![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 |
The text here mentions two women in the Hebrew Bible, but then goes on to cite Jezebel (princess of Tyre and queen of Israel) from 1 Kings, and the seer Jezebel of Thyateira, who is named in the Apocalypse of John (Book of Revelation). Should the text read "...is the name of two women in the Bible."? The rest of the article makes it clear where each person is discussed. Epimetreus 23:08, 23 April 2006 (UTC)
The comment in the opening section about makeup being associated with "painted women" and prostitutes thanks to the Jezebel story is false and should be removed. Making oneself pretty is not seen as an attribute of "fallen" women in the Old Testament. For example, Genesis (Egyptians saw Sarah was a very beautiful woman), Esther, before she appeals to the King; Exodus (in the oral history that accompanies Exodus, women go into the fields and inspire their husbands, wearing makeup, after the Pharoah commands them to throw their newborns into the Nile). Go ahead and add any interpretations about beauty from the New Testament you want, but they do not belong in the Old Testament. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jumpygrouch ( talk • contribs) 08:30, 15 February 2011 (UTC)
Jezebel was referenced in the song Juke Joint Jezebel by KMFDM off the Money album as well —Preceding unsigned comment added by Runswithspoon ( talk • contribs) 17:40, April 26, 2006
I have another, Poe (the singer) sings "This is Jezebel in hell" in her song Angry Johnny. It is ultimately one of my favorites, and lead me to look up exactly who Jezebel was (leading me to here).-- 160.81.78.102 01:31, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
It seems likely that the name recorded in the Bible is changed to be a slur. Are there any scholarly guesses as to what her real name was? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.132.164.243 ( talk • contribs) 09:45, October 3, 2006
This is all well and good but encyclopedic entries require verifiability. None of the above could be consider such common knowledge that your average reader turning to wikipedia would know the sources of such information and the single mention in the article that The Naked Archeologists says so isn't a reliable since he is not a linguist and he tends to make amazing leaps of judgement to reach conclusions that few historians would defend. The best way to include this information is to simply name the linguist or historian asserting these interpretations as fact and then include the citation to where they make the statement. I'll try and find what I can using Google Books but those editors who really care about this as above, might already have their reliable sources at the ready. I realize I'm several years late in this discussion but the article's content on this continues to evolve and not for the better. Please help me source these assertions. Thanks! LiPollis ( talk) 00:56, 24 May 2010 (UTC)
I'm not sure the Popular Culture section is all that relevent to an article called "Jezebel (Bible)". The title would imply the depiction in the bible is more important. I propose that the list get a seperate article. If anybody agrees I'll go ahead and do it. Robinoke 23:51, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
The subsection Jezeble as a "slut" should be renamed, as the word "slut" referes to a prostitute or sexually promiscuous woman, whereas the section also refers to images of a Jezebel being a wicked and controlling woman. I suggest replacing "slut" with "evil woman". Wkharrisjr ( talk) 19:53, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
Move due to primary meaning and usage. - Ste vertigo 07:45, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
Most of this article is just fluff pop culture references. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.153.4.250 ( talk) 07:34, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
Using the vowels traditionally employed for this name by Hebrew readers, the Hebrew form of this name means "not exalted". But it is highly unlikely her parents would have given her such a name. Read with different vowels it can be understood as meaning "Where is the Prince?" ('ay zebul in Hebrew). In fact, early Syrian inscriptions from Ugarit demonstrate that "the Prince" (equivalent of Hebrew "Zebul") was a popular title for the storm god of the Phoenicians. The sentence "Where is the Prince?" is even found in Ugaritic literature. It is a form of invocation, calling on the god named to appear and act. In other words, this Tyrian princess was given a name in praise of the chief god of her people (whom the Hebrew Bible refers to mainly by the title "Baal", meaning "lord, master"). "Jezebel" is, then, a reinterpretation, intended to mock this Queen and her god, whom she encouraged Israel to worship. The transliteration is 'Iyzebel meaning "Baal is exalted".
The Hebrew Bible contains two other examples of this name formula. First, in the larger context of the Jezebel story, after Elijah is taken up, Elisha strikes the Jordan with Elijah's cloak and cries, "Where is YHWH, the god of Elijah?" as an invocation for Yahweh to part the waters, as he had done from Elijah (2 Kings 2). Second, the name " Ichabod", traditionally read as "no glory" (son of the priest Phinehas, in 1 Samuel) may be read as, "Where is the Glory?" In context, the question becomes sadly ironic, because "the Glory" is associated with the Ark of the Covenant, which has just been captured by the Philistines.
