Jump to content

Talk:Sennacherib

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

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 50.111.51.247 (talk) at 02:36, 27 March 2021 (→Removed note on name in Sumero-Akkadian cuneiform). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Featured articleSennacherib is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so.
Main Page trophyThis article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on March 27, 2021.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
January 10, 2015Articles for deletionMerged
May 2, 2020Good article nomineeListed
December 4, 2020Peer reviewReviewed
January 29, 2021Featured article candidatePromoted
Current status: Featured article

Sennacherib in his chariot

Why does this article rely on the BIBLE for historic evidence???

The bible is not historic and should not be quoted as some kind of history book. Get real sources for heavens sake, NOT myths and supernatural accounts! 87.59.77.180 (talk) 00:04, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

On the contrary, thousands of archaeological finds have confirmed the Bible as a true history book. For example, the Cylinder of Cyrus and the Moabite Stone among hundreds others. Why are you so quick to reject Biblical historical accounts for another account?
I concur, as the Bible has been proven to be an accurate, historical work. Although you may not think so, it is a perfectly fine and often useful reference. Regards, Laurinavicius (talk) 00:23, 11 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I disagree, the bible as a source of history must be taken if a large grain of salt. For one thing, it is an anthology, and each book must be analyzed separately. Secondly, it was written with a political bias, as most written works are. Thirdly, its been rewritten/re-translated many times over, if you must use the bible for a historic source, find the drafts closest to the time period you're researching. At any rate, its probably best to avoid using the bible as your sole source for historic information; and while mentioning it on Wikipedia is welcome, it is not a complete record nor is it infallible. I'm going to clean up some inconsistent wording in the article, cheers. 71.65.93.189 (talk) 03:59, 10 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, the Bible is grossly wrong in much of its history, and very much wrong regarding this episode. However, the article only reports what the Bible says: it does not state that the Bib;es incorrect version is correct, let alone that the Bible's wrong version should be relied upon.--Desertphile (talk) 01:29, 7 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Since the Bible refers to these events then it must recorded in this article. Whether it is historically accurate or not is irrelevant, since there is so little remaining material from these times. Whether an Angel or other messenger from God killed the seigeing army or a disease went through the camp and wiped them out or they were eventually victorious and invaded, the possibilities need to be noted so that the reader can test them along with their own knowledge and make their own conclusions. Lets face it no argument starts and ends with what is recorded in Wikipedia. 121.98.30.31 (talk) 02:35, 15 November 2015 (UTC)inastew[reply]

Yahweh or Jehovah

Gabby Merger keeps changing the name of the Hebrew god referenced in the article from Yahweh to Jehovah. Can other editors please explain to the user that Yahweh is the form preferred by scholars, and that the article Yahweh is about the deity in keeping with the context of the link, whereas the article Jehovah is about the alternative name. Thanks.--Jeffro77 (talk) 05:52, 26 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The god's name was YHWH. How that was pronounced is anyone's guess, but we can be sure it wasn't Jehovah. Yahweh is the convention among scholars. PiCo (talk) 11:52, 29 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The section was heavily skewed towards a discussion of the bible instead of Sennacherib. It's now more focused, and the problem of the divine name has gone away (there's no reason to mention it at all).PiCo (talk) 12:35, 30 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Sennacherib. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:46, 2 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Missing references

There are references in this section (numbered like this [9], [10], [11] etc.) that are plain text. I don't see the books or articles they refer to. Ideally, we resource them and enter them properly but in the meantime should they be removed? Seleucus123 (talk) 09:09, 23 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:Sennacherib/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Iazyges (talk · contribs) 23:59, 20 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Will start soon. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 23:59, 20 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Criteria

GA Criteria

GA Criteria:

  • 1
    1.a checkY
    1.b checkY
  • 2
    2.a checkY
    2.b checkY
    2.c checkY
    2.d checkY (Has a high % result due to incidental parallels and a quote)
  • 3
    3.a checkY
    3.b checkY
  • 4
    4.a checkY
  • 5
    5.a checkY
  • 6
    6.a checkY
    6.b checkY
  • No DAB links checkY
  • No dead links checkY
  • No missing citations checkY

