[HN Gopher] Hymn to Babylon, missing for a millennium, has been ...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Hymn to Babylon, missing for a millennium, has been discovered
        
       Author : wglb
       Score  : 150 points
       Date   : 2025-07-04 04:16 UTC (3 days ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (phys.org)
 (TXT) w3m dump (phys.org)
        
       | wglb wrote:
       | Source article in the journal Iraq:
       | https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S002108892...
        
         | echelon wrote:
         | This is great! Thank you.
        
         | idoubtit wrote:
         | Thank you. Without this source, it's hard to separate the facts
         | from the bullshit in what was posted on phys.org.
         | 
         | I'm not a scholar, just an amateur, but two sentences were
         | strikingly ridiculous.
         | 
         | "Legend has it that Noah hid them here from the floodwaters
         | before boarding the ark." This article is supposed to be
         | popular science about Babylonian archaeology, why mix it with a
         | Hebrew myth derived from an older Mesopotamian myth? I guess
         | it's just because Noah appeals to the ambient Christian
         | culture. In other words, it's nonsense, but it sells.
         | 
         | "The information about the women of Babylon, their role as
         | priestesses and the associated tasks, has also astonished
         | experts, as no texts describing these things were previously
         | known." There are many many texts about women and Naditu
         | (sacred women) in Mesopotamia and in Babylon. According to the
         | scholar article : "The passage has great importance for
         | understanding the roles played by the various classes of
         | priestesses: ugbakkatu, nadatu, and qasdatu." Quite different.
        
           | catlikesshrimp wrote:
           | They did cite the source at the bottom of the phys.org page
           | (The source article and the link)
           | 
           | "More information: Anmar A. Fadhil et al, Literary Texts From
           | The Sippar Library V: A Hymn In Praise Of Babylon And The
           | Babylonians, Iraq (2025). DOI: 10.1017/irq.2024.23"
        
           | treve wrote:
           | Legend has a specific meaning:
           | 
           | > A traditional story sometimes popularly regarded as
           | historical but unauthenticated.
           | 
           | Even though it's BS I think it's still interesting to read
           | how people relate to the story.
        
           | metalman wrote:
           | the "Hymm's of Innana" are more than a bit interesting, as it
           | shows(clearly) that Innana was the original riot girl goddess
           | who gets whatever she wants...daddy made the universe and
           | none of the "rules" apply to her, well except, that she does
           | get pensive when her latest boy toy wanders. Not that
           | suddenly catesrophic things dont then happen to said boy,
           | previously praised for bieng "like a young bull". Especialy
           | interesting are the number of occasions where she breaks into
           | songs of praise for her "galla"......... quite clear that the
           | tavern culture of the times was much like our own
        
           | sramsay wrote:
           | > I'm not a scholar, just an amateur, but two sentences were
           | strikingly ridiculous.
           | 
           | Well, I am a scholar, and if you mean "Noah clearly did not
           | hide these texts," then yes. Of course, that is ridiculous.
           | 
           | But it's actually a crucial bit of information if you're a
           | humanist scholar. The article doesn't say anything about it,
           | but the question would be: Which tradition recorded _this
           | legend_ about _these texts?_ Almost any answer is important,
           | because one culture trying to legitimate its own literary
           | traditions or those of another through its own myths or those
           | of another is absolute gold. It helps us to understand the
           | way literary and religious syncretism unfolded (or failed to
           | unfold) in the ancient near east and in later epochs . . .
        
         | dzdt wrote:
         | I was wondering about the headline date "missing for a
         | millennium", as this Babylon is much older than 1000 years.
         | From the article it seems like "two millenia" is more accurate:
         | "The text survives in 20 manuscripts, from the 7th to the
         | 2nd/1st centuries BCE"
        
           | mechanicum wrote:
           | I don't think that necessarily follows. The age of the
           | surviving fragments today isn't the whole story.
           | 
           | We could presumably infer it still wasn't "missing" as
           | recently as a thousand years ago from later sources referring
           | to it, even if the specific text (or oral tradition) those
           | authors knew of hasn't survived.
           | 
           | Like how we know about some of now lost Greek plays,
           | originally written in the 5th century BC, because they were
           | still being performed in Imperial Rome and writers of that
           | time described them, even the details of how they were
           | staged.
        
