Talk:Babylonian star catalogues

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Astronomy (Rated Start-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon Babylonian star catalogues is within the scope of WikiProject Astronomy, which collaborates on articles related to Astronomy on Wikipedia.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
Note icon
An appropriate image needs to be added to this article, or the current one needs to be updated.
Once this has been done, please remove the |needs-image=yes parameter from this template.
WikiProject Ancient Near East (Rated Start-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ancient Near East, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Ancient Near East related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
 


Citations needed[edit]

In the section Zodiacal constellations the list could easily be upcited using f.ex. (Origins of the ancient constellations), J. H. Rogers:

However, the identification (f.ex. MUL.MUL "Star of Stars" to Pleiades) varies somewhat from author to author. The connection between the MUL.APIN tablet constellation to a modern constellation, should be attributed to varying sources. ... said: Rursus (mbor) 08:34, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

New future content?[edit]

Path of Enlil[edit]

Rogers interpretations on MUL.APINs path of Enlil (northern path) is:

Notes
  1. ^ the seat of Anu = the Point of Summer solstice
  2. ^ α Leo
  3. ^ Rogers of course refers to the "Coma star cluster", Melotte 111, the Coma cluster of galaxies is not observable without a telescope, or perhaps strong binoculars

Which doesn't coincide very well with the current text description. Consider the above text the future replacement of the article text. ... said: Rursus (mbor) 16:32, 16 August 2009 (UTC) Ready! ... said: Rursus (mbor) 17:54, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

I was wrong, I found the direct citation of the article list. However the one above might be perused in MUL.APIN instead (with some kind of rewriting so that many path of Enlil interpretations are mentioned — J.H.Rogers is not the sole interpretation of the meanings, as much as I know, there are about 2-3 more interpretation sets out there). ... said: Rursus (mbor) 18:56, 16 August 2009 (UTC)
The list development is now continued on Talk:Mul.Apin. This is an overview article. MUL.APINs contents is better for the article of that name. ... said: Rursus (mbork³) 08:22, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

Link dump[edit]

I remade the zodiacal list to fit Gary D. Thompson's source. He seems to be a properly reliable researcher (whether professional or amateur) preparing by immense bibliographies. That much before an alleged Dr (?) Shepherd Simpson, Galactic Astrologer (!!!!). I suspect there are very few Dr:s in Astrology, and in Galactic Astrology (never ever heard of the concept anywhere else) none! ... said: Rursus (mbork³) 15:06, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

Sumer isa source?[edit]

The intro alleges that the original constellations were Sumerian. Three stars each instead gives the sources Akkad, Amurru, Elam and no-source. Maybe some of those from no-source came from Sumerian sources, but such a stmt needs refs. Rursus dixit. (mbork3!) 10:52, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

I think that the editors have confused Sumerian with the fact that Mesopotamia for it's entire history used a cuneiform script deriving from Sumerian cuneiform and also having a Sumerian pronunciation. At most 4 constellations may actually have a Sumerian origin, i.e. Aquarius/Capricornus (representing Enki), Leo and Taurus. Although that is very speculative. Rursus dixit. (mbork3!) 11:00, 24 February 2010 (UTC)
And maybe Elam is the original source of the first constellations, see Rogers 98 page 11. Rursus dixit. (mbork3!) 16:09, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

Temporary intro save[edit]

Intro going to be rewritten, to accomodate for unknown sources for star catalogues. First three para:s saved here:

Old Babylonian astronomy inherited systems of star catalogues from Sumerian sources[citation needed]. The Babylonians grouped the stars in companies of seven. References are made to the seven Tikši, the seven Lumaši, and the seven Maši. The Enūma Eliš (V.2) mentions the Lumaši, translated by L.W. King (1902) as "the stars of the Zodiac":

(V.1) u-ba-aš-šim man-za-za an ilāni rabūti (V.2) kakkabāni tam-šil-šu-nu lu-ma-ši uš-zi-iz
"He (Marduk) made the stations for the great gods; The stars, their images, as the stars of the Zodiac, he fixed."[1]

In particular, a list of stars along the path of the Moon (the ecliptic) is the predecessor of the system of the classical zodiac of twelve signs developed in Neo-Babylonian astronomy around the 7th to 6th century BC and inherited by Hellenistic astrology.[2]

  1. ^ L.W. King, The Seven Tablets of Creation, London 1902.
  2. ^ Lankford, John History of Astronomy Routledge 1996 ISBN 978-0815303220P.43 [1]

By. Rursus dixit. (mbork3!) 20:15, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

Font?[edit]

There should be a notice about the type of script on the page and what fonts to use. ~janus zeal (talk) 05:29, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done Rursus dixit. (mbork3!) 10:29, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

"Age of this-and-that"[edit]

This edit tried to "explain" the movement of the vernal equinox point along the ecliptic by referring to Age of Taurus. That's not a good explanation since the astrologers concepts of Age of Taurus/Aries/Pisces etc., is under heavy discord among the astrologers themselves. Astronomers dismiss these "Ages" since there is no fixed point on the ecliptic where one can consider the movement of the vernal equinox to begin: there is no starting point. Besides Astrology is perfectly untrue in every aspect, and have no connection to reality. WP:NPOV and editor dynamics makes this very fuzzy and obscure on Wikipedia, but all psychology investigations that hold for skeptical scrutiny, indicate that there is no connection between personality and/or fate with the planets whatsoever. Rursus dixit. (mbork3!) 09:40, 31 December 2011 (UTC)