Discussion

  • One issue with citations: There is a Luckenbill 1957 (p. 140), (currently citation #103), which does not fit with any of the cited sources; I belive it is properly matched with the Luckenbill, Daniel David (1927) source, as this source has no refs referring to it. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 15:12, 21 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oops! Yes you're correct, fixed. Ichthyovenator (talk) 15:01, 24 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • The Glassner, Jean-Jacques (2004). Mesopotamian Chronicles. Atlanta: SBL Press. ISBN 978-1589830905. also has no sources referring to it, suggest moving it to a further reading section if it is not going to be utilized within the article. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 15:12, 21 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm, true. I removed it entirely since it seems odd to me to have a source that isn't directly related to Sennacherib be the only thing in a "further reading" section, but I could add it in that way if you think that's better. Ichthyovenator (talk) 15:01, 24 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Prose Suggestions

Please note that almost all of these are suggestions, and can be implemented or ignored at your discretion. Any changes I deem necessary for the article to pass GA standards I will bold.

Lede

  • due to the role he plays in the Old Testament of the Bible, which describes his war in the Levant suggest due to the role he played in the Old Testament of the Bible, which describes his campaign in the Levant.
  • Other events of his reign which have made him remembered throughout the millennia following his death include his 689 BC destruction of the city Babylon and his construction of the last great Assyrian capital, Nineveh. suggest Other events of his reign which secured his legacy throughout the millennia following his death include his destruction of the city Babylon in 689 BC and his construction of the last great Assyrian capital, Nineveh.
  • Shortly after Sennacherib inherited the throne, suggest Shortly after Sennacherib inherited the throne in 705,
  • Though Sennacherib retook the south in 700 BC, suggest Though Sennacherib reclaimed the south in 700 BC, to avoid using retook twice in two sentences.
  • After the Babylonians and Elamites captured Sennacherib's eldest son Ashur-nadin-shumi, another noble Sennacherib proclaimed as his vassal king in Babylon, Sennacherib campaigned in both regions, successfully subduing Elam suggest After the Babylonians and Elamites captured and executed Sennacherib's eldest son Ashur-nadin-shumi, whom Sennacherib had proclaimed as his vassal king in Babylon, Sennacherib campaigned in both regions, successfully subduing Elam.
  • Though the biblical narrative has Sennacherib's attack on Jerusalem defeated through divine intervention by an angel destroying the Assyrian army, an outright Assyrian defeat is unlikely as Hezekiah submitted to Sennacherib at the end of the campaign. suggest Though the biblical narrative holds that Sennacherib's attack on Jerusalem was defeated through divine intervention by an angel destroying the Assyrian army, an outright Assyrian defeat is unlikely as Hezekiah submitted to Sennacherib at the end of the campaign.
  • the city was the site of one of the most ambitious building projects in ancient history. suggest he launched one of the most ambitious building projects in ancient history
  • Sennacherib's new heir had originally been the second eldest surviving son, Arda-Mulissu. For unknown reasons, Arda-Mulissu was replaced as heir in 684 BC by a younger son, Esarhaddon, suggest Sennacherib originally designated his second eldest son, Arda-Mulissu, as his heir, but later replaced him with a younger son, Esarhaddon, in 684, for unknown reasons;
  • a decision Sennacherib maintained despite repeated appeals by Arda-Mulissu to be accepted as heir again. suggest Sennacherib ignored repeated appeals from Arda-Mulissu to be reinstated as heir.
  • In 681 BC, Arda-Mulissu and another of Sennacherib's sons assaulted and murdered the king, hoping to seize power for themselves. suggest Sennacherib was assaulted and murdered by Arda-Mulissu and another son, who hoped to seize power for themselves, in 681.
  • In Babylonia and the Levant, Sennacherib's death was welcomed as divine punishment whilst the reaction in the Assyrian heartland was probably resentment and horror. suggest His death was welcomed as divine punishment in Babylonia and the Levant, while the Assyrian heartland probably reacted with resentment and horror.
  • Arda-Mulissu's coronation was postponed and in the meantime, Esarhaddon raised an army and successfully seized Nineveh, becoming king as intended by Sennacherib's succession plans. suggest Arda-Mulissu's coronation was postponed, and Esarhaddon raised an army and seized Nineveh, installing himself as king as intended by Sennacherib.
All implemented :) Ichthyovenator (talk) 15:16, 24 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ancestry and early life