A related type of Hebrew name is "Who is like El?" ( Michael), or "Who is like Yahweh?" (Micaiah).
I have just removed all of the above from the article. There are no references, and it reads like speculative musings. If this is a theory that has appeared in print, then it needs to be reinstated, but preceeded with appropriate qualifiers. E.g., "Professor Bloggs speculated in June 2009 issue of The Journal of Biblical Studies that..." -- Oliver P. ( talk) 21:56, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
I have created a Requested Move to relocate this article to Jezebel and move the disambiguation page to Jezebel (disambiguation). Discussion should take place at Talk:Jezebel#Requested move. Propaniac ( talk) 16:33, 20 January 2010 (UTC)
There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Jezebel which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. — RM bot 17:00, 20 January 2010 (UTC)
Considering the "Christian" label on this, I am surprised by the leaning toward defense of Jezebel. A more middle of the road position might recognize instead that Jezebel did "start" the animosity not actually through what she was accused of, but through actually KILLING the people on her husband's side. When she did that, she made herself an enemy to his people.
Human reaction is still the same today when a new spouse of either sex appears to want to divide the other spouse from his or her biological family. The family of birth "feels" as though the new spouse is misusing the power of sex and whatever else as a wedge between them. The killings of her husband's "people" seems to prove that as her intention. Her husband's people might then believe that the only way to stop her was to react in kind and they also might then go on to believe that the "wiles" of a beautiful woman are particularly dangerous -- which, unfortunately, hurts other women in general. Just because she is a strong woman doesn't make her innocent of all charges. She apparently did have an agenda that did involve harm to those who were NOT her people.
So, I believe when we look at the stories of these people in the past, we need to beware of drifting too far toward one end or the other. Instead, we need to recognize the REALITIES of the situation and accept them for what they are. Yes, Jezebel was a strong-willed woman, but No, she was not an innocent who was badly maligned and overpowered by "bad" religious zealots for no reason because she killed some of those zealots before that time showing them that her intentions toward them was not good and that she intended to use her power in a dangerous way.
Religion has been a divider for a very long time, but when we take sides in the retelling of the events, we falsely extend the hatred. A fight can NOT exist without at least TWO differing parties. There is NEVER just one side to any story. Jezebel was not maligned falsely by the overly-zealous people of Ahab, but many women after her were held back because of her out of fear of the power that women might have against men... women were stereotyped according to Jezebel because of the men's fear of their own weaknesses in love. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.45.28.217 ( talk) 18:18, 23 May 2010 (UTC)
I can't find V. Barzowski or his supposed book online. Editors need to provide complete source info, including accurate title, place,, publisher and date of publication, page references - otherwise it does not count as a valid citation. Parkwells ( talk) 19:36, 15 November 2010 (UTC)
This article is in dire need of sources. I suggest an entire overhaul of the whole thing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.11.153.37 ( talk) 10:19, 5 July 2012 (UTC)
My reason for visiting the article was to find out *why* the name Jezebel is associated with promiscuous women? Is there more to the story? I did not see a sexual element, she is not accused of adultery or excessive sexual appetite. Or is it as simple as calling a woman you hate a slut/whore, etc.? Article identifies this association with the early 20th century (inclusion in 1911 Encyclopedia Brittanica) but does not mention that the encyclopedia refers to 2 Kings 9:22: "And it came to pass, when Joram saw Jehu, that he said, Is it peace, Jehu? And he answered, What peace, so long as the whoredoms of thy mother Jezebel and her witchcrafts are so many?" I looked this up on my own, but it is not referenced in the article, it should be. 173.217.202.38 ( talk) 02:52, 17 November 2012 (UTC)
2003:45:2D29:7301:3470:5C95:E53:5912 ( talk) 07:25, 25 January 2015 (UTC)
This article starts off on a very strange tone to me because it is written as if this was a real, historical person and not a fictional character of myth and legend. I don't want to add a layer of qualification over all the text, but the Bible is not a historical record, it's a religious text. It can't be taken verbatim as "true" or factual. Jezebel is a character in a story, not a person. 69.125.134.86 ( talk) 22:06, 21 July 2013 (UTC)
Indeed, the Jezebel article is about a character from the Bible! But the entire article sounds like we're discussing biographical details from history books. Weird. I'm gonna go look up Santa Claus, see if we're consistent here. Richard8081 ( talk) —Preceding undated comment added 06:16, 12 August 2013 (UTC)
Santa Claus is a demonstrable myth. Jezebel is not, and I believe the article even references a coin that is believed by certain archaeologists to carry her royal seal. Until you can prove it unreasonable to believe that a queen named Jezebel lived at that time in that part of the world, can the biased attitudes, 'kay? 209.62.203.19 ( talk) 16:25, 19 February 2014 (UTC)
