Talk:Sham Ennessim

Ancient Origin(s)

I have removed this section due to concerns about the source:

The festival has been nationally celebrated by all the Egyptians since ancient times, as it is considered a national festival in Egypt. Its history goes back to ancient Egyptian times, as it was related to the agricultural background of the ancient Egyptians, originating from Shemu. Sham Ennessim is an official holiday in modern Egypt.

Reasoning: I am not aware of a pharaonic Shemu festival nor can I find anything on it. There is the season šm.w which gives us Coptic ϣⲱⲙ (summer). šo:m does not directly become sham - and it's not the name of a festival, AFAIK. The festival of the first month of šm.w is the festival of Renenutet. Maybe there is a connection between the Renenutet festival and the modern festival, but that needs to be shown - the source give in the section above just asserts that Sham Ennessim is ancient because it associates it with the season name šm.w ... which smacks a lot like superficial armchair linguistics.

If you want the section back, please provide some source that shows that there was a festival of that name in antiquity or shows the parallels in customs that would justify a connection without just going by "A sounds like B to me so ..." MikuChan39 (talk) 12:31, 18 April 2025 (UTC)

about AI-generated image

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

(User:That Coptic Guy) removed the image and I think it is a wrong application of the policies, he actually referred to WP:AIIMAGES

AI-generated images
Most images wholly generated by AI should not be used in mainspace, especially for named people and in technical or scientific subjects such as anatomy and chemistry. Obvious exceptions include articles about AI and articles about notable AI-generated images; other categories of exceptions may arise through further community discussion. AI-generated images should not be used to depict individual people (living or dead). Marginal cases (such as major AI enhancement or if an AI-generated image of a living person is itself notable) are subject to case-by-case consensus.

So, it say (most) not (all) + (shouldn't) not (must not) + also it apply on "people and in technical or scientific subjects" and this article is not + (other categories of exceptions may arise through further community discussion) and you remove it without discussion.

I don't know what's wrong with posting an image like this that captures the atmosphere of an Egyptian celebration or tradition. There's nothing deceptive about it, and the comment of image states it's an imaginary image. Unfortunately, there aren't any free Sham Ennessim images available yet, so there's no harm in using an expressive image. If others have a different opinion, we can reach a consensus, but I absolutely refuse to remove an image just because another user doesn't like the AI-generated images. Ibrahim.ID ✪ 22:07, 22 April 2025 (UTC)

@Ibrahim.ID - I apologize for not posting on the talk page before removing the image. I'm going to restore it, but for purposes of this discussion, I am absolutely voting to remove the image for the reasons you mentioned above. We need to try and not use AI images in mainspace. This is also not an article discussing an AI topic, so that's another reason why it isn't appropriate here. The image isn't inherently deceptive as you did properly noted it was AI, but no real Sham el-Nassim celebration will be held with perfectly arranged eggs, fish, and a background with flowing greenery on a sunny day like that image depicts... — That Coptic Guy^{ping me!} (talk) (contribs) 01:15, 23 April 2025 (UTC)

@Ibrahim.ID Sorry - struck a part of my comment. Please see WP:AIIB as another editor mentioned. The community has come to a consensus on a general ban of AI-images on non AI-related articles. — That Coptic Guy^{ping me!} (talk) (contribs) 01:19, 23 April 2025 (UTC)

Thank you. In fact, I'm not a stickler for posting this image and I'm not a stubborn person. I certainly respect all points of view, and if many people find it inappropriate, there's no problem with removing it. I was simply surprised because I didn't violate any policies or guidelines. As the rules state (Each case is discussed separately).

Thank you for pointing out the discussion WP:AIIB, I've noticed that most of the opinions support banning AI images, but at the same time, they oppose a "blanket ban" They argue that these are exceptional cases, and perhaps the article here is an exception.