  • but Ataliya's grave at Kalhu has been recovered and her body indicated that she was at most 35 years old when she died. suggest but Ataliya's grave at Kalhu indicates that she was at most 35 years old when she died.
Done. Ichthyovenator (talk) 18:37, 29 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • The name probably derives from Sennacherib not being Sargon's first son, but all of his older brothers being dead by the time he was born. And I used to think the old "don't name your kid until they're one in case they kick the bucket" was morbid.
Haha, yeah. "you're a replacement for your dead older brothers" also struck me as a really odd and dark choice for a name while I was researching this. Ichthyovenator (talk) 18:37, 29 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sennacherib as crown prince

  • The vast responsibilities allowed to Sennacherib suggests a certain degree of trust between the king and the crown prince. suggest changing allowed to entrusted
Done. Ichthyovenator (talk) 18:37, 29 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Assyria and Babylonia

  • Though Babylonia in the south had once been a large kingdom as well, suggest changing in the south to to the south
Done. Ichthyovenator (talk) 18:28, 30 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • it was typically weaker than its northern neighbor due to being is this meant to mean that it had always been weaker for these issues, or only now was weaker during this period? If always, suggest changing typically to consistently, if only now suggest changing to it was typically weaker than its northern neighbor during this period, due to being
The history of Assyria and Babylonia cover almost 2000 years, so it wouldn't be always (Hammurabi's Old Babylonian Empire vassalized early Assyria in the 1700s BC), but the "typically weaker" still refers to a very prolonged stretch of time and Assyria was always more militaristic than Babylonia. That being said, I've changed it to "during this period" since the internal division and its specific causes discussed here were a more recent phenomenon. Ichthyovenator (talk) 18:28, 30 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • The population of Babylonia was divided into various groups with different priorities and ideas. should specify that this is ethnic (and religious?) groups perhaps The population of Babylonia was divided into various ethnic {and religious} groups with different priorities and ideas. if the religious element is true, I'd say it merits a minor inclusion when discussing the various ethnicities below.
The Babylonians, Arameans and Chaldeans were distinct ethnic/cultural groups but AFAIK they all worshipped the Mesopotamian pantheon. In addition to the Mesopotamian deities, the Arameans also worshipped some western deities, such as El, and the Chaldeans might have had their own gods too in addition to the Mesopotamian ones but I couldn't find anything on Chaldean religion. I've added "ethnic". Ichthyovenator (talk) 18:28, 30 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • There were also the Arameans, living on fringes of the settled land and being notorious for their robberies and plunders kinda awkward grammar, suggest The Arameans lived on the fringes of settled land and were notorious for plundering {Babylonian?} land. if it isn't the Babylonians they are plundering, specify which groups in general, if it known, or surrounding if it isn't.
Yeah, went with "surrounding" rather than "Babylonian" since I think they were plundering Assyrian land as well. Ichthyovenator (talk) 18:28, 30 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Because these three major groups rarely worked together, suggest Because of the infighting of these three major groups,
Done. Ichthyovenator (talk) 18:28, 30 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • The two kingdoms competed for centuries expect a "from" statement, perhaps The two kingdoms competed for centuries, from {date} on,
Assyria and Babylonia began to compete after Babylonia's "second founding" under the Kassites. We have treaties establishing the borders between the two from the 16th and 15th centuries BC and proper campaigns going in both directions from the reign of Ashur-uballit I (14th century BC) onwards, when the Middle Assyrian Empire became the dominant power in the Ancient Near East. Added "The two kingdoms had competed since the rise of the Middle Assyrian Empire in the 14th century BC ...". Ichthyovenator (talk) 19:09, 30 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • the Assyrians eventually gained the upper hand before seemed to imply that tides of campaigns went back and forward, similar to wars between Rome and Persia, if this is true, suggest the Assyrians consistently gained the upper hand
Changed to "consistently". Worth pointing out that Babylonia eventually won and destroyed Assyria for good less than a century after Sennacherib's death. Ichthyovenator (talk) 19:09, 30 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • generally either annexing them and turning them into Assyrian provinces or allowing them to continue on as vassal states. kinda awkward, suggest generally either annexing them as Assyrian provinces or turning them into vassal states.
Done. Ichthyovenator (talk) 19:09, 30 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • However, because the Assyrians venerated Babylon's long history and its culture, it was preserved as a full kingdom, either being ruled through an appointed vassal king or by the Assyrian king directly (then being the king of both Assyria and Babylonia) suggest However, because the Assyrians venerated the long history and culture of Babylon, it was preserved as a full kingdom, either ruled by an appointed client king, or by the Assyrian king in a personal union.
Done. Ichthyovenator (talk) 19:09, 30 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Assyria's relationship to Babylon was in a way an emotional one, there is an implicit gendering of the two countries in Neo-Assyrian inscriptions and in their worldview (with Assyria as the metaphorical "husband" of its "wife", Babylon) suggest The relationship of Assyria and Babylon was emotional in a sense, with the implicit gendering of the two countries as the Assyrian metaphorical "husband" to its "wife" Babylon in Neo-Assyrian inscriptions and worldview.
Done. Ichthyovenator (talk) 19:09, 30 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • "the Assyrians were in love with Babylon, but also wished to dominate her". bit of a rough wooing situation.
Definitely. Ichthyovenator (talk) 19:09, 30 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Death of Sargon II and succession

