Jump to content

Talk:Ishtar

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 70.231.129.144 (talk) at 06:07, 20 February 2013 (→‎Time for an update: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

2003

Where is the material on Astarte, now that we are being redirected here? Wetman 11:15, 21 Nov 2003 (UTC)

I guess the topic of Astarte was all wiped out and we are supposed to accept Ishtar as being Astarte though a totally different culutre worshipping her. Amazing, Innanna we separate, but Astarte we merge. -- anonmous IP 69.76.46.169, 19:42, 5 February 2007

Star symbol

Removed this theory on the eight-pointed star:

This star, joined with the crescent moon, became a symbol of the Ottoman Empire and later of Islam.

because I can't find anything to confirm it, and it states a connection that could just as well be coincidence. I rather doubt that the Turkish Osmanli adopted the cult of a Mesopotamian goddess, especially considering the generally shamanistic bent of pre-Islamic religion among the Turks. —Charles P. (Mirv) 11:48, 23 Dec 2004 (UTC)

please separate Inanna and Ishtar !


It would be VERY good to separate Inanna and Ishtar !
Inanna was a sumerian goddess.
Ishtar was babylonian (mix of sumerian and akkadian) and came much later (1000 years). That's why Ishtar inherited semitic properties and replaced Innana in the babylonian religion.

Indeed. This is only one of the things wrong with this article. It contains a number of speculations that appear to be original work, or should at least not be presented uncritically as fact. (For example "She was probably the precursor to the Greek Athena," and similar assertions are not things documented in any relible source I know of.) I'd undertake this myself only I'm insufficiently expert in the subject. The main reference in my possession is Kramer, which may be a tad out of date by now, and I know next to nothing about Ishtar as distinct from Inanna. Csernica 20:55, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)


Ok let me add details ;) Ishtar was an akkadian goddess, she appeared much later than old sumerian goddess Inanna . And there is already an article about Inanna. This article is unfortunately mixing all together... User:saggiga

This issue may be partially clarified by the wikipedia article on En-hedu-ana, which should be linked to this article!!!!! Lily20 (talk) 18:35, 12 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Removed "Pleiadian" from "Pleiadian-sumerian". As there was "Semetic" nearby, I don't even want to know what was meant with it. --Oop 09:29, Jan 30, 2005 (UTC)

the second name derives from the first Semitic people, the Akkadians.
I'm pretty sure Akkadians were not the first Semitic people. -Tydaj 21:34, 10 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]


yes there are significant problems with the Inanna / Ishtar seperation. One very problematic entry is on the Uruk Vase. THis depicts Inanna, not Ishtar. And indeed mentions of inscriptions are misleading. There are no inscriptions on the vase. In addition its identification of the depicting Inanna's Sacred Marriage Rite is problematic. The Uruk Vase which appears to depict the Sacred Marriage Rite predate any texts which mention the Sacred Marriage Rite. So either that attribution is an anachronism. Or as I have argued in my thesis, the visual depictions on the Uruk Vase are in fact neccessary for the particularities of the Sacred Marriage Rite to appear textuality. That is to say that the Uruk Vase is the visual model with complex representational and recursive properties that actually aid in the later development of textual language that can accurately describe the Sacred Marriage Rite. I'm very interested in this topic, and have done much scholarly work on it. I shall create an account soon so that I may give a serious update to the Inanna entry on the wikipedia.

Perhaps you may be interested in a difference between I-Nanna and Ishtar as this following theory if it can be allowed in Ishtar Talk (not being the main article) without someone scrapping it out before you read it. I-Nanna is Sumerian but so is the dates of the sumerian 360-day calendar. Where as Ishtar is later during the 365-day calendar. Nannar is said to be the moon, and yet nannar means great mother, a name that was applied to Venus. Aligning long NeoBabylon chronology to short Genesis chronology and you get the same 177 years for Ur by either. However, in the short Meskiag-Nannar begins 243 years after the Hebrew Flood which is a Venus cycle not lunar. As for those who dont want Ishtar and Astoreth to be the same goddess Venus, do see my answer to AnonMoos below.69.76.46.169 03:35, 6 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There is no I-nanna, if you want to know how to spell it in sumerian, it's In-anna. She was originally Ninanak, or the lady of the datepalm storehouses, but she eventually evolved to take on more attributes slowly becomming Inanna. Though she is the daughter of Nanna, that's not part of her name. I'm not sure what you are talking about with a 365 day calendar, do you mean during the hellenistic era? There really wasn't any babylonian/assyrian/sumerian paganism left by the time they adopted (if they did) that calendar), as the local religions got absorbed into the zoroastrian and zoroastrian-influenced religions of the time.