I understand some people's displeasure with the AI-generated image, as it is fabricated, distorts facts, and is inappropriate for Wikipedia articles which rely on facts and reliable information. We're not talking, for example, about AI-generated images of the "Mona Lisa" or "Big Ben" (I'm definitely against that), but rather about an Egyptian tradition (not something tangible or with a specific image). We're talking about celebrating Sham Elnessim in parks, eating colored eggs and "Fesikh" or Bloater and green onions. This image expresses the atmosphere, no free photos yet. I just thought I'd include an imaginary image to help convey the idea to the reader.

I also understand the fear many have about the idea of ​​relying on AI images. I've seen this issue as an ongoing debate for years, with both supporters and opponents of the idea in general. Therefore, I don't want this image to be part of that debate; I want to discuss it independently. --Ibrahim.ID ✪ 08:24, 23 April 2025 (UTC)

No free photos yet. There actually is. I added one to the Wikidata item. There's also File:Bg-easter-eggs.jpg and an image of fish in an Arbic article for the holiday. I'm sure your aware of all that though since you edited the articles and Wikidata item. --Adamant1 (talk) 00:39, 29 April 2025 (UTC)

I removed the image. This clearly isn't an instance of "about self" since the article doesn't have to do with AI or AI generated images and that was only exception. You should have asked on the talk page to have the image added to the article. Instead of just adding it and then expecting everyone else to justify it's removal. Personally, I don't find your reason for putting it in the article compelling or valid. Your just going off about AI generated images in general instead of actually saying why you think this particular image should be in the article. This isn't the place to discuss or debate AI generated images. --Adamant1 (talk) 00:22, 29 April 2025 (UTC)

This is your opinion, do not force your opinion on everyone Ibrahim.ID ✪ 07:06, 5 May 2025 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Ancient Origins, part 2

First off, really appreciate the extensive rewrite of the article that took place over the last days - it was much better, but still full of speculation, unfortunately:

- There is no festival Shemu that I can find from pharaonic times, only the season

- Cannot find the place where Plutarch speaks of salted fish and lettuce

- I cannot find any attestation for ϣⲱⲙ as a festival, it is summer and taxes only in Crum

- No *ϣⲱⲙ ⲛⲛⲓⲥⲓⲙ "summer of the grasses", either - looks like a complete internet retcon

- Read through Blackman's chapter on festivals, and she does NOT talk about origins at all

Sorry, this whole history section is hopeless. I have rewritten the first section of this paragraph to start from what we know and present the other claims and the objective issues with each of them. I left the date section alone because I have no specific knowledge on that, but it is still rather disjointed.

I am pasting the previous text in here out of respect for the amount of work that went into rewriting it, but if you want to restore parts of it, please look up the original primary sources first and cite them in a way that the claims can be verified by a reader or another editor. If you know where to find the Annals of Ain Shams Literature, I would appreciate that, btw.

Ancient Egypt

Sham Ennessim was believed by some to have first been celebrated by Egyptians during the Pharaonic era (ca. 2700 BC) and they kept celebrating it during the Ptolemaic times, the Roman times, medieval times, and up to the present day. Others contend that while the festival is a descendant of a Shemu festival, it's current form is an amalgamation of different influences from different eras. Ultimately, there is insufficient evidence to confirm the festival's exact origins and evolution. Allegedly, Plutarch records that there was a festival around the time of spring where Egyptians went out into their gardens with food, drink, and musical instruments. Gifts were exchanged, including salted fish and lettuce.

Christianization of Egypt

There is some evidence indicating Shemu was tied to Easter after the Christianization of Egypt. According to Winifred Blackman, Shom Ennisim used to come before Easter, during fasting time. It was then changed so that Christians could participate in festival activities, which include eating fish. Coptic fasts prohibit meat consumption. However, she does not say when this change happened. The Coptic calculation of Easter uses the Aqbati method, invented by Pope Demetrius (189-231 AD) to ensure it would always be on the same date as Easter celebrated by other Christian groups, due to an early Byzantine decree. Fish and eggs are both symbols of resurrection for Christians, influencing their use in festivities.

Shom means spring or summer. Enn is a prefix meaning of the, and sim means herbs or grasses. If the full term Shom Ennisim predates Islam, it translates to Spring of the Herbs/Grasses. If Shom was preserved in an archaic understanding, it means Harvest of the Herbs/Grasses.