The article was very poor in my opinion. I have removed a lot of the discussion of the origin of the name "Jezebel", which had a "citation needed" tag sitting on it for years. I could not find any reliable sources which said what the article originally did so it has been replaced with a simpler explanation from The Oxford Guide to People and Places of the Bible. I cannot find a single reference to "V. Barzowski" online or anywhere else, so I am deleting the passages that use him as a source and replacing that commentary with WP:RS. Smeat75 ( talk) 16:07, 23 August 2013 (UTC)
The "In popular culture" section goes longer and longer with unreferenced additions such as every pop song ever called "Jezebel", somebody called a hurricane "Jezebel" in some movie, a character in a video game has "Jezebel" as a first name. Almost none of it is cited to any source, my inclination is delete it all except for the most notable instances which can be sourced, for instance the Davis and Goddard films and the Asimov novel, or move all the unsourced trivia to another article "Jezebel in popular culture", but I will wait a while and see if there are any other opinions as to what should be done about it. Smeat75 ( talk) 17:45, 15 November 2013 (UTC)
So I am going to act on the advice given by Diego above and on the advice I was given when I raised this question at WP:RSN, the reliable sources noticeboard. For an item to be included in the "In popular culture" section of this article, we need first of all a Secondary source cited to show that there really was or is a pop song called "Jezebel", for instance, or that a character in a movie or TV show really did call another character, or a hurricane, "Jezebel".As Diego says here [1],"it's recommended to include an inline reference for each item, preferably from third parties whenever possible, or else a reference to the work containing the mention." It is not enough to link to another WP article - see WP:WPNOTRS: Wikipedia articles ... are not reliable sources for any purpose. However, just to establish from a reference to a reliable secondary source that there really is a video game with a character who has "Jezebel" as a first name, for instance, is not enough either - it must also be established by a reliable secondary source not only that the video game,movie or TV show had an impact on popular culture but that the use of the figure of Jezebel in the video game, movie or TV show had a notable cultural impact. As editor kww put it at RSN [2]" It's not enough to have a citation that verifies that Hello Kitty appeared in an episode of a random sitcom, you need a citation that analyses the relevance of that appearance of Hello Kitty". So I am going to remove all but the few items that are sourced and have some degree of notability, not only as a movie or song, but for the use of the "character" of Jezebel in the song or movie, and as Diego says, move them to a section on this talk page where they can be discussed and those interested can try to find sources for them so that they can be put into the article. Smeat75 ( talk) 03:24, 17 November 2013 (UTC)
As discussed in the above section, the following entries have been removed from the article. If sources can be found to establish both the existence of these mentions of Jezebel in various media and that the portrayal of Jezebel in these works had a significant cultural impact, they can be put back in.
-- Smeat75 ( talk) 03:24, 17 November 2013 (UTC)
The isp on reader feedback is I think correct in general terms: "This article is absent of a largely important piece of historical data regarding the worship of Baal; therefore connecting the reasoning behind why people use the word/name Jezebel in relation to sexual promiscuity. The worship of Baal was largely intertwined with the practice of prostitution within the temple walls of Baal itself. Intercourse with a prophetess of Baal supposedly cleansed away sin toward the god Baal. Wikipedia doesn't mention this at all, and therefore presents a skewed reasoning toward the understanding of the usage of the name "Jezebel"." More on the growth of Jezebel as a sexualized figure or metaphor would be nice. I've rerated as C anyway. Johnbod ( talk) 12:19, 10 January 2014 (UTC)
Please see above on this page, such tidbits need references not only to show that there is such a song but that the use of the figure of Jezebel in them had a significant cultural impact, if such references are cited the songs can be put back into the article. Smeat75 ( talk) 21:51, 17 January 2014 (UTC)
Another one - "Sade has a song called "Jezebel" on her album entitled "The Best of Sade" 1994 Sony Music Entertainment." Smeat75 ( talk) 14:15, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
And another - " Memphis May Fire, a metalcore band, have a song titled "Jezebel" on their 2012 album, Challenger. The song portrays a contemporary Jezebel and starts: She's on the prowl. She wants it all & she'll stop at nothing! Everyone knows she's well aware of the fact that her self respect was long lost on her search for something Smeat75 ( talk) 03:37, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
Sludge metal band Acid Bath recorded a song entitled "Jezebel" for their 1994 album When the Kite String Pops Smeat75 ( talk) 03:37, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
This article is a part of two death-type catagories, but it should only be in one, unless somehow she died BOTH by dog attack AND defenestration. Something's gotta give, here, you can't have it both ways. Chrisrus ( talk) 23:17, 10 April 2015 (UTC)
Jezebel is the 'anglicised transliteration' of the name found in Hebrew sources. What else would it be ? A common method used in cases like this is simply to write the English form with the form from which it is derived in brackets ( Pamour ( talk) 21:51, 28 August 2016 (UTC)).