       | freilanzer wrote:
       | Fascinating. I should have studied Assyriology, few areas are as
       | impressive imo. Maybe I still can, even at LMU. Although I don't
       | believe it's possible alongside a regular job.
        
         | Isamu wrote:
         | I found that the languages are hard to break into as an
         | amateur, owning to the available literature. In contrast
         | Egyptology has many popular treatments, you just have to watch
         | out for the junk.
        
           | cheese_van wrote:
           | Speaking of junk, I was in Syria, many years ago, when it had
           | about 250k tourists yearly, under Hafez al-Assad . I was in
           | the company of an Assyriologist and in a shop of a vendor I
           | knew (who sold artifacts under the table).
           | 
           | The vendor proudly showed us a new acquisition, an ancient
           | cylinder seal. The archeologist examined it and told him it
           | was a fake, because he explained, "I can read this language,
           | and it is gibberish."
           | 
           | The UCLA archeologist, then excavating at Tel Mozan with
           | Giorgio Buccellati, had 2 dead languages under his belt, a
           | requirement for his Phd. I was rather in awe of the fellow -
           | 2 dead languages!
           | 
           | Pro-tip: never buy artifacts without an archeologist to
           | advise you. It's likely ethically wrong anyway, and likewise
           | stupid unless you're an expert.
        
             | jxjnskkzxxhx wrote:
             | Damn. I'm the opposite. When learning a language I'm
             | careful to pick languages which are culturally influencial
             | and have a prospect of continuing to be - it's not enough
             | that they're alive. Ironically, last new language I learned
             | was Russian, and then Putin goes and invades Ukraine. Fuck
             | my life.
             | 
             | All this to say I have infinite respect for someone who'd
             | learn a dead language, let alone two. I'm glad someone is
             | doing this work, and fortunately it's not me.
        
       | octopoc wrote:
       | The Fall of Civilizations podcast has an interesting episode
       | about Assyria. The cities in Mesopotamia were polytheistic and
       | each city has its own deity. Apparently the way they viewed their
       | deities was similar to how we view sports teams. There was an
       | expectation that if you traveled to another city, you should
       | sacrifice to its god. They viewed inter city warfare as the gods
       | competing in heaven.
        
         | zppln wrote:
         | I can recommend this episode as well. If I don't mix things up
         | they gave some very good examples of how everyday life wasn't
         | that much different from what it is now. Amazing how stuff like
         | that can be communicated through identations on pieces of clay.
        
         | bee_rider wrote:
         | Polytheism seems to make a lot more sense that way. Cities (and
         | personal trajectories as well) have ups and downs. If you
         | understand it as a competition between various gods, it makes
         | sense that they'd have a lot of back and forth going on. If
         | there's only one god, it must have some preposterously
         | convoluted plan, it just seems a bit silly.
        
           | atoav wrote:
           | Well also in polytheism gods were displayed as incredibly
           | flawed.
        
             | bee_rider wrote:
             | A common-sense and straightforward extrapolation of human
             | behavior. And also an obvious solution to the "problem of
             | evil."
        
           | dragontamer wrote:
           | Monotheism elevates godhood in many regards.
           | 
           | In Polytheistic culture, gods fight and gods die. Zeus eats
           | his (and thus kills) his father Chronos. Thor dies in
           | Ragnarok.
           | 
           | In Monotheistic culture, the one true God is above all else.
           | As it turns out, different Monotheistic cultures can then
           | cooperate as it's an argument over what this one true God
           | believes (Catholics vs Muslims).
           | 
           | Then we get into weird blends like Hindu and their many
           | avatars of Vishnu (who'd argue that Jesus probably existed
           | and could do those things because he probably was that time's
           | Vishnu).
           | 
           | ----------
           | 
           | Polytheism is likely flawed as an organizational concept
           | because it's clear that gods were creations of man.
           | Monotheism flips it and makes God the master of the universe
           | while man struggles to understand the nature of God.
           | 
           | ---------
           | 
           | But yes. As the sibling comment points out: the gods of most
           | polytheistic cultures are NOT omnipotent or omniscient. They
           | are more powerful or smarter than humans but they are still
           | able to be killed or destroyed.
           | 
           | Maybe back when cities and religions would get wiped out by
           | warfare, it was more common to see religions die out (and
           | thus those old gods die with those religions/cultures). It
           | makes you wonder about the nature of human belief systems and
           | how humans lived differently back then.
        
