...I've seen the same empty black box awaiting my green text. ;-)

Jesus IS not Christianity. He would be the first to disavow to the blend of paganism, Judaism tacked onto his dissertations by those that followed and made a religion out of his sermons.

I separate personalities from the religions that may use them.

Buddha would never have endorsed 'Buddhism'. Jesus was trying to tear down religious conformity and were he alive today he would take no part in Christianity. Moses was a skillful exploiter who knew about the tides, frogs, plagues and the mosquito season. He knew exactly what he was doing when he went up the mountain to return with commandments. He already understood symbolism. He knew his group was falliing apart and to maintain control he needed a new message. To insure it stuck in the folks head it didn't hurt pouring molten gold down the disbelievers throats.

Mohammed first thought he was insane, but after being comforted by his exploitive wife who surely got in touch with the Hanifs, it's a safe bet that after that he surely believed his own rants, but being illiterate, his status as a 'prophet' was exploited by those whose literacy could coarsely compile together, the bits and pieces to create the Koran. As for Mohammed's mental state - I have to take what data various historians describe at face value. But I think it's safe to say that the ban on images depicting Mohammed might very well be because he was a scary looking madman whose appearance might turn lots of folks away from believing his seizure induced sermons. By dehumanizing him, it made him seem more noble more fitting of a "prophet".

As for Shamanism, the Triad of NA, etcetera as the first form of religion in Babylon, the most recent reference I have available is in the Encyclopaedia Britannica from 1900 - the New Werner Edition in a very comprehensive article on Babylon. They, in turn, reference a number of French and English texts on the subject and these older works clearly derive much data from Berossus, a Babylonian priest from circa 250 BC. He is probably a pretty good original source, since he had no reason or inclination to accomodate other faiths or sensitivities.

Unfortunately, his original history of Babylon is only known through other authors and you can bet that early books translating Berossus' history of Babylon and its religion were quickly burned, destroyed or "lost" during the following centuries.

Such is the curse of history, the aging of paper and the accidental and intentional loss of old knowledge.

I have no doubt that ancient Babylon as a trading center attracted folks with vastly varying beliefs. The agrarian peoples who might travel to sell their crops can be expected to have held different beliefs than those who lived in the early cities. Much like today, the urban centers do not embrace religion the same as do folks in remote regions.