Items should not be in that list unless they are sourced so that they can be verified. Ideally the source will also show that the song or whatever actually had an impact on popular culture. When an editor supplies a source they can be moved back on to the article page.
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Jezebel. 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).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 06:15, 22 April 2017 (UTC)
@ Jytdog: has removed a couple refs w/o getting consensus or really saying why. Thoughts? BedrockPerson ( talk) 15:49, 7 July 2017 (UTC)
If the are enough sources about the archaeological finding, perhaps it should have a spin-off article of its own. Dimadick ( talk) 17:22, 10 July 2017 (UTC)
"* Isaac Asimov's protagonist of the Robot Series Elijah Baley is married to a woman "Jessie" which is short for Jezebel" was added to the "In popular culture" section with no reference. It needs a reference to be added to the article. Smeat75 ( talk) 05:41, 17 February 2018 (UTC)
The historicity section seems to be a summary of a single, not necessarily representative source. I reviewed the source, which, in the pages referenced, is itself largely unfootnoted, so it is not clear whether the author is expressing an opinion or a widely established fact. Could someone with knowledge of this subject add other references, please? Otherwise, the historicity section should probably be reduced to 'Jezebel is unknown as a historical figure outside the Hebrew Bible', since the arguments proposed by Finkelstein are discussed elsewhere. Martin Turner ( talk) 16:22, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
if jezebel died in 842 bc was 'defenestration' a possible cause of death? were there windows [?] in 842 [?] from which one could be thrown to deliberately occasion death? wikipedia elsewhere "Defenestration is the act of throwing someone or something out of a window. The term was coined around the time of an incident in Prague Castle in the year 1618 which became the spark that started the Thirty Years' War." 220.240.42.129 ( talk) 10:31, 15 September 2020 (UTC)
Not really WP:UNDUE. It's two sentences, linking to an article on the subject, and well sourced.
850 B.C. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.152.184.139 ( talk) 17:12, 29 January 2022 (UTC)
I would not add Category:Dog nutrition, but Category:Dogs in human culture fit the story very well. The dogs are not mythical, so Category:Mythological dogs does not fit here.-- Geysirhead ( talk) 18:39, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
My edit to add the song Jezebel by The Rasmus to the "In popular culture" section was reverted by @ Unbh: with reason "This is not about the biblical jezebel". I believe that this song fits in the "In popular culture" section. While it might not be about the biblical Jezebel, the Jezebel in the song is a reference to and inspired by the biblical Jezebel. Other entries in this section are also not about the biblical Jezebel but are just references to her.
The Rasmus frontman Lauri Ylönen mentions the connection to the biblical Jezebel here (at 9:15 in the video interview): https://www.rocksound.tv/videos/watch/the-rasmus-jezebel-eurovision-song-contest-2022-interview. I could add this as an additional reference and reformulate my sentence to make it clearer what the connection between the biblical Jezebel and the song is.