Muslim Conquest of Egypt

As Egypt became Islamized, the term Shemu/Shom Ennisim may have found a rough phono-semantic match in Sham Ennesim, or "Smelling/Taking In the Zephyrs," which fairly accurately represents the way in which the festival is celebrated. There is some doubt about where the current Coptic name of the festival came from, due to limited attestation.

At one point, Muslims in Giza celebrated the mawlid of Abu Huraira on the same date as Shom Ennisim.

The Islamic calendar being lunar and thus unfixed relative to the solar year, the date of Sham Ennessim remained on the Christian-linked date. The Christian Egyptians have played a major role in preserving the festival through their cultural agency, which was quite limited after the conversion to Islam in Egypt, but that cannot be taken to be the reason why the Muslim Egyptians collectively celebrate the festival.

Some believe that for the festival to be collectively celebrated by the Muslim Egyptians it must have been retained by them among themselves after conversion, citing E. W. Lane, (see below), and from the fact that they perform similar celebratory traditions.

MikuChan39 (talk) 00:26, 24 April 2025 (UTC)

Ancient Origins, part 3

I'm getting somewhat tired of this, but here we go again: If you want to establish as an undisputed fact that there really was continuity for this festival from ancient times we need more than the source by Molefi Kete Asante. In his book he does not establish that there was a spring festival of this name in pharaonic Egypt, he just makes that assertion. If it were true, I'd expect to see it somewhere in an Egyptian dictionary or a description of relevant source texts about festivals in Middle Egyptian, Late Egyptian, Demotic or, heck, even Coptic. Have not been able to find anything - šm.w is summer or tax, not a festival. Same for Coptic ϣⲱⲙ. So, the etymology Molefi Kete Asante presents as fact looks a lot like wishful thinking and I am calling BS on the whole thing. Not going to outright delete it because it has been published and there are a lot of tourist guides etc. that repeat it without questioning, but some qualifiers are in order even if you have no rebuttal from Egyptologists because frankly Egyptologists do not have time to write rebuttals for every piece of speculation that is put out there. MikuChan39 (talk) 03:27, 12 May 2025 (UTC)

Moving the reply down here instead. You are all over the place, please keep the discussion in one place.

Formulating the passage in accordance with the peer-reviewed source is not only sufficient, it is the standard of accuracy we are obligated to uphold on Wikipedia. There is no need to extrapolate additional conclusions out of an overabundance of editorial caution, particularly when such extrapolations risk falling afoul of WP:SYNTH. As presently written, the text accurately distinguishes between two separate claims from the sources: first, that the tradition originates in a festival celebrated during the harvest season; and second, that the modern name may derive from the ancient name of the season. Nowhere does it assert that the tradition descends from a specific festival named shemu. It appears you are conflating these distinct points to suggest that the article claims the tradition stems from an ancient celebration called shemu.

Your revision attributes conclusions to the cited source that it simply does not make. This constitutes a textbook example of WP:OR, which may be summarily removed. Moreover, you are relying on a Coptic lexicon to assert the nonexistence of attestations. On what basis can such a claim be made, unless a reliable source explicitly states that no attestation exists?

If your aim is to challenge the current source’s assertion, the burden lies with you to produce a reliable, contradictory source. At that point, we can present both perspectives in balanced fashion, per WP:DUE. In short, there are sources that explicitly support this claim, which suffices for its inclusion. If you wish to challenge it, the burden lies with you to disprove it using reputable sources, not through your own conjecture or original research. Absent that, I will be reworking the section to align strictly with what the sources state, nothing more, and certainly nothing less. Turnopoems 𓋹 ✎ 09:53, 12 May 2025 (UTC)

First off, thanks for the reply (@Turnopoems) and for working on restructuring the article. The new structure is better than the old one.