Nannar doesn't mean great mother, learn akkadian. As for the Venus cycle, the only calendars that go by that are the mayan one. Other than that, its not applicable elsewhere. As for Ishtar and Ashtoreth, they aren't the same. Ashtoreth is a hebrew invented word, and no such deity was worshipped. They corrupted the name Ashtart/Athtart, of whom is etymologically linked to Ishtar, but they aren't the same necessarily. [User:Abdishtar|Abdishtar] 15:12 31 January 2010 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Abdishtar (talk • contribs) 20:12, 31 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, Ashtoreth, like the Canaanaite word which gave rise to "Astarte" is a linguistic cognate to Ishtar... AnonMoos (talk) 23:13, 4 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Of the Sleep of Ishtar

The text "Of the Sleep of Ishtar" appears in Simon's Necronomicon and is readily available on the net (in this location among others). Is this an actual ancient Sumerian or Babylonian text? (Note: I am asking about this particular text, not the myth in general.)

I am asking because I don't know how much of Simon's Necronomicon is fiction and how much consists of actual myths and authentic texts. (Also, the text contains names such as Cuthalu and Azag-Thoth, which I have not seen anywhere outside the Necronomicon.) Does anyone know? SpectrumDT 22:58, 25 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I can tell you that Cuthalu and Azag-Thoth are just bastardizations of Cthulhu and Azathoth. --Tydaj 00:16, 26 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
That was my point. I want to know if these names have any connection with actual Sumerian mythology, as the writer of this "Necronomicon" claims. SpectrumDT 17:08, 26 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I did some research (googling) myself, and apparently "Of the Sleep of Ishtar" as well as pretty much everything else in the Simon's Necronomicon is fiction, loosely based on actual Mesopotamian myths. See here for more info. SpectrumDT 20:28, 26 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
A lot of stuff in the Cthulhu mythos is borrowed from real mythologies, but I'm not sure how much of the Simon Necronomicon is new to the book itself and how much is true to pre-existing mythology. --Tydaj 13:31, 5 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Ishtar

Of course the one thing not mentioned is that Ishtar is also the origin of "Mary & baby Jesus" paintings and worship in the RCC - Ishtar by another name.

And neither of you supplied any sources for either of your statements, so your'e both wrong.

213.141.89.20 06:47, 6 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

2012

You don't have to provide sources for obvious things . . . — Preceding unsigned comment added by 170.3.8.253 (talk) 15:07, 2 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Read WP:VERIFY. And read this talk page - it's clearly not obvious and consensus has been it doesn't belong here. Dougweller (talk) 15:33, 2 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
170.3.8.253 -- Judging by the book Gods, Demons, and Symbols of Ancient Mesopotamia: An Illustrated Dictionary by Jeremy Black and Anthony Green (1992, ISBN 0-292-70794-0), pp. 108, 173, the goddess Inana/Ishtar is NOT generally depicted with accompanying infant, and there are few indications that she was ever even thought to have children (except for scattered sources mentioning the minor Shara (god)). Whoever came up with this nonsense was very confused between Inana/Ishtar vs. Isis-with-baby-Horus... AnonMoos (talk) 19:52, 2 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Two things. . .

First of all, I would like to make a note on the above message concerning the origin of the classic Madonna-with-baby-Jesus image. Although I've never heard of any Ishtar-Madonna conection, I would like to note that it is widely believed that the image ultimately derives from the ancient Egyptian image of Isis suckling baby Horus. For text evidence, try pg. 63 of the following book: Fletcher, Joann. The Egyptian Book of Living and Dying. London: Thorsons, 2002. Also, try looking on the Wikipedia Isis page. There's a set of two images on the page that show the similarities between the images.