  • on campaign against King Gurdî of Tabal in central Anatolia. may wish to say a campaign
  • The campaign was a disaster; Gurdî defeated the Assyrian army, killed the king and carried off his body. suggest The campaign was disastrous, resulting in the defeat of the Assyrian army and the death of Sargon, whose corpse was carried off by the Anatolians.
  • Though the defeat was bad, the death of the king was worse and the Assyrians believed that the gods must have punished Sargon for some major past wrongdoing. suggest The defeat was made significantly worse by the death of Sargon, who Assyrians believed was punished by the gods for some major past misdeed.
  • has the king proclaim that he was investigating the nature of a "sin" committed by his father. suggest states that Sennacherib proclaimed he was investigating the nature of a "sin" committed by his father.
All done. Ichthyovenator (talk) 11:46, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

First Babylonian campaign

Thank you! All your fixes look good. Ichthyovenator (talk) 11:46, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • did not go well. suggest was less stable
Done. Ichthyovenator (talk) 11:53, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Unlike Sargon, do we know if this was a prescedent set by previous Assyrian kinds, or started by Sargon? If previous kinds had done this
Looks like you were cut off mid-sentence here but the previous Babylonian kings had AFAIK all titles themselves as "viceroys" in reverence to Marduk, which the two Assyrian kings who also ruled Babylon before Sennacherib, Tiglath-Pileser III and Sargon II, had continued to do. So, being a viceroy rather than a king was the prescedent set by the Babylonian "kings" themselves, continued under Assyrian rule. I've made this clear in the text now. Ichthyovenator (talk) 11:53, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oops, must have gotten distracted. ADHD at it again. You've done what I was going to ask regardless. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 10:15, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • (which was considered Babylon's formal "king") suggest changing which to who
Done. Ichthyovenator (talk) 11:53, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Sennacherib on campaign against Babylon as depicted in one of his reliefs. (File caption) suggest on a campaign
Done. Ichthyovenator (talk) 11:53, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • took the throne but he was after just two or four weeks replaced as king by Marduk-apla-iddina II, suggest took the throne, but was deposed after just two or four weeks by Marduk-apla-iddina
Done. Ichthyovenator (talk) 11:53, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Didn't finish this section yet.
  • supported by cavalry under the command of his commander-in-chief suggest changing commander-in-chief to just commander
  • Near the city of Kish,[31] the forces of this coalition successfully defeated an early Assyrian attack led by Sennacherib's commander-in-chief and other generals, bolstering their confidence and Babylon continued to ignore the Babylonian claims of the Assyrian king. suggest The Assyrian army, led by Sennacherib's chief commander, {name?}, launched an unsuccessful attack on the coalition forces near the city of Kish, bolstering the legitimacy of the coalition. Mostly just structure, but think we can remove the "and Babylon continued to ignore the Babylonian claims of the Assyrian king" part as unnecessary.
  • Once Sennacherib, encamped by the city of Kutha, received word of the defeat of his generals he led the next attack in person and at a new battle near Kish, he defeated the troops of the anti-Assyrian coalition. suggest Once Sennacherib, encamped by the city of Kutha, received word of the defeat of his first army he personally led the next attack, defeating the coalition troops near Kish.
  • Babylon opened its gates to Sennacherib without the need of a protracted siege. suggest Babylon opened its gates to Sennacherib, surrendering without a fight.
All done. Ichthyovenator (talk) 19:16, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