As for the topic at hand, the supposed antiquity of the festival, the sources given do not seem satisfactory. I hope you have the patience to review the following as I have taken the trouble to write it up for discussion rather than just summarily editing the article as I see fit. Proposals included in the text below:

(1) tshom ni sime

Middle East Eye is a web-publication dealing with news on all sorts of topics, it is not a peer-reviewed Egyptology or archeology journal. Specifically, the following statement needs to be modified when sourced to this article as it currently is:

This in turn has a proposed Coptic origin, tshom ni sime, meaning "garden meadows". With the Arabization of Egypt, the name is thought to have underwent a phono-semantic shift and evolved into Sham Ennesim.

tshom ni sime is not good Coptic, neither Bohairic nor Sahidic. I am relying on the ability to read Coptic and to write grammatically correct Coptic here after having taken several courses on it. tšōm n-ni-sim (ϭⲱⲙ ⲛⲛⲓⲥⲓⲙ) "garden of the grasses" would work which is one of the two etymologies I have seen proposed before. The other is šōm n-ni-sim (ϣⲱⲙ ⲛⲛⲓⲥⲓⲙ "Harvest of the Herbs/Grasses"). Note that the form proposed by Ms. Osman has two mistakes in it, a missing genitive and a form sime that does not exist. The problem with both etymologies is that I have not seen the original word in any actual Coptic text. That does not mean that they do not exist, but it also means that we cannot just take a random news article as any kind of proof. Unless there is a much better source in [5] which I cannot access at present, I would propose the following for this passage:

A derivation from a Coptic ϣⲱⲙ ⲛⲛⲓⲥⲓⲙ ("Harvest of the Herbs/Grasses") or ϭⲱⲙ ⲛⲛⲓⲥⲓⲙ ("garden of the grasses") has been proposed. This term is, however, given without reference to any particular source text nor found in standard Coptic dictionaries. (happy to provide sources for both proposed etymologies in these forms)

Which is true. Look for it in any standard Coptic dictionary like Crum, Westendorf or Spiegelberg - it's not there. You are not going to find a peer-reviewed paper on which made-up words are not in the dictionary. So, I think it's up to whoever makes this claim to show an actual Coptic text from before the internet that uses this word. Wikipedia is not a place for Original Research, but it is also not a place for random etymological speculation, especially when presented as quasi-fact: "the name is thought to have undergone (not underwent)" suggests that this is scholarly consensus which it is certainly not.

Sidenote: I don't see what is not factual about my original statement: "It has been proposed that the Arabic name is a reinterpretation of a proposed Coptic *ϣⲱⲙ ⲛⲛⲓⲥⲓⲙ "Harvest of the Herbs/Grasses". No actual attestation of this term has, however, been provided. ϣⲱⲙ by itself means 'summer' or 'tax' in Coptic, not 'festival' or 'harvest'." - all pieces of this sentence are easily verifiable.

(2) The 4,500 year old festival

This one is more tricky. What exactly does Molefi Kete Asante say?

The people of Egypt have celebrated this holiday (Spring Day) for more than 4,500 years. It is called Sham ennessim because the harvest season in ancient Egypt was called shamo. [...] The early Egyptians offered salted fish, lettuce, eggs and onion to the deities during that festival.

While you are correct that he does not say that the name of the ancient festival was "shamo", that's where the problem logically comes in. How do you show that a particular holiday existed for 4,500 years? You'd need a record of a festival by a similar name or at least substantially similar customs. The name part we can eliminate, because šmw does not seem to be the name for any ancient festival. Siegfried Schott put a list of festivals together (Altägyptische Festdaten. Wiesbaden 1950) and while there are multiple festivals in the 1st month of šmw, none of them are called Spring Day or šmw festival. There is a festival of Renenutet, but I don't think we know exactly what was celebrated. So, where does Molefi Kete Asante get all his details from? I don't see any footnotes, so how do I know this is reliable at all? I have no idea if the book is peer-reviewed by Egyptologists. So, my principal objection here is that this is not a very strong source for the claim that the festival in question goes back in a straight line for 4,500 years - when I cannot find anything in the Egyptological literature about it.