             | octopoc wrote:
             | Polytheistic religions have more room for multiple
             | worldviews than monotheistic religions. Polytheists have
             | internalized the fact that there can be different paths
             | that are right for different people. That's why you get so
             | much division in monotheistic religions.
             | 
             | In polytheistic religions, you still get infighting, but it
             | isn't considered virtuous.
             | 
             | Put another way, monotheism is polytheism except with a
             | single title, Lord of the Universe, that all the
             | gods/theologies/denominations have to compete for in order
             | to be legitimate. That competition of different
             | gods/worldviews is the essential innovation that monotheism
             | brings.
             | 
             | That competition, that need to justify one's beliefs,
             | provides a drive that monotheists have and polytheists
             | lack. And that is why monotheism prevailed in so many
             | areas.
        
               | toasterlovin wrote:
               | > that need to justify one's beliefs, provides a drive
               | that monotheists have and polytheists lack
               | 
               | FYI, before the monotheists fully suppressed the
               | polytheists in the Roman Empire, it was the polytheists
               | who were suppressing the monotheists.
        
               | sapphicsnail wrote:
               | Early Christians seemed weird to a lot of the people of
               | the Roman Empire. Sort of how Christians now think of gay
               | and trans people. It was deviant and socially upsetting.
               | Modern Christians would probably not get along with early
               | Christians.
        
               | toasterlovin wrote:
               | I don't know enough to argue the merits of your point, so
               | instead I'll just point to Hindu nationalism in present
               | day India.
        
             | bee_rider wrote:
             | > Polytheism is likely flawed as an organizational concept
             | because it's clear that gods were creations of man.
             | Monotheism flips it and makes God the master of the
             | universe while man struggles to understand the nature of
             | God.
             | 
             | I don't think that's true of polytheism at all. That the
             | gods aren't everywhere or all-powerful doesn't mean they
             | were invented by the local humans, just that they were
             | discovered by them.
             | 
             | They just look made-up by humans to us because we don't
             | believe in them. I'm sure ancient people believed in their
             | gods' stories just as much as some modern ones do, and most
             | religions don't feature some "humans created the gods"
             | story, right?
             | 
             | I'm not sure what it means to be "flawed as an
             | organizational concept." States that had polytheistic
             | religions as the main one stuck around for a long time of
             | course. It is hard to say what's predictive and what's a
             | coincidence in history I guess.
        
         | jollyllama wrote:
         | The Hebrew view may not have been so different [0] and in turn
         | this view is congruent with Christian teaching, depending on
         | the theology.
         | 
         | [0]
         | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Divine_Council#Hebrew/Israelit...
        
           | jschveibinz wrote:
           | This is most likely correct. I'm not sure why you were
           | downvoted. Many scholars trace the earliest worship of Yahweh
           | to the southern Levant, possibly Edom, Midian, or Seir which
           | were outside of traditional Canaanite (early Hebrews)
           | centers. Inscriptions from 800 BC refer to "Yahweh of
           | Samaria" and "Yahweh of Teman," implying a localized deity.
           | 
           | So given that Assyria is in the same geographic region as the
           | Levant, the comment makes sense in context.
        
             | mlinhares wrote:
             | Catholicism maintains it somehow by having "patron saints"
             | and every city picking one up. Most cities in highly
             | Catholic countries will have their own specific saint that
             | they will have a special relationship with.
        
