Sign in to follow this  
Taomeow

Sumer: the "black-headed" vs. the "red-faced"

Recommended Posts

The Sumerian creation myth, discovered on a tablet in Nippur, an ancient Mesopotamian city founded in approximately 5000 BC, begins like this:

 

When in the height heaven was not named, 
And the earth beneath did not yet bear a name, 
And the primeval Apsu, who begat them, 
And chaos, Tiamut, the mother of them both 
Their waters were mingled together, 
And no field was formed, no marsh was to be seen; 
When of the gods none had been called into being, 
And none bore a name, and no destinies were ordained; 
Then were created the gods in the midst of heaven...

 

Around 5400 BCE, settlers arriving from no one knows where, speaking a language that was a linguistic isolate (not related to any other known languages), which also happens to be the oldest known written language on earth, founded Eridu, a city in southern Mesopotamia (on the territory of present-day Iraq) which is generally regarded by today's historians to have been the world’s first city.  It didn't appear to gradually change from something primitively city-like to a full blown city -- on the contrary, from the get-go it had absolutely everything we associate with an ancient city:  temples, administrative buildings, housing, agriculture, markets, astronomy and mathematics and art, and, of course, walls.

 

The Sumerian people were also an ethnic isolate, and intermixed with other populations of the area only a couple thousand years later, after Akkadian conquests which ultimately created a "melting pot."  Sumerians and Akkadians, though they did continue to live in the same cities but in their own distinct communities, both referred to themselves as the sag gigga (“black-headed people”) and didn't have a concept of race, nor any prohibitions on intermarriage.  Which seems to have gradually become common enough to eventually erase all traces of Sumerian-proper DNA from the human genetic pool -- at least none can be clearly identified at present.

 

No one knows what they looked like either, since their surviving art is so eclectic and presented so many human and non-human versions of their self-portraits that it's of no help.  It is not known if the term sag gigga, "black-headed," refers to hair color at all, since they also had a term for the "uncivilized" peoples surrounding them that literally means "red-faced," much like what European settlers dubbed Native Americans, referring not so much to the actual skin color (which was never really "red") but to the -- well, everybody knows what.  "Black-headed" may have been a reference not to the appearance but, e.g., to the custom of wearing a hat (or some other head covering) for sun protection common in those who didn't live in a forest; while "red-faced" distinguished those who did still live in the forest, and therefore didn't need sun-protection contraptions.    All that is known (from multiple clay tablets with extensive accounts of everything under Sumerian sun) about the relationship between the black-headed and the red-faced is that the black-headed did not discriminate against other black-headed, i.e. they accepted anyone civilized as equal, and simultaneously hated, rejected, and relentlessly killed all "red-faced," "wild," non-civilized people around their cities.  The raids to exterminate the "uncivilized" were a regular and common feature of the civilized lifestyle of the area for thousands of years.

 

And so begins the thread aiming to tackle Sumer without any references to Sitchin and staying