That said, if somebody could provide a source that actually shows how it arrives at its assertions I would be more than happy. It would be cool if the festival went that far back and survived multiple cultural breaks. But retconning due to national pride is a thing, too, so I think as editors we have to weigh this and put qualifiers where a piece of information does not seem transparently sourced.

I'd be OK with this:

Sham Ennessim is commonly believed to be directly descended from a proposed spring festival named after the season of Shemu in the old Egyptian calendar, thus establishing direct continuity since pharaonic times. There is, however, insufficient evidence to confirm the festival's exact origins and evolution.[ref. 2]. MikuChan39 (talk) 01:08, 13 May 2025 (UTC)

I'm glad we're beginning to find common ground here, @MikuChan39, and I do appreciate the clarity with which you've expressed your position. I do, however, disagree with your framing of the second point, and I’ll elaborate on that.

To begin with, I’m perfectly willing to concede that the first point may indeed be problematic, particularly if the linguistic derivation of the term in question cannot be credibly reconciled. This is, unfortunately, a recurrent issue across numerous Egypt-related articles, where some contributors, well-meaning as they may be, have overreached, inventing unattested Coptic etymologies which find their way across the internet. The only reason I reintroduced the claim was that I had, this time, located a peer-reviewed source to support it. But if that source cannot bear the necessary philological scrutiny, the correct editorial response would be to remove the claim altogether, not to counter it with our own inference that no such attestation exists, which, absent a source explicitly stating as much, would be a pretty blatant WP:OR fail. In any balance between a peer-reviewed academic source and editorial conjecture, the latter must yield. That’s how it goes on Wikipedia.

Now, regarding the origin of the festival itself, this is where we disagree. Your approach strikes me as unnecessarily rigid. Has the modern festival of Sham Ennessim been celebrated under that precise name and in its present form for 4,500 years? Obviously not. The question is whether the custom itself, in some iteration, has roots in the celebration of spring within Egypt’s ancient cultural memory. On that point, the answer is not only “yes”, it is “almost certainly yes”. The existence of spring celebrations in Egypt is well-documented, within that exact timeline even. Cultural traditions are not static relics; they are constantly evolving. Even within the various phases of ancient Egyptian civilization itself, Old, Middle, and New Kingdoms, festivals transformed in form and function, and those evolutions are attested.

By way of analogy, Christmas celebrations have diverged dramatically, with substantial adaptations in the last century in particular, yet we still understand it as rooted in a synthesis of Christian and pre-Christian feasts like Saturnalia or Yule. The same holds true for many of Egypt’s local moulids. We know for a fact that many of them have deep roots in ancient Egyptian festivals that were later rebranded as Islamic, like how Moulid Abo El Haggag lines up with the ancient Opet festival. The first drop of water that hits the Nile, known as Isis’ tear, signaling the start of the annual flood, is still marked in northern Cairo with a celebration called Moulid El Embabi. Then there’s the end of the Wag Festival, which happens when the Nile reaches its peak. Around that same time, people celebrate Moulid Mar Barsoum El Rayan. Another one is the annual moulid of Abu Huraira, held in Giza. Do we sever their ancient ties just because they have gone through a series of adaptations and changes?

As for Sham Ennessim, as a springtime harvest festival celebrated by Egyptians, its links to ancient Egypt have, notably, not been contradicted by any peer-reviewed material I’ve seen. The Palermo Stone, dating back 4,400 years to the Old Kingdom period, records several springtime festivals that are likely the basis for such claims in the material used here. The ritual consumption of symbolic foods during festivals, such as lettuce and onions, is also well attested in Egyptian texts. While you mention the Renunetet festival, which was indeed during Shemu, it began in the New Kingdom period and was celebrated in March, festivals like those of Bastet or the Valley Feast, both celebrated in the Egyptian month of Bashans, roughly April, coincide more closely with the date of Sham Ennessim. Not that the date needs to be interpreted as static in order for the ties to Sham Ennessim to be credibl, meaning that even celebrations such as the Sokar festival, which was an agrarian festival (but not during Shemu), and was also mentioned in the Palermo Stone, could be a probable influence. There are at least a dozen festivals celebrated throughout Shemu itself that we know of though, not just that of Renunetet. It doesn't even have to be rooted in a single festival, it could be an amalgamation of influences from various ones. It's impossible to reconstruct or even fully conceptualize the exact trajectory of cultural developments across millennia, however, drawing plausible connections based on available evidence is a well-established and legitimate methodology in historical research.