               | jollyllama wrote:
               | Can't have a power vacuum on the Divine Council, gotta
               | put one of your guys in when you take over!
        
               | lo_zamoyski wrote:
               | One difference is that saints are not deities, even if
               | there may be a similar psychological need (for
               | protection, help, etc) in play. Saints do not possess
               | power of their own accord. They function as intercessors.
               | They are still human beings, albeit in an elevated
               | spiritual state or plane, so to speak (a saint is anyone
               | who is saved from hell and in heaven; canonized saints
               | are simply those who are known to be saints and thus
               | formally acknowledged).
               | 
               | Pagan gods are personifications of natural forces, hence
               | Thales's famous remark that "the world is full of gods".
               | They are beings like you and me, in some sense, with
               | powers that we may not possess.
               | 
               | God, on the other hand, is not a personification of a
               | force of nature or one being among many. In that sense,
               | the distinction between monotheism and polytheism can be
               | misleading, because it's not a matter of how many gods
               | you believe in, but a profound difference in
               | understanding of what divinity even means. God here is
               | the _Ipsum Esse Subsistens_ , or self-subsisting Being;
               | the verb "to be". This makes God prior to any particular
               | being and the cause of the be-ing of anything and
               | everything at all times.
               | 
               | Whatever the history of the development of theological
               | ideas and beliefs, these must be distinguished from the
               | philosophical substance of the beliefs.
        
               | sapphicsnail wrote:
               | > Pagan gods are personifications of natural forces,
               | hence Thales's famous remark that "the world is full of
               | gods".
               | 
               | There were all kinds of gods. The Christian conception of
               | God is taken from "pagan" philosophers. There's also a
               | difference between theologian's/philosopher's conception
               | of the Divine and religion and how lay people actually
               | understood their faith. Even early Christians were
               | divided on how they understood God.
        
               | timschmidt wrote:
               | If I've learned anything from brief forays into different
               | Gnostic groups it's that at some point in some place
               | humans seem to have believed every possible variation of
               | themes and interpretations.
        
               | hibikir wrote:
               | And don't miss those that have wider use than one town.
               | Sta Maria del Carmen, patron of mariners, is celebrated
               | in the same day in July in many a coastal town that had a
               | fishing industry. The statue leaves the church and is
               | paraded around in people's shoulders, taken to the port,
               | and often sent on a short trip on one of the boats. The
               | locals prayed for plenty fish, and for the fishermen to
               | avoid dying at sea. You can trace that kind of thing to a
               | polytheistic world quite well.
        
         | zdragnar wrote:
         | I have vague memories from college about China having something
         | similar during the dynasties.
         | 
         | The hierarchical government on earth, with the emperor on top
         | down through layers of bureaucracy down to officials in
         | villages was a mirror of the organization of the heavens.
         | Villages would have their own deities and might go so far as to
         | replace them after bad years of flooding or other weather. That
         | was more of an outlier, though, as usually the emperor or
         | government got the blame first.
        
         | cogman10 wrote:
         | Some of this is visible in the Bible.
         | 
         | For example, Moses needing to keep his hands up to win a battle
         | (Ex 17). Or his battles with the Egyptian gods.
         | 
         | From what I've read, it's believed that the Hebrews emerged
         | from multiple people's groups combining and unifying their
         | beliefs. El, YHWH, and Baal were all different deities merged
         | into one as the people groups unified. That's why some of the
         | biblical stories like the creation and the flood have earlier
         | references from older people's groups.
         | 
         | The evolution of monotheism was much more about keeping a large
         | diverse people group united.
         | 
         | You can see a historic parallel to how that played out with the
         | formation of the Roman pantheon. Mostly stolen stories and
         | ideas from the Greek pantheon tweeked to fit the empire.
        