Secondly, while studying Mesopotamian cultures in school recently, my class participated in a simulation to see how ancient empires worked. The simulation, known simply as "Empires," is complex and directs the classroom teacher to assign all the students into one of five groups, the Babylonians, Hittites, Medes, Persians, and Phoenicians. As a member of the Babylonian group, I began to search for a Babylonian god or goddess that our group could "worship" (although the simulation didn't require this, we thought it might be fun). After researching the subject, I suggested Ishtar (coincidentally, my birthday is on the same day as a festival of hers). While I was doing my research, I read some text that strongly implied that Ashtaroth was another name for Isthar. Is this correct, or is this just a misperception? --The Great Honker 22:48, 14 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Arabic script

The Arabic script is totally irrelevant to this page, since Ishtar was not an Arab goddess, and since there was no real significant permanent presence of Arabs in Mesopotamia until Christianity was already getting pretty solidly established in the area. Also, the form of the Arabic name عشتار reveals that this Arabic word is not even any kind of close or direct borrowing from an Akkadian language -- since the Akkadian languages had no pharyngeal ع or `Ayn consonant, and since the so-called "š" of the late Akkadian languages was in fact borrowed into other languages as an "s" sound. Arabic عشتار is probably the end product of a rather convoluted Canaano-Aramaic historical transmission path, ultimately resulting from Akkadian Ishtar being equated with Canaanite Ashtoreth. So Arabic عشتار really has no ascertainable relevance whatsoever to Akkadian Ishtar. AnonMoos 07:18, 30 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ishtar's role in the story of Gilgamesh

The article says that Ishtar is a major figure in the story of Gilgamesh. But the Wikipedia page about Gilgamesh doesn't mention Ishtar. A sentence or two here explaining her major role in the epc would be good.

It's based on the conventional equivalence Akkadian Ishtar = Sumerian Inanna, I assume... AnonMoos 19:25, 24 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

She actually does show up in the Epic of Gilgamesh, she plays a bigger role in the Babylonian epic than in the sumerian tales. If it hasn't been already, I will try to get around to adding in the role she takes in it. Abdishtar (talk) 02:10, 11 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Eostre

The Biblical name Esther actually has a much more solid connection to Ishtar than does pagan Eostre. Strange but true... AnonMoos 19:34, 24 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Can you cite that? I don't find any connection at all to Queen Esther and the goddess Ishtar except phonetically. So, is Santa also Satan? 69.228.239.77 20:25, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Due to certain linguistic correspondence patterns in borrowings from Akkadian languages into Canaanite languages during the first millennium BC, the forms of the names Ishtar and Ester (no "th" in the Hebrew of this word) are such that Ester could phonologically perfectly well be a borrowing from Akkadian -- and some have noted that the consonants of Mordechai are also the same as those of the name of the god Marduk. It doesn't necessarily prove anything, but it's quite a bit more than anyone has been able to show for Ishtar and Anglo-Saxon Eostre. AnonMoos 09:48, 4 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Problems with recent edits

The name Asherah begins with an Aleph (glottal stop) consonant, while the etymological cognates of Ishtar (such as Hebrew `Ashtoreth) begin with an `Ayin (voiced pharyngeal) consonant . Therefore it is extremely unlikely that there is any etymological connection between these two words. Also, "Goddess" should not be capitalized except when it appears at the beginning of a sentence. And Eostre is nonsense. AnonMoos 19:29, 7 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with AnonMoos here, as much as i disagree. I agree both are Venus. But the words define a different Venus. As AnonMoos would disagree at my quote of Ish-shtar meaning Man's star, i have said before that Ash means lion or in Leo, though some translate it as Arcturus or as Big Dipper which are both in the zodiac zone of Leo from equator to pole. If you look at Venus in 1770 BC you will see that the sun passes thru Leo at the time of Venus morningstar which then rises atthe horizon above Regulus in the NE while Sothis rises the same time to the SE. This Ishtar of Hamurabi which would mean man's star is the same planet at year for it to be called by others as Ash-star or Leo star. So if some like to equate Ishtar and Astoreth as the same there is reason, yet if they wish to argue they are different, then that too they are not being define or labeled with the same name thought the same date and year. Now as for Inanna, she is Venus centuries before Hamurabi, and before the 365-day calendar whether long chronology 2900-2700 BC or short chronology 2300-2200 BC.