You are calling for a single, comprehensive academic study that definitively traces the exact evolution of Sham Ennessim from antiquity to the present. Such a source would certainly be ideal. But in the absence of that, our role is not to substitute it with our own interpretive effort. I also don't like the fact that you are selectively citing parts of the sources to present a narrative that is clearly not intended by the authors themselves, which would have been evident if you cited the full text. This effort would likely fail if put through additional dispute resolution processes as well, like WP:NORN. We should write what the peer-reviewed material states, even if not entirely satisfactory, otherwise this effort is just a massive combination of WP:SYNTH, WP:OR and WP:DUE fails. If and when we find something that states otherwise, we can present that narrative as well per WP:DUE. Until then, we must allow the sources to speak for themselves, in the terms in which it was published, not as we would prefer it to be reframed, which also means avoiding WP:ALLEGED-terms. Turnopoems 𓋹 ✎ 14:38, 13 May 2025 (UTC)

@Turnopoems - first off, thanks for engaging in a substantive discussion on the topic, it's what I was hoping for.

If you think that removing the tšom nnisim / šom nnisim claim is the only way to deal with the situation that would be within policy then I am aligned. My only concern is that this will be a recurring battle - many people do not seem to read the talk pages before making edits, so I expect this to come back on a frequent basis. At the same time, you will not get a scholarly source to refute this particular claim anytime soon, because, frankly: what should such a paper even look like and who would be motivated to write it? It is a weakness within Wikipedia that it is easier to get shoddy claims into an article than to get them out again. So, if eliminating the proposed Coptic etymology works for you, then let's do that.

As for the festival itself, you seem to misunderstand me. I did not call for "a single, comprehensive academic study that definitively traces the exact evolution of Sham Ennessim from antiquity to the present". Where did you get that from? I would just like to see anything that demonstrates that there was a festival within the claimed period (e.g. 2,500 BCE) that is sufficiently similar to be a direct ancestor. Is that too much to ask? Is that unreasonable?

Let's stay with your example of Christmas: Christmas celebrates the birth of Christ, takes place on 12/25 and in its current form it typically features a Christmas tree and presents. If you show me a festival in the 3rd century CE that celebrates the birth of Christ and is around December, I will accept that. If it moves by a month ... fine. If you have a pre-Christian festival say from 100 BCE that features a rebirth, some of the same elements and happens at around the same date: I think a claim could be made that Christmas likely continues that tradition. It is not proven yet ... e.g. Hanukkah is around Christmas and in its current form features lights and presents, but I don't think it is commonly claimed as Proto-Christmas - a naive contemporary observer (e.g. in the US where both festivals are observed side by side) could come to that conclusion if you do not actually trace back the traditions and just judge from general similarities.

I would expect there to have been a Spring festival in Egypt. But if you are making the claim that there is a direct line from a festival in 4,500 BC to Sham Ennessim, I would like some details about this festival - what specifically was similar? And how do you know? I have tried to find a reference to the salted fish and onions in Plutarch and Herodotus (since they are pretty descriptive) and was not successful. If you have a source text I am happy to check it out - I don't recall the Palermo stone going into such detail. If you have no ancient source that says on x festival y was eaten, how can you just come to the conclusion that this was the case and that there is a continuous custom on that particular festival? Germans generally like waffles - does that mean waffles are a traditional Christmas dish? They're not. I don't see Asante give any backup for the very specific claims he makes and I think it absolutely has to be expected - if you make very specific claims (like xyz festival was celebrated 4,500 years ago in x place) you should be able to present some specific evidence. I am not going to take it just on plausibility and neither should you.