           | giraffe_lady wrote:
           | I don't think this is quite true about either group but it's
           | dangerously close if you know what I mean. How & why genesis
           | specifically shares so much content with other stories from
           | the region is an extremely interesting subject in itself and
           | still under active developing scholarship but I'm not
           | qualified represent it well.
           | 
           | That's definitely a misunderstanding of the roman pantheon
           | though. It was already a fully formed syncretic religion at
           | the time of acculturation of the greek gods into it, having
           | regularly adapted to & adopted nearby belief systems as it
           | encountered them.
           | 
           | Some of the greek gods were fully syncretized with similar-
           | enough roman gods, some only partially, some greek gods were
           | adopted more completely because there was no near enough
           | equivalent, and then some roman gods continued in more or
           | less their previous form, for example janus who the greeks
           | had nothing comparable to. But even a lot of the pre-greek
           | exposure "roman" gods were themselves adopted from other
           | cultures, and/or already syncretized with indigenous ones. In
           | any case it wasn't "mostly" stolen from any one place, it
           | followed a pretty typical pattern for syncretic religions.
           | The acceptance & merging of the greek gods was only one event
           | in what was at the time already a venerable and dynamic
           | religious system.
           | 
           | You also need to be careful about timelines. The greek
           | cultural influence here is at like 800bc, predating the roman
           | _republic_ much less the empire. It arguably predates
           | anything you could reasonably call rome at all, this is in
           | the distant past that was already mythological to the roman
           | republic. This was always part of their cultural essentially.
        
             | tiahura wrote:
             | Mark S Smith has written pretty persuasively about history
             | of the Jews as El worshipers. See eg Abdeel, Abiel, Adbeel,
             | Amiel, Ariel, Azarel, Azareel, Aziel, Asael, Ashbel, Adael,
             | etc. Yet the paucity of yhwh names. Not to mention, the
             | Bible flat out states as much "I am the LORD. I appeared to
             | Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob, as God Almighty (El
             | Shaddai), but by my name the LORD (YHWH) I did not make
             | myself known to them."
        
               | toasterlovin wrote:
               | > Yet the paucity of yhwh names.
               | 
               | Many of the biblical names ending in "ah" are YHWH names.
               | This includes many of the prophets. So Elijah, Zechariah,
               | Jeremiah, Micaiah, Isaiah, for instance are all "ah"
               | ending names that have a meaning related to YHWH in the
               | same way that the "el" ending names are related to El.
               | And then Joshua (and, hence, Jesus) is also a YHWH name.
        
           | ARandomerDude wrote:
           | > El, YHWH, and Baal were all different deities merged into
           | one as the people groups unified.
           | 
           | How does this theory account for the overt hostility to Baal
           | et al. in the Bible?
        
             | cogman10 wrote:
             | Unification.
             | 
             | The authors of the Torah are laying down what correct
             | worship is supposed to look like. I believe (and I'm not a
             | biblical scholar, just like learning) the theory is that
             | the priests at the time were dealing with a mixed culture
             | and differing beliefs. One way to handle that is "Look at
             | these evil/dumb heathens worshiping their weak gods".
             | Painting the gods which likely some of the population still
             | believes in dumb is a way to undermine and discourage
             | belief. Sort of a "We are no longer team Bears, we are team
             | bulls. The bears are actually inferior and dumb".
             | 
             | Part of forming the new religion was merging concepts and
             | powers from commonly believed in gods. A little like the
             | early christians rebranding pagan holidays while actively
             | purging pagans.
        
             | smithkl42 wrote:
             | "Baal" was less a name than a title. In modern Hebrew, it
             | just means "lord" or "husband". It was also apparently a
             | title that could, at some stages of Israel's history, even
             | be applied to YHWH, much like "Adonay" ("My lord"). For
             | instance, the individuals named "Mephibosheth" and "Ish-
             | bosheth" (two of the sons of Saul, a clear if imperfect
             | Yahwist) were originally named "Meribaal" and "Ish-baal".
             | Whoever put together 1 and 2 Samuel changed their names
             | from "May Baal Contend" and "Man of Baal" to various plays
             | on "shame" (bosheth). Their original names are preserved,
             | oddly enough, in 1 Chronicles.
             | 
             | If you could go back and ask, say, Samuel or David or Saul
             | about how many gods existed and what their names were, I
             | suspect all of them would have been clear that YHWH was the
             | chief of the gods, and the only one that Israelites should
             | worship, but beyond that you would have gotten some
             | complicated and perhaps confused answers. Even some parts
             | of the Bible take for granted that other gods besides YHWH
             | exist - see, for instance, Psalm 82.
             | 
             | https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Psalm%2082&ver
             | s...
             | 
             | Over time, "Baal" began to denote a specific agricultural
             | deity, and it became less appropriate to use as a title for
             | YHWH. That seems to have kicked off (or was kicked off by)
             | the well-known conflict between Yahwism and Baal worship -
             | see, ad infra, 1 Kings 18.
             | 
             | https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1%20kings%2018
             | &...
        