War in the Levant

  • Sennacherib's third campaign, directed against the kingdoms and city-states in the Levant, is compared to many other events in the history of the ancient Near East very well documented. suggest Sennacherib's third campaign, directed against the kingdoms and city-states in the Levant, is very well documented compared to many other events in the ancient Near East.
  • The resistance in the southern Levant was not as easily compelled to submit, suggest The resistance in the southern Levant was not as easily supressed,
  • successfully besiege and take numerous cities. suggest removing sucesffully as unnecessary.
  • As the Assyrians were preparing to retake Ekron, Hezekiah's ally Egypt intervened in the conflict but the Egyptian expedition was defeated in battle near the city Eltekeh suggest As the Assyrians were preparing to retake Ekron, Hezekiah's ally Egypt intervened in the conflict, however the Egyptian expedition was defeated in battle near the city Eltekeh
  • since supplies were running out. suggest due to lack of supply.
  • (essentially a ramp made of stone and earth) suggest changing parenthesis to commas.
All done. Ichthyovenator (talk) 19:16, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sennacherib at the gates of Jerusalem

  • Allegedly, the Rabshakeh used the phrase "eat feces and drink urine" nice.
Gotta love details like these, even if they're anecdotal. Ichthyovenator (talk) 19:34, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • the Levantine campaign was an Assyrian victory suggest the Levantine campaign was largely an Assyrian victory
Done. Ichthyovenator (talk) 19:34, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Resolving the Babylonian problem

  • Elamite city Nagitu suggest Elamite city of Nagitu
  • groomed to also follow Sennacherib as the King of Assyria upon his death suggest groomed to succeed Sennacherib
  • primogeniture (the oldest son inherits) suggest primogeniture, wherein the oldest son inherits.
All done. Ichthyovenator (talk) 19:34, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The Elamite campaign and revenge

  • When the Arahtu joined with the Euphrates south of Babylon, suggest changing When to Where
  • successfully took several cities suggest removing successfully as unnecessary.
  • Though Sennacherib had successfully had his revenge against Marduk-apla-iddina, suggest removing sucessfully had
  • In June or July of 694 BC, Nergal-ushezib captured the city Nippur but three months later the Assyrians took Uruk and shortly thereafter the war decisively turned in the favor of the Assyrians. suggest In June or July of 694 BC, Nergal-ushezib captured the city Nippur, however three months later the Assyrians took Uruk, shortly thereafter turning the war decisively in their favor.
All done. Ichthyovenator (talk) 19:34, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Destruction of Babylon

  • decision to support Babylon as dumb, suggest changing dumb to unintelligent
The source actually uses "dumb" (maybe the Assyrian records themselves do to?), which is funnier, but yes, changed to "unintelligent". Ichthyovenator (talk) 19:34, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Babylonian texts describe the battle as a great victory, but so do Assyrian documents. suggest Both Babylonian and Assyrian texts claim the battle as a great victory.
  • The initial success of the Babylonians had been short-lived and in that same year, suggest Although the Babylonians were initially successful, that was short-lived, and in that same year,
  • Babylon must have been in a suggest Babylon would likely have been in a
  • It is worth pointing out that even as suggest Although
All done. Ichthyovenator (talk) 19:34, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Construction of Nineveh

  • (so that four legs could be seen from either side and two from the front) suggest removing parenthesis for a more natural flow.
Done. Ichthyovenator (talk) 19:39, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Conspiracy, murder and succession

  • When his eldest son and original crown prince Ashur-nadin-shumi disappeared and presumably died suggest When his eldest son and original crown prince Ashur-nadin-shumi disappeared, presumably executed,
  • but repeatedly tried to appeal Sennacherib to again accept him as heir instead. suggest But made many appeals to Sennacherib to reinstated as heir.
  • ruler of the mightiest empire on the planet at his time suggest ruler of one of the most powerful empires at the time think to call it "the" strongest is arguable, kinda brings up POV issues.
  • Despite their conspiracy succeeding suggest Despite the success of their conspiracy
  • Esarhaddon made sure to execute all conspirators and political enemies he could get his hands on, suggest Esarhaddon executed all conspirators and political enemies within his reach,
All done. Ichthyovenator (talk) 19:39, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Family and children

  • only one at a time was recognized as the queen and primary consort. suggest only one would be recognized as queen and primary consort at one time.
  • but she was Esarhaddon's mother and the title was thus bestowed on her either by Esarhaddon or late in Sennacherib's reign. suggest but as she was Esarhaddon's mother, the title may have been bestowed on her either late in Sennacherib's reign or by Esarhaddon
Both done. Ichthyovenator (talk) 19:39, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Character