Which brings me to the final, less pleasant part of this write-up: where exactly am I "selectively citing parts of the sources to present a narrative that is clearly not intended by the authors themselves, which would have been evident if you cited the full text"? That's a pretty strong allegation, so I would like to know what specifically you are referring to. More generally, I would also appreciate if you could drop the adversarial rhetoric of "blatant fail", "massive fail" and the barrage of WP:policy cites as if I was about to start an edit war with you. The fact that I am spending my time explaining my reasoning here should be evidence enough that this is unwarranted. For me, this is not about who prevails but about (A) determining if the sources are convincing - I would say they are not at all - and (B) how we can integrate this into the article in a way that works for Wikipedia. Let's keep this a good faith effort - thank you! MikuChan39 (talk) 00:21, 14 May 2025 (UTC)

First and foremost, I want to offer a sincere apology if my previous remarks came across as unduly adversarial. That was not my intent. I fully acknowledge that you are engaging in this discussion with genuine good faith, and I do not believe we are at cross-purposes when it comes to reaching a well-reasoned and constructive conclusion. To be clear, my objection was not an allegation directed at your conduct, which I regard as thoughtful and principled, but with the proposed phrasing in your proposed draft. Specifically, the line stating that “There is, however, insufficient evidence to confirm the festival's exact origins and evolution”. While the cited source indeed makes that cautionary note, it also, in the very same breath, posits a plausible link to ancient Egypt and Shemu. That omission subtly, but significantly, shifts the framing in a way clearly not intended by the author. I also want to clarify that my reference to the guidelines was not intended to criticize your approach, but simply to help align our discussion within the broader editorial framework. Again, I appreciate the constructive nature of your input.

Regarding the Coptic etymology, while it is inherently difficult to "future-proof" any particular formulation, it is worth noting that material susceptible to WP:OR scrutiny remains far more vulnerable to challenge than content grounded in an established consensus. Fortunately, the understanding we have reached here qualifies as precisely such a consensus. Should someone seek to revise this content in the future, they would need to challenge it through a new consensus process. Personally, I’ve long been skeptical of the Coptic etymology; the perfect phonetic and semantic alignment has always struck me as unusually convenient. Both names are curiously precise descriptors of the festival, which also raises legitimate questions about retrospective interpretation. To my mind, this perfect match is not something that a natural linguistic evolution across two languages would ascribe any substantive value, and some difference would be expected. I did come across an online discussion among people who appeared to possess a solid command of Coptic, and the consensus there seemed to be that the term in question was, for the most part, a modern fabrication that served to promote Coptic in a contemporary context. While such efforts are entirely valid for linguistic revival and cultural preservation, it does not justify its inclusion here, especially not with a historical framing.

Returning to the substance of the festival itself, I don’t find your caution unreasonable in principle, but in the absence of contrary evidence, and in the presence of a plethora of material that explicitly discuss probable continuity, such content is defensible. Academic caution is important, but even such caution should be grounded in a source, not assumed as default through our own interpretive effort.

As for lettuce and onion: lettuce was consumed during festivals, it was associated with the deity Min, a symbol of fertility in ancient Egypt, while onions were linked to Osiris and widely used in ritual contexts, including the Sokar festival for example. Herodotus does in fact note the consumption of preserved fish in Egypt, as referenced in Tallet, P. (2015). Food in ancient Egypt. A Companion to Food in the Ancient World, 319–325. That source explicitly ties the practice to modern-day fesikh. I don’t have a online link to that material for you, but here is the referenced passage from The Histories itself: https://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.01.0126%3Abook%3D2%3Achapter%3D77

It could be interesting having a section in this article talking about the ancient symbolism of these foods, what do you think? As a sidenote, it also mentions a fermented barley drink, very likely to be the predecessor of modern-day bouza, which I wrote the Wikipedia article about.

Anyway, I can make an attempt at drafting a somewhat more cautious assertion to reflect your sentiment, based on the two sources in the article. Hopefully you'll find it easier to reconcile with your stance. This would replace the opening paragraph of the history section.