-- FreundTech ( talk) 17:06, 11 May 2022 (UTC)
am i only one who is so confused about the situation because from what i read i see no evidence stating jezel worshipped or sold herself to the 'bad man' so how is she a daemon??????? 192.182.87.40 ( talk) 06:09, 7 July 2022 (UTC)
JIGOJGUNRGHEIRGJIJ 2803:1500:1203:5CCE:39A7:1207:F639:E28B ( talk) 01:32, 23 February 2023 (UTC)
In the article it says: "Jezebel had significant power and influence, which she used to both support Baal's cultus and eliminate its rivals, using methods that the Bible describes in brutal terms." "1 Kings 16:32" is given as source; I can not find any "methods of eliminating rivals described in brutal terms" at 1 Kings 16:32 and around... Could you please explain or give a more precise citation? Thank you! HilmarHansWerner ( talk) 16:16, 27 March 2023 (UTC)
@ Sinclairian: Greetings! Regarding this revert, Wikipedia:Summary style says that the lede should summarize the major points of the article. Removing this text means the intro doesn't summarize the Historicity section at all. The question of the accuracy for the biblical account related in the remainder of the intro and the "Biblical account" section seems extremely relevant to readers, so I don't see why it would be omitted on the grounds that it's a minor detail. -- Beland ( talk) 22:40, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 |
The text here mentions two women in the Hebrew Bible, but then goes on to cite Jezebel (princess of Tyre and queen of Israel) from 1 Kings, and the seer Jezebel of Thyateira, who is named in the Apocalypse of John (Book of Revelation). Should the text read "...is the name of two women in the Bible."? The rest of the article makes it clear where each person is discussed. Epimetreus 23:08, 23 April 2006 (UTC)
The comment in the opening section about makeup being associated with "painted women" and prostitutes thanks to the Jezebel story is false and should be removed. Making oneself pretty is not seen as an attribute of "fallen" women in the Old Testament. For example, Genesis (Egyptians saw Sarah was a very beautiful woman), Esther, before she appeals to the King; Exodus (in the oral history that accompanies Exodus, women go into the fields and inspire their husbands, wearing makeup, after the Pharoah commands them to throw their newborns into the Nile). Go ahead and add any interpretations about beauty from the New Testament you want, but they do not belong in the Old Testament. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jumpygrouch ( talk • contribs) 08:30, 15 February 2011 (UTC)
Jezebel was referenced in the song Juke Joint Jezebel by KMFDM off the Money album as well —Preceding unsigned comment added by Runswithspoon ( talk • contribs) 17:40, April 26, 2006
I have another, Poe (the singer) sings "This is Jezebel in hell" in her song Angry Johnny. It is ultimately one of my favorites, and lead me to look up exactly who Jezebel was (leading me to here).-- 160.81.78.102 01:31, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
It seems likely that the name recorded in the Bible is changed to be a slur. Are there any scholarly guesses as to what her real name was? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.132.164.243 ( talk • contribs) 09:45, October 3, 2006
This is all well and good but encyclopedic entries require verifiability. None of the above could be consider such common knowledge that your average reader turning to wikipedia would know the sources of such information and the single mention in the article that The Naked Archeologists says so isn't a reliable since he is not a linguist and he tends to make amazing leaps of judgement to reach conclusions that few historians would defend. The best way to include this information is to simply name the linguist or historian asserting these interpretations as fact and then include the citation to where they make the statement. I'll try and find what I can using Google Books but those editors who really care about this as above, might already have their reliable sources at the ready. I realize I'm several years late in this discussion but the article's content on this continues to evolve and not for the better. Please help me source these assertions. Thanks! LiPollis ( talk) 00:56, 24 May 2010 (UTC)
I'm not sure the Popular Culture section is all that relevent to an article called "Jezebel (Bible)". The title would imply the depiction in the bible is more important. I propose that the list get a seperate article. If anybody agrees I'll go ahead and do it. Robinoke 23:51, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
The subsection Jezeble as a "slut" should be renamed, as the word "slut" referes to a prostitute or sexually promiscuous woman, whereas the section also refers to images of a Jezebel being a wicked and controlling woman. I suggest replacing "slut" with "evil woman". Wkharrisjr ( talk) 19:53, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
Move due to primary meaning and usage. - Ste vertigo 07:45, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
Most of this article is just fluff pop culture references. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.153.4.250 ( talk) 07:34, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
Using the vowels traditionally employed for this name by Hebrew readers, the Hebrew form of this name means "not exalted". But it is highly unlikely her parents would have given her such a name. Read with different vowels it can be understood as meaning "Where is the Prince?" ('ay zebul in Hebrew). In fact, early Syrian inscriptions from Ugarit demonstrate that "the Prince" (equivalent of Hebrew "Zebul") was a popular title for the storm god of the Phoenicians. The sentence "Where is the Prince?" is even found in Ugaritic literature. It is a form of invocation, calling on the god named to appear and act. In other words, this Tyrian princess was given a name in praise of the chief god of her people (whom the Hebrew Bible refers to mainly by the title "Baal", meaning "lord, master"). "Jezebel" is, then, a reinterpretation, intended to mock this Queen and her god, whom she encouraged Israel to worship. The transliteration is 'Iyzebel meaning "Baal is exalted".
The Hebrew Bible contains two other examples of this name formula. First, in the larger context of the Jezebel story, after Elijah is taken up, Elisha strikes the Jordan with Elijah's cloak and cries, "Where is YHWH, the god of Elijah?" as an invocation for Yahweh to part the waters, as he had done from Elijah (2 Kings 2). Second, the name " Ichabod", traditionally read as "no glory" (son of the priest Phinehas, in 1 Samuel) may be read as, "Where is the Glory?" In context, the question becomes sadly ironic, because "the Glory" is associated with the Ark of the Covenant, which has just been captured by the Philistines.
A related type of Hebrew name is "Who is like El?" ( Michael), or "Who is like Yahweh?" (Micaiah).
