond mortal comprehension for it to be achieved. Also, I think there are authors who were capable of combining rigorous approach to sources with a feminist sensibility, too, especially Joan Goodnick Westenholz; I just think Stuckey is not a rigorous researcher in general, whether for ideological reasons or not.
|
|
|
Post by hukkana on May 28, 2022 15:00:44 GMT -5
Belated congratulations on finishing this !
|
|