               | schuyler2d wrote:
               | I don't want to completely refute this because I'm also
               | an amateur and there are a lot of instabilities of
               | consensus, but Baal was at least also the son of El in
               | Canaanite religion which predated an Israeli kingdom.
               | 
               | My understanding is more that Yahvists had more nomadic
               | origins and populated (/conquered, possibly the
               | Levites[1]) a Canaanite cultural context and then there
               | was religious syncreticism and interest in merging them.
               | Depending on the specific passage's history there's
               | either a ret-coning of "all one god" or at least the
               | interpretation that way (including how your links
               | translate those passages).
               | 
               | [1] https://www.amazon.com/Exodus-Richard-Elliott-
               | Friedman/dp/00...
        
             | schuyler2d wrote:
             | I'd answer a bit differently than replies so far. Later
             | monotheist post "merging" of El and YHWH didn't really have
             | space for El's son so they had to treat him as a lesser and
             | then hostile God. Any worship for him was considered bad.
             | 
             | Otoh, just like "Easter" is an echo of an earlier holiday,
             | it just so happens Canaanites, as I understand it,
             | celebrated the end of the storm god's season in spring ...
             | Very similarly to how Passover is observed. With a
             | sacrificed lamb shank bone and some other aspects.
        
               | empath75 wrote:
               | > Otoh, just like "Easter" is an echo of an earlier
               | holiday
               | 
               | (This is commonly repeated, but there is very little
               | evidence for this)
        
               | schuyler2d wrote:
               | Well the evidence is circumstantial. A bunch of
               | Canaanites celebrate a spring festival with unleavened
               | bread. Later they adopt a different religion that has a
               | spring festival and an Exodus story with a new god called
               | YHWH is glommed onto El.
               | 
               | I think it depends how "natural" one thinks the reason
               | for unleavened bread is to Exodus. There's obviously
               | plenty of mythical aspects to the story but the oldest
               | are more focused on the river (Song of the Sea) and the
               | battle. Why not combine rebirth/reinvention stories --
               | one a feast and another the beginning of "freedom"
               | 
               | But it's fair to say that most of Passover as a story and
               | holiday is unrelated.
        
             | empath75 wrote:
             | "The Bible" is not a single coherent text, but rather a
             | collection of hundreds or thousands of years of oral
             | tradition that was created and passed on by various people
             | at various times for various purposes, and then collected
             | and edited again by different people for different
             | purposes.
             | 
             | There are layers of edits that you can tease out with
             | careful reading, and they can be supported by archeological
             | evidence from sites all around the near east.
             | 
             | It is not remotely controversial that the
             | Hebrews/Israelites/Canaanites/Judeans were originally
             | polytheistic, with a pantheon built around Canaanite gods
             | (El, Ashera, etc), just like all of their neighbors and
             | then gradually became henotheistic (our god is the best
             | god), and then finally monotheistic (there is only one
             | god). Pure monotheism was a very late development, and a
             | lot of the conflicts in the bible is straightforwardly
             | interpreted as describing a conflict between Yahwist
             | henotheism and traditional near-eastern polytheism. Even
             | just reading the very first part of Genesis, there are two
             | creation stories with very clear signs of a pantheon of
             | gods.
             | 
             | There are also completely retellings of polytheistic myths
             | in the Bible which are basically a find-replace of Ba'al,
             | etc, with either "El" or "Yahweh" or both.
        