I have just removed all of the above from the article. There are no references, and it reads like speculative musings. If this is a theory that has appeared in print, then it needs to be reinstated, but preceeded with appropriate qualifiers. E.g., "Professor Bloggs speculated in June 2009 issue of The Journal of Biblical Studies that..." -- Oliver P. ( talk) 21:56, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
I have created a Requested Move to relocate this article to Jezebel and move the disambiguation page to Jezebel (disambiguation). Discussion should take place at Talk:Jezebel#Requested move. Propaniac ( talk) 16:33, 20 January 2010 (UTC)
There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Jezebel which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. — RM bot 17:00, 20 January 2010 (UTC)
Considering the "Christian" label on this, I am surprised by the leaning toward defense of Jezebel. A more middle of the road position might recognize instead that Jezebel did "start" the animosity not actually through what she was accused of, but through actually KILLING the people on her husband's side. When she did that, she made herself an enemy to his people.
Human reaction is still the same today when a new spouse of either sex appears to want to divide the other spouse from his or her biological family. The family of birth "feels" as though the new spouse is misusing the power of sex and whatever else as a wedge between them. The killings of her husband's "people" seems to prove that as her intention. Her husband's people might then believe that the only way to stop her was to react in kind and they also might then go on to believe that the "wiles" of a beautiful woman are particularly dangerous -- which, unfortunately, hurts other women in general. Just because she is a strong woman doesn't make her innocent of all charges. She apparently did have an agenda that did involve harm to those who were NOT her people.
So, I believe when we look at the stories of these people in the past, we need to beware of drifting too far toward one end or the other. Instead, we need to recognize the REALITIES of the situation and accept them for what they are. Yes, Jezebel was a strong-willed woman, but No, she was not an innocent who was badly maligned and overpowered by "bad" religious zealots for no reason because she killed some of those zealots before that time showing them that her intentions toward them was not good and that she intended to use her power in a dangerous way.
Religion has been a divider for a very long time, but when we take sides in the retelling of the events, we falsely extend the hatred. A fight can NOT exist without at least TWO differing parties. There is NEVER just one side to any story. Jezebel was not maligned falsely by the overly-zealous people of Ahab, but many women after her were held back because of her out of fear of the power that women might have against men... women were stereotyped according to Jezebel because of the men's fear of their own weaknesses in love. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.45.28.217 ( talk) 18:18, 23 May 2010 (UTC)
I can't find V. Barzowski or his supposed book online. Editors need to provide complete source info, including accurate title, place,, publisher and date of publication, page references - otherwise it does not count as a valid citation. Parkwells ( talk) 19:36, 15 November 2010 (UTC)
This article is in dire need of sources. I suggest an entire overhaul of the whole thing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.11.153.37 ( talk) 10:19, 5 July 2012 (UTC)
My reason for visiting the article was to find out *why* the name Jezebel is associated with promiscuous women? Is there more to the story? I did not see a sexual element, she is not accused of adultery or excessive sexual appetite. Or is it as simple as calling a woman you hate a slut/whore, etc.? Article identifies this association with the early 20th century (inclusion in 1911 Encyclopedia Brittanica) but does not mention that the encyclopedia refers to 2 Kings 9:22: "And it came to pass, when Joram saw Jehu, that he said, Is it peace, Jehu? And he answered, What peace, so long as the whoredoms of thy mother Jezebel and her witchcrafts are so many?" I looked this up on my own, but it is not referenced in the article, it should be. 173.217.202.38 ( talk) 02:52, 17 November 2012 (UTC)
2003:45:2D29:7301:3470:5C95:E53:5912 ( talk) 07:25, 25 January 2015 (UTC)
This article starts off on a very strange tone to me because it is written as if this was a real, historical person and not a fictional character of myth and legend. I don't want to add a layer of qualification over all the text, but the Bible is not a historical record, it's a religious text. It can't be taken verbatim as "true" or factual. Jezebel is a character in a story, not a person. 69.125.134.86 ( talk) 22:06, 21 July 2013 (UTC)
Indeed, the Jezebel article is about a character from the Bible! But the entire article sounds like we're discussing biographical details from history books. Weird. I'm gonna go look up Santa Claus, see if we're consistent here. Richard8081 ( talk) —Preceding undated comment added 06:16, 12 August 2013 (UTC)
Santa Claus is a demonstrable myth. Jezebel is not, and I believe the article even references a coin that is believed by certain archaeologists to carry her royal seal. Until you can prove it unreasonable to believe that a queen named Jezebel lived at that time in that part of the world, can the biased attitudes, 'kay? 209.62.203.19 ( talk) 16:25, 19 February 2014 (UTC)