  • (something at least 19 of his 21 immediate predecessors had done) suggest changing parenthesis to commas.
  • The assumption of several new epithets never before used by Assyrian kings, such as "guardian of the right" and "lover of justice", suggests a desire to leave a personal mark on a new era beginning with his reign. suggest Sennacherib assumed several new epithets never before used by Assyrian kings, such as "guardian of the right" and "lover of justice", suggesting a desire to leave a personal mark on a new era beginning with his reign.
  • He would thus have been well acquainted to the administration of the empire. suggest He would thus have been well acquainted with} the administration of the empire.
All done. Ichthyovenator (talk) 19:47, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • as an aggression suggest as an act of agression
Done. Ichthyovenator (talk) 11:54, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • here described as an act of aggression rather than as a response to Hezekiah's rebellious activities suggest removing here
Done. Ichthyovenator (talk) 19:47, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Archaeological discoveries

  • For the first six years of his tenure as king, suggest For the first six years of his reign.
Done. Ichthyovenator (talk) 19:47, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Iazyges: That's all suggestions implemented! Thank you very much for taking the time to munch through this one, no worries about taking your time, this is one of the longest articles I've written. I owe you one ;) Ichthyovenator (talk) 19:47, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Statement Quality Predictions

Hi,

The below statements were identified by an AI as having minor POV issues. The aim is to detect weasel words and inflated/ambiguous language in the statements automatically to aid in article review. Please let us know inline if these below statements indeed have NPOV issues. Feel free to leave general comments on my talk page. Your valuable feedback will help us evaluate the AI and refine it for practical use. See the discussion on FAR for more information. Sumit (talk) 04:14, 16 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • There are also examples of a more naturalistic approach in the art; where colossal statues of bulls from Sargon's palace depicts them with five legs so that four legs could be seen from either side and two from the front, Sennacherib's bulls all have four legs.
  • The second king of the Sargonid dynasty, Sennacherib is one of the most famous Assyrian kings for the role he played in the Old Testament of the Bible, which describes his campaign in the Levant.
  • Some suggest the famous Hanging Gardens of Babylon, one of the Seven Wonders of the Ancient World, were actually these gardens in Nineveh, but the impressive royal gardens in Babylon itself makes this idea somewhat unlikely.
  • Thankful, Sinharib then converts to Christianity and founds an important monastery near Mosul, called Deir Mar Mattai.
  • Throughout the millennia following Sennacherib's death, the popular image of the king has been mainly negative. There are two primary reasons for this. The first is Sennacherib's negative portrayal in the Bible as the evil conqueror who attempted to take Jerusalem; the second is his destruction of Babylon, one of the most prominent cities in the ancient world.
  • In 705 BC, Hezekiah, the king of Judah, had stopped paying his annual tribute to the Assyrians and began pursuing a markedly aggressive foreign policy, probably inspired by the recent wave of anti-Assyrian rebellions across the empire.
  • After Behnam converts to Christianity, Sinharib orders his execution, but is later struck by a dangerous disease that is cured through being baptized by Saint Matthew in Assur.
  • To transform Nineveh into a capital worthy of his empire, he launched one of the most ambitious building projects in ancient history.
  • The discovery of Sennacherib's own inscriptions in the 19th century, in which brutal and cruel acts such as ordering the throats of his Elamite enemies to be slit, and their hands and lips cut off, amplified his already ferocious reputation.
@Sumit.iitp: I don't see how any of these passages have POV issues. Ichthyovenator (talk) 15:03, 16 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Removed note on name in Sumero-Akkadian cuneiform

As part of the FAC review, it was suggested that the note that explains Sennacherib's name in Sumero-Akkadian cuneiform (rather than the later Neo-Assyrian version) was to be removed on account of the source of the information being somewhat cryptic. I'm saving the note here on the talk page in case of future discussion:

Sumero-Akkadian cuneiform: 𒀭𒌍𒉽𒎌𒋢 {d}SIN-PAP-MESH-SU in "CDLI-Archival View". cdli.ucla.edu.

Without special fonts installed, those show up as numbered boxes, anyway - a jpg or some other graphics format would be preferable.50.111.51.247 (talk) 02:36, 27 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Sennacherib&oldid=1014440830"