           | schuyler2d wrote:
           | There's definitely some relatable and transmitted stories
           | like the flood, etc. However, the Levant and Egyptian gods
           | "grew up" in different contexts than Mesopotamia. Egypt was
           | pretty centralized from the beginning and their gods were not
           | based on cities. "El" means mountain and Baal was a storm god
           | -- neither of which has (to my understanding) any trace to
           | specific cities.
           | 
           | That said, I agree there was some idea of a god "living"
           | someplace specific -- e g. YHWH living in the Arc so they
           | could carry Him into battle.
        
         | detourdog wrote:
         | Thought it was more an ancestral teams. Each city marveling at
         | the founding families.
        
         | marcellus23 wrote:
         | > There was an expectation that if you traveled to another
         | city, you should sacrifice to its god.
         | 
         | This was pretty common in the polytheistic world I think. In
         | the time of the Roman empire (pre-Christianity of course) there
         | was a similar idea. And although Roman gods might be imported,
         | they were often identified with the local gods, rather than
         | replacing them.
        
       | MrGuts wrote:
       | "Hymn to Babylon, missing for a millennium, has been discovered"
       | 
       | Oh great, just in time for the passage of an interstellar object
       | and the Dalai Lama's reincarnation day.
        
       | dr_dshiv wrote:
       | If I recall, there are hundreds of thousands of untranslated
       | cuneiform texts--and less than 10% have been translated.
       | 
       | I wish there was a resource that tracked all the untranslated
       | classical texts. For instance, only about 10% of Neo-Latin texts
       | have been translated. It seems to me that the products of the
       | renaissance ought to be a part of the training corpus of AGI.
        
         | AlotOfReading wrote:
         | That would involve better funding for the humanities, which has
         | been in notoriously short supply for the past century or so.
         | Digitization efforts are underway in many institutions and have
         | been for decades.
        
       | smithkl42 wrote:
       | "missing for a millennium" - according to both the article and
       | the journal piece, the most recent of these fragments is nearly
       | two millennia old.
       | 
       | https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/iraq/article/literar...
        
         | ajcp wrote:
         | I think just because it's 2,000 years old doesn't mean it's
         | been _missing_ for 2,000 years? There could be references to a
         | fragment as recently as 1,000 years ago, even if the contents
         | of it were not recorded at that time. Or bad copy-editing.
        
       | cjs_ac wrote:
       | Somewhat related, since we're talking about cuneiform: Dr. Irving
       | Finkel of the British Museum telling the surprisingly amusing
       | story of how he discovered the oldest known version of the Noah's
       | Ark story: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s_fkpZSnz2I
        
         | Eupolemos wrote:
         | Dr. Finkel is just plain amazing.
        
       | yayitswei wrote:
       | Interesting literacy regression: this newly discovered Babylonian
       | hymn was routinely copied by schoolchildren 3,000 years ago,
       | while yesterday's article about why English doesn't use accents
       | showed that by 1100 AD European literacy had contracted so much
       | that monks were essentially writing only for other monks.
       | 
       | If I'm interpreting this correctly, ancient Babylon had
       | institutionalized childhood education for complex literary works.
       | Medieval Europe treated literacy as a specialized craft. So much
       | for exponential growth.
        
         | johnnyApplePRNG wrote:
         | You're skipping a lot of context here. Ancient Babylonian
         | scribal schools were for a small elite--hardly universal
         | childhood education. Medieval Europe's "regression" had a bit
         | to do with the collapse of the Roman state, plagues, and
         | centuries of instability, not just a lack of ambition.
         | Comparing literacy rates across millennia without mentioning
         | population size, language complexity, or what "schoolchildren"
         | even means is a stretch.
         | 
         | History isn't exponential--it's bumpy.
        
         | burnt-resistor wrote:
         | "Progress" and "enlightenment" are neither uniform, linear,
         | upwards, or continuous. All it takes is one absurdly corrupt
         | regime to burn down the "Library of Alexandria", and with it,
         | thousands of years of history and accomplishment.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2025-07-07 23:00 UTC)