The article was very poor in my opinion. I have removed a lot of the discussion of the origin of the name "Jezebel", which had a "citation needed" tag sitting on it for years. I could not find any reliable sources which said what the article originally did so it has been replaced with a simpler explanation from The Oxford Guide to People and Places of the Bible. I cannot find a single reference to "V. Barzowski" online or anywhere else, so I am deleting the passages that use him as a source and replacing that commentary with WP:RS. Smeat75 ( talk) 16:07, 23 August 2013 (UTC)
The "In popular culture" section goes longer and longer with unreferenced additions such as every pop song ever called "Jezebel", somebody called a hurricane "Jezebel" in some movie, a character in a video game has "Jezebel" as a first name. Almost none of it is cited to any source, my inclination is delete it all except for the most notable instances which can be sourced, for instance the Davis and Goddard films and the Asimov novel, or move all the unsourced trivia to another article "Jezebel in popular culture", but I will wait a while and see if there are any other opinions as to what should be done about it. Smeat75 ( talk) 17:45, 15 November 2013 (UTC)
So I am going to act on the advice given by Diego above and on the advice I was given when I raised this question at WP:RSN, the reliable sources noticeboard. For an item to be included in the "In popular culture" section of this article, we need first of all a Secondary source cited to show that there really was or is a pop song called "Jezebel", for instance, or that a character in a movie or TV show really did call another character, or a hurricane, "Jezebel".As Diego says here [1],"it's recommended to include an inline reference for each item, preferably from third parties whenever possible, or else a reference to the work containing the mention." It is not enough to link to another WP article - see WP:WPNOTRS: Wikipedia articles ... are not reliable sources for any purpose. However, just to establish from a reference to a reliable secondary source that there really is a video game with a character who has "Jezebel" as a first name, for instance, is not enough either - it must also be established by a reliable secondary source not only that the video game,movie or TV show had an impact on popular culture but that the use of the figure of Jezebel in the video game, movie or TV show had a notable cultural impact. As editor kww put it at RSN [2]" It's not enough to have a citation that verifies that Hello Kitty appeared in an episode of a random sitcom, you need a citation that analyses the relevance of that appearance of Hello Kitty". So I am going to remove all but the few items that are sourced and have some degree of notability, not only as a movie or song, but for the use of the "character" of Jezebel in the song or movie, and as Diego says, move them to a section on this talk page where they can be discussed and those interested can try to find sources for them so that they can be put into the article. Smeat75 ( talk) 03:24, 17 November 2013 (UTC)
As discussed in the above section, the following entries have been removed from the article. If sources can be found to establish both the existence of these mentions of Jezebel in various media and that the portrayal of Jezebel in these works had a significant cultural impact, they can be put back in.
-- Smeat75 ( talk) 03:24, 17 November 2013 (UTC)
The isp on reader feedback is I think correct in general terms: "This article is absent of a largely important piece of historical data regarding the worship of Baal; therefore connecting the reasoning behind why people use the word/name Jezebel in relation to sexual promiscuity. The worship of Baal was largely intertwined with the practice of prostitution within the temple walls of Baal itself. Intercourse with a prophetess of Baal supposedly cleansed away sin toward the god Baal. Wikipedia doesn't mention this at all, and therefore presents a skewed reasoning toward the understanding of the usage of the name "Jezebel"." More on the growth of Jezebel as a sexualized figure or metaphor would be nice. I've rerated as C anyway. Johnbod ( talk) 12:19, 10 January 2014 (UTC)
Please see above on this page, such tidbits need references not only to show that there is such a song but that the use of the figure of Jezebel in them had a significant cultural impact, if such references are cited the songs can be put back into the article. Smeat75 ( talk) 21:51, 17 January 2014 (UTC)
Another one - "Sade has a song called "Jezebel" on her album entitled "The Best of Sade" 1994 Sony Music Entertainment." Smeat75 ( talk) 14:15, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
And another - " Memphis May Fire, a metalcore band, have a song titled "Jezebel" on their 2012 album, Challenger. The song portrays a contemporary Jezebel and starts: She's on the prowl. She wants it all & she'll stop at nothing! Everyone knows she's well aware of the fact that her self respect was long lost on her search for something Smeat75 ( talk) 03:37, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
Sludge metal band Acid Bath recorded a song entitled "Jezebel" for their 1994 album When the Kite String Pops Smeat75 ( talk) 03:37, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
This article is a part of two death-type catagories, but it should only be in one, unless somehow she died BOTH by dog attack AND defenestration. Something's gotta give, here, you can't have it both ways. Chrisrus ( talk) 23:17, 10 April 2015 (UTC)
Jezebel is the 'anglicised transliteration' of the name found in Hebrew sources. What else would it be ? A common method used in cases like this is simply to write the English form with the form from which it is derived in brackets ( Pamour ( talk) 21:51, 28 August 2016 (UTC)).
Items should not be in that list unless they are sourced so that they can be verified. Ideally the source will also show that the song or whatever actually had an impact on popular culture. When an editor supplies a source they can be moved back on to the article page.
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Jezebel. 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).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 06:15, 22 April 2017 (UTC)
@ Jytdog: has removed a couple refs w/o getting consensus or really saying why. Thoughts? BedrockPerson ( talk) 15:49, 7 July 2017 (UTC)
If the are enough sources about the archaeological finding, perhaps it should have a spin-off article of its own. Dimadick ( talk) 17:22, 10 July 2017 (UTC)
"* Isaac Asimov's protagonist of the Robot Series Elijah Baley is married to a woman "Jessie" which is short for Jezebel" was added to the "In popular culture" section with no reference. It needs a reference to be added to the article. Smeat75 ( talk) 05:41, 17 February 2018 (UTC)
The historicity section seems to be a summary of a single, not necessarily representative source. I reviewed the source, which, in the pages referenced, is itself largely unfootnoted, so it is not clear whether the author is expressing an opinion or a widely established fact. Could someone with knowledge of this subject add other references, please? Otherwise, the historicity section should probably be reduced to 'Jezebel is unknown as a historical figure outside the Hebrew Bible', since the arguments proposed by Finkelstein are discussed elsewhere. Martin Turner ( talk) 16:22, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
if jezebel died in 842 bc was 'defenestration' a possible cause of death? were there windows [?] in 842 [?] from which one could be thrown to deliberately occasion death? wikipedia elsewhere "Defenestration is the act of throwing someone or something out of a window. The term was coined around the time of an incident in Prague Castle in the year 1618 which became the spark that started the Thirty Years' War." 220.240.42.129 ( talk) 10:31, 15 September 2020 (UTC)
Not really WP:UNDUE. It's two sentences, linking to an article on the subject, and well sourced.
850 B.C. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.152.184.139 ( talk) 17:12, 29 January 2022 (UTC)
I would not add Category:Dog nutrition, but Category:Dogs in human culture fit the story very well. The dogs are not mythical, so Category:Mythological dogs does not fit here.-- Geysirhead ( talk) 18:39, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
My edit to add the song Jezebel by The Rasmus to the "In popular culture" section was reverted by @ Unbh: with reason "This is not about the biblical jezebel". I believe that this song fits in the "In popular culture" section. While it might not be about the biblical Jezebel, the Jezebel in the song is a reference to and inspired by the biblical Jezebel. Other entries in this section are also not about the biblical Jezebel but are just references to her.
The Rasmus frontman Lauri Ylönen mentions the connection to the biblical Jezebel here (at 9:15 in the video interview): https://www.rocksound.tv/videos/watch/the-rasmus-jezebel-eurovision-song-contest-2022-interview. I could add this as an additional reference and reformulate my sentence to make it clearer what the connection between the biblical Jezebel and the song is.
-- FreundTech ( talk) 17:06, 11 May 2022 (UTC)
am i only one who is so confused about the situation because from what i read i see no evidence stating jezel worshipped or sold herself to the 'bad man' so how is she a daemon??????? 192.182.87.40 ( talk) 06:09, 7 July 2022 (UTC)
JIGOJGUNRGHEIRGJIJ 2803:1500:1203:5CCE:39A7:1207:F639:E28B ( talk) 01:32, 23 February 2023 (UTC)
In the article it says: "Jezebel had significant power and influence, which she used to both support Baal's cultus and eliminate its rivals, using methods that the Bible describes in brutal terms." "1 Kings 16:32" is given as source; I can not find any "methods of eliminating rivals described in brutal terms" at 1 Kings 16:32 and around... Could you please explain or give a more precise citation? Thank you! HilmarHansWerner ( talk) 16:16, 27 March 2023 (UTC)
@ Sinclairian: Greetings! Regarding this revert, Wikipedia:Summary style says that the lede should summarize the major points of the article. Removing this text means the intro doesn't summarize the Historicity section at all. The question of the accuracy for the biblical account related in the remainder of the intro and the "Biblical account" section seems extremely relevant to readers, so I don't see why it would be omitted on the grounds that it's a minor detail. -- Beland ( talk) 22:40, 6 February 2024 (UTC)