The exact origin of the festival remains insufficiently documented; however, it is generally held that Sham Ennessim traces back to ancient Egypt. The modern name is likely derived from the harvest season, Šmw (Shemu), with the festival associated with early forms of springtime festivities dating back over 4,500 years. Turnopoems 𓋹 ✎ 11:50, 14 May 2025 (UTC)

@Turnopoems Let me pick that up tomorrow - long day today. I think we're getting close, though. MikuChan39 (talk) 04:39, 15 May 2025 (UTC)

Hi @Turnopoems, how would you feel about this:

The exact origin of the festival remains insufficiently documented; however, it is generally held that Sham Ennessim traces back to ancient Egypt. It has been proposed that the modern name is derived from the harvest season, Šmw (Shemu), and that the the festival itself is a continuation of early forms of springtime festivities dating back over 4,500 years.

If you feel that is too much interpretation let me know, but I think it elegantly side-steps the issue by straightforwardly reporting what others have said without taking an absolute stance on it (as in: Wikipedia 100% subscribes to this being true). This could be the opening sentence of the history section.

Thanks for the Greek food references - I had seen those, but you probably know what I am going to say: they don't specifically reference a spring festival. But breaking it into a separate food symbolism section (they way you have it now) is safe. Tallet looks like an interesting source, btw (found the relevant passages in Google Books). I am primarily a language guy - with a specialization on Late Egyptian - and fish deliveries, dried or fresh, are a surprisingly interesting topic.

Now that we have the food symbolism section, can we take this out? - During the spring festival, ancient Egyptians presented offerings of salted fish and other foods to their deities in alignment with the spring equinox. It's not impossible and I think this would be cool if there was a source that told us how they arrive at that conclusion, but in both Osman and Asante it just falls from the sky which makes me very uncomfortable considering how often I see sweeping claims of cultural continuity as a point of pride (in different cultures - the caricature of etymologies in the 'Big fat Greek wedding' comes to mind and boy, have I met many real life examples of this). While I agree that we shouldn't attempt to change what the sources say, it is up to the editor which claims seem relevant and safe enough to include in an encyclopedia article and then source appropriately. Or we could do it with attribution (so and so said ...), but do we even need it if there already is a food symbolism section? Let me know! MikuChan39 (talk) 03:30, 16 May 2025 (UTC)

Hey @MikuChan39,

In the interest of resolving the issue, I’d say your revisions are mostly fine, even though the qualifying language may not be strictly necessary per WP:DUE. I don't think it contradicts the author though, so it's okay.

Regarding the salted fish, I assumed you were asking more generally. Beyond Herodotus, it’s well established that the Egyptians practiced fish preservation, with the process even depicted in murals. There's also evidence of them exporting salted roe, what we now call batarekh, to other parts of the region.

As for the festival part of the claim, allegedly from Plutarch, it seems more likely to be a modern extrapolation from scattered fragments of information, maybe from De Iside et Osiride. But frankly, I haven’t been able to track down the primary source.

In any case, I was already envisioning the proposed draft replacing the entire introductory paragraph of that section, so if you're comfortable moving forward on that basis, so am I.

I’ve been knee-deep in a two-month-long dispute throughout multiple articles on Wikipedia, trying to temper narratives that mythologize ethnonationalist origins on the back of identitarian claims of this nature, rooted in racist colonial epistemology, so believe me, I understand exactly where you're coming from. Turnopoems 𓋹 ✎ 10:18, 16 May 2025 (UTC)

@Turnopoems, cool, I think we have what we need then - please go ahead. & thanks for the discussion! Agree, the intersection of identity politics and history / etymology is such a pain. BTW, it seems that you are Egyptian? - edit: answered my own question from your talk page :-D MikuChan39 (talk) 17:23, 16 May 2025 (UTC)

@MikuChan39: Glad we could reach a compromise, and thanks for the good dialogue. I am indeed Egyptian. :D Turnopoems 𓋹 ✎ 09:47, 17 May 2025 (UTC)