JUDGEMENT AGAINST ME

I find it very offensive that AnonMoos is allowed to take astronomy and judge it as occultism which would mean astrological nonsense. He degrades every form of astronomy aspect for any myth or calendar or god or legend. And it is a very disgrace to treat astronomy in this fashion when its exact physical laws have provided the satelite orbits and technology to have this internet and communicate in any of this fashion. Ishtar is Venus, it does come from various related languages, scholars every where have different theories, it is NOT point of view and favoritism in any form other than to let AnonMoos make his little editorial judgements on every posting following around like a policeman. This is not an attack on AnonMoos but rather a defence stating that AnonMoos is doing the attacking if he can claim anything he wants as fiction, and occult, and name call away any label he perceives others writings to be. May i state that i disagree with many encyclopedia claims or theories, i don't wipe out and judge as being fanatic anything i have read on Wikipedia. -- anonmous IP 69.76.46.169, 19:42, 5 February 2007

Why don't you consult Usenet message http://groups.google.com/group/talk.origins/msg/c39c89ca7ce8bd8d ? However, I'd like to know what is the nature of the comments you added to Talk:Kali if not occultism? It certainly looks like New Age eclecticism resynthesized into an esoteric theory to me... AnonMoos 01:06, 6 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Star

It is no theory that Ishtar is depicted as 8 points on thousands of reliefs on tablets. And it is astronomical fact not occultism that Venus returns to the same stars in 8 years (8x365 days) after 5 orbits (5x584 days) of 5 risings. Someone needs to learn actual real astronomy instead of finger pointing name calls of occultism and of astrology and claiming its personal view points. And how is it if Catholicism is the Catholic viewpoint, and Judaism is the Jewish viewpoint, that Sumerian astral stories aren't astral viewpoints in contrast to Babylon's astral stories as their viewpoint. This editing games is getting redundant and shows no professionalism at all to learn. I find it offensive that under Ishtar we can find smart ass reply remarks on comments made in other places, the Kali Talk, or Google Talk, following me and others around. And in the end of the matter, I would like to say that those who are wrong thruout history will wish they were dead if there ever is a God of resurrection back to life on earth. Like Judas whom millions would say to him how dare you, you killed Jesus, and like Egypt's Jannes who millions would say look how you defied Moses, and to quote Jesus as saying a Queen of Sheba who comes back and says you fools, i see an AnonMoos who likewise would come back to millions who will recall the high almighty atitude AnonMoos ruled Wikipedia with so that millions of others couldnt learn because you feel i must be killed like Moses or Jesus. Quit trying to shut me up, i am learning to use the discussion section for topics to consider rather than change the main article, and i am also presenting sources. Not to mention i am also defending many others you seem to be freely editing as if youre the God of final decision. Grow up and join the learning process instead of defying it making many others miserable...i speak this for them, not just me. -- anonymous IP 69.76.46.169, 6 February 2007

Dude, the issue at question was not the basic 8-pointed star symbol itself, but rather whether this became the basis for the star-and-crescent symbol of islam... AnonMoos 11:08, 6 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Ishtar Easter

I would like to suggest this article show the Ishtar/Easter connection, with the fertility symbols of Rabbits and eggs and all. does anyone agree? Kljenni 14:57, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry, but there is no absolutely no valid evidence whatsoever of any LINGUISTIC connection between the names Ishtar and Eostre. You can discuss at length the possible pagan connections of Easter on the Easter article (provided that you can assemble reputable sources for such connections), but such exposition doesn't belong here on article Ishtar, because no one has ever been able to prove to the satisfaction of the majority of scholars that the similarity between Eostre and Ishtar is anything other than a meaningless coincidence of sounds. AnonMoos 15:42, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Who are these 'majority of scholars'? ፈቃደ (ውይይት) 15:57, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Why not look up "Easter" in any standard scholarly dictionary which includes etymologies, and see whether the word is traced back to "Ishtar"? I looked in two dictionaries just now, and they don't do so. Rather, they trace the word back to an Indo-European root whose most basic meaning appears to be "Dawn". P.S. It's not very user-friendly to replace the display of your username with characters which do not display in many browser software setups. AnonMoos 16:12, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There is overwhelming evidence that Astarte, Ishtar Ashtoreth is also Easter. Let it be mentioned at least as a possibility.

