Talk:Ugarit

Assessment comment

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Ugarit/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

This is a very well-written article on a highly interesting subject. I'd loved to read this one; cheers to it's creator, whoever that might be! R. P. Williams 13:50, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

Last edited at 13:59, 27 June 2007 (UTC). Substituted at 09:28, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

"Ugarit is considered quintessentially Canaanite"?

I considered putting a "dubious" flag after this in the article but I don't have a copy of the book by this Tubbs guys so I don't know where he's coming from. Ugarit was a Amorite city. Are Canaanites Amorites? No. Did they speak Canaanite in Ugarit? No. Were the religions of Ugarit similar to that in many other parts of the region? Yes. Were they the same as the Canaanite religion? No. Are epigraphic records from other city-states in the area clear that they were distinct from Canaan? yes. I have other wiki stuff on my list at the moment but hopefully I can get back to this at some point and ref it into oblivion. Ploversegg (talk) 20:39, 9 July 2018 (UTC)

Ploversegg, hi. I agree, but now we have zero mention of the words Canaan, Canaanite in the entire article. The only occurrence is in the bibliography: Gregorio Del Olmo Lete (2004), "Canaanite Religion: According to the Liturgical Texts of Ugarit". There is also an analysis of the connection to the Phoenician alphabet. So yes, the topic of the relation between Ugarit and Canaan must be addressed! Ignoring it is just wrong and leaves the article incomplete in a fundamental point. Religion was a very deep and essential characteristic, and it didn't just parachute from above on unrelated places. Can you pick this one up? Thanks, Arminden (talk) 11:39, 13 February 2024 (UTC)

I'll take a look. The article as it existed was pretty well contaminated with the "biblical archaeology" narrative (which I'm not judging, it was just the way things were at that time for that region of the ANE) so Obviously Ugarit, and the article, was all about the Canaanites. I may have swung the pendulum a bit far in the other direction when I rewrote the article. :-) I will check it out.15:03, 13 February 2024 (UTC) Ploversegg (talk) 15:03, 13 February 2024 (UTC)

1) Having read the Canaan article (as I remembered, the word "canaanite" didn't even exist until the mid-1st millennium BC) there is basically nothing much Canaanite involved in Ugarit. I suppose one could throw in the mention of Canaan from RS 20.182 (a very damaged text btw) from "Rainey, Anson F., "Who Is a Canaanite? A Review of the Textual Evidence", Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research, no. 304, pp. 1–15, 1996". Basically Canaan was somewhere nearby. PS the Canaan article needs a complete rewrite. Not by me.

2) Language? Pretty well settled that there is basically no link between the two languages. Similarly the alphabet.

3) A look at List of Ugaritic deities shows nothing Canaanite EXCEPT that they used a lot of the same gods because almost everybody in that region was using the same gods and variants thereof.

Thats what I saw. If I missed something feel free to clue me in.Ploversegg (talk) 15:40, 13 February 2024 (UTC)

há palavra na lingua amorreica com aproximação fonetica com a palavra cananeu usada na bíblia, porém os significados são totalmente diferentes. na lingua amorreica se refere a produtores de corantes roxos, o que combina com a atividade que envolvia a retirada de ostras na costa de ugarit enquanto no contexto hebraico está mais proximo ao significa egipcio, que significa reinos e povos submetidos, perfeitamente condizente com o cananeu bíblico, que sempre foi subjugado e dependente da força egipcia, ainda que esta fosse um "caniço quebrado que não garante ninguém". 45.228.98.204 (talk) 01:43, 17 October 2024 (UTC)

“HEY DAY”

What is a hey day in reference to this article? Suggest an append that creates a more knowledgeable understanding of RAS SHAMRA.

The city reached its [heyday] between 1800 and 1200 BCE, when it ruled a trade-based coastal kingdom, trading with Egypt, Cyprus, the Aegean, Syria, the Hittites, and much of the eastern Mediterranean. Grantdustin (talk) 11:49, 16 October 2021 (UTC)

2 years late, but a heyday is essentially a "prime" or "golden age." I've changed it to golden age. Dialmayo (talk) (Contribs) she/her 18:59, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

Cribbed content

A number of sections of this article are cribbed, almost word for word, from the book Ancient cities: the archaeology of urban life in the ancient Near East and Egypt, Greece and Rome. I linked a ptr to the online book for reference. It needs to be majorly re-editted but I haven't decided how yet. When I do, don't be alarmed if lots of stuff disappears.Ploversegg (talk) 20:05, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

Article

I rebuilt the Ugarit article, which was largely cribbed from one source reffed 15 times plus some wishful thinking. What I did not do, being ugarited out, was fix up all the subsidiary articles, the 8 rulers, Ugaritic texts, Royal Palace of Ugarit, Ras Ibn Hani, Ugaritic Vintage Rites, Minet el-Beida, Baal with Thunderbolt, Ugaritic alphabet, Ugaritic, and Ugaritic grammar. At least List of Ugaritic deities appears to be in good nick.Ploversegg (talk) 19:30, 7 February 2024 (UTC)