“What means the term Easter itself? It is not a Christian name. It bears its Chaldean origin on its very forehead. Easter is nothing else than Astarte . . . the queen of heaven, whose name, as pronounced by the people of Nineveh, was evidently identical with that now in common use in this country [England]. That name, as found by Layard on the Assyrian monuments, is Ishtar. The worship of Bel and Astarte was very early introduced into Britain. . . . Such is the history of Easter. The popular observances that still attend the period of its celebration amply confirm the testimony of history as to its Babylonian character. The hot cross buns of Good Friday, and the dyed eggs of Pasch or Easter Sunday, figured in the Chaldean rites just as they do now.”

The Two Babylons (London; 1957), by Alexander Hislop pp. 103, 107, 108. Kljenni 00:58, 9 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I notice you didn't bother to link to Alexander Hislop or The Two Babylons. If you had, then it would have become clear that he was a mid-19th-century crank who constructed a hyper-elaborate conspiracy theory to "prove" that the Roman Catholic church is the evil antichrist.
In any case, proposed etymologies must satisfy technical linguistic criteria, which take into account many factors other than overall vague resemblances of sounds (see Junggramatiker), and the Ishtar-Easter connection fails such tests, as is seen by the fact that it isn't mentioned in standard etymological reference works. AnonMoos 02:19, 9 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I would not refer to Mr Hislop as a "crank" as you do, but can you show that his beliefs were wrong? Kljenni 20:01, 9 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Because none of his unique beliefs have been accepted by current mainstream scholarship, and his main thesis of a unique Babylonian-Roman Catholic direct connection (bypassing other forms of Christianity) is pretty much completely wrongheaded. Please take this to the Easter page -- you can debate the pagan origins of bunnies and eggs to your heart's content there, while leaving Ishtar (and the technical linguistic issues connected with it, which you do not seem to be willing to take the effort to master) aside... AnonMoos 01:14, 11 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

From the Easter wiki page with cited sources:

Easter as a Babylonian festival

Some suggest an etymological relationship between Eostre and the Babylonian goddess Ishtar (variant spelling: Eshtar) ([2] [3] [4] [5]) and the possibility that aspects of an ancient festival accompanied the name, claiming that the worship of Bel and Astarte was anciently introduced into Britain, and that the hot cross buns of Good Friday and dyed eggs of Easter Sunday figured in the Chaldean rites just as they do now.

Any alleged connection between Ishtar and Easter is geographically distant and linguistically untenable.[3]

Claiming a connection between Ishtar and Easter also ignores the fact that Easter is called "Passover" in almost every other language in the world. (The only exceptions appear to be the languages of those people who first learned Christianity at the hands of English or other Anglophone missionaries.) Examples of this are the Hebrew Pesach; the Greek Paskha; the Latin Pascha; the Italian Pasqua; the Spanish La Pascua; and Scots Gaelic An Casca. The holiday was not called "Easter" until the 8th Century, by which time it had already been in existence for 700 years.

There is the additional problem that the very lands where Ishtar was once known have never been known to use a name like "Easter" for this or any other spring holiday.[4]

Xuchilbara 02:02, 9 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

2012

It doesn't prove that roman catholic church is evil but it does prove it was all copied from pagans and that is why no one wants to talk about it. 170.3.8.253 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 15:12, 2 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Why, when there's no valid evidence accepted by mainstream scholarship of any linguistic connection between the words "Easter" and "Ishtar"?? -- AnonMoos (talk) 20:12, 2 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]


The Jews had their passover so the hellenistic jews who were creating a new religion wanted to have a similar sprintime holiday but if they canlled it passover it'd look like they were copying. So they called it easter which helped get them new converts from pagans who already followed the holiday celebrating ishtar in the spring, a fertility goddess because spring is when the soil is fertile again, and all the rabbits and eggs also symbolize this. Why do christians intend to deny this to their deathbed when it is obvious? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 170.3.8.253 (talk) 15:15, 2 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Dude, early Christians were not at all afraid of "copying" from Judaism (and often considered themselves to be the true spiritual heirs of Biblical Judaism, and called their commemoration of Christ's crucifixion πασχα (in Greek), from Hebrew פסח. "Easter" didn't come into it until centuries in later in Anglo-Saxon England, and there is absolutely no connection between the Germanic word "Easter" and the Semitic word "Ishtar", as discussed above... AnonMoos (talk) 20:06, 2 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Citations

Can someone verify some of the info provided outside of 'The Women's Encyclopedia of Myths and Secrets' by Barbara G. Walker? It's kinda hard to trust that book, and it's not usually considered a reference source.

Xuchilbara 19:32, 8 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ishtar and Biblical `Ashtoreth

A lot of nonsense was cut from this article a while back, but the valid connection between Ishtar and Biblical Hebrew `Ashtoreth was also cut out (see Ancient Semitic religion). AnonMoos 15:22, 21 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see why it's necessary really to have her under Ishtar. Aside from that, Ishtar actually has more connections with the male deity Athtar, from whom her name is derived. Though you are right, there is a valid connection between them. I don't know why whoever cut it out. Abdishtar (talk) 02:05, 11 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Misc

Text of article includes "To sum it up, she was a HO FO SHO". Seems to not belong in there.

Ryz 14:30, 19 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Anunit/Atarsamain/Esther/Ishtar

"Anunit, Atarsamain and Esther are alternative names for Ishtar."

I have removed the sentence from the article lead; article Atarsamain makes no mention of the goddess being a counterpart of Ishtar, and the link between biblical Esther and Ishtar is highly disputed by scholars - the article shouldn't state it as a fact. - Mike Rosoft (talk) 08:13, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, the fact that there are valid linguistic correspondences between the word Ishtar and Hebrew Ester, suitable to a late Akkadian loanword to west Semitic (but not suitable to an inherited cognate, of course) is not very controversial, as far as I'm aware. What many people are skeptical about is whether this has any great significance or deep meaning... AnonMoos (talk) 22:38, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, Anunit is a seperate goddess, she isn't Ishtar, Cuthaean Creation Legend: 'I prayed to Ishtar, (...), Zamama, Anunit, Nabu, (...) and shamash the warrior' I think that you are confusing the Ishtars with the goddess herself. The Ishtars were a group of goddesses, that included both Ishtar and Anunit. Is there any references to Atarsamain being female? [User:Abdishtar|talk] 15:25 31 January 2010 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Abdishtar (talk) 22:50, 4 February 2010 (UTC) (talk • contribs) 20:25, 31 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

A call for critical review of ...

the following books...

^^^^^
FYI

--124.78.214.145 (talk) 07:50, 22 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sacred Prostitution

A few years ago I was interested in writing a book about temple prostitution for Ishtar, and quickly found most serious scholars don't think it was true. Apparently, from what I recall, the only report of it comes from Herodatus (the same guy who gave us the story of the Lost City of Atlantis) and no actual reports come from within the culture. This makes it a bit tricky to write about, since that Herodotus thing gets quoted all over the place and can easily be cited, but nevertheless might not be true. --174.56.0.212 (talk) 14:05, 26 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

In recent work, there seems to be a great deal of doubt or dispute over what the term "sacred prostitution" exactly means, or whether the concept is at all useful in discussing ancient Mesopotamia. However, the idea that Ishtar is associated with various forms of exuberant sexuality does not depend on one dubious passage in Herodotus -- just take one look at the illustration on p. 152 of the book Gods, Demons, and Symbols of Ancient Mesopotamia: An Illustrated Dictionary by Jeremy Black and Anthony Green (1992, ISBN 0-292-70794-0) and you'll be convinced... AnonMoos (talk) 23:29, 26 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'd like to add that you can also read up on sacred prostitution with regards to Ishtar in Sex and Gender in the Ancient Near East, though I have to look up the author. I'm sure the title should pop up on google books or amazon. Abdishtar (talk) 02:02, 11 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Time for an update

The sacred prostitution and sexuality obsession with Ishtar in this Wikipedia entry is really outdated and needs to be updated. It currently relies on a book of essays and some dubious theory references. There has been considerable scholarship and archaeology in the past three years since this text was last edited. The references from Guirand, Felix, 1968, are especially out of date and just plain wrong. It's certainly fun to ascribe sexual inferences to ancient gods who were female, but that doesn't make it accurate or useful to scholars. We can do better than this.

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Ishtar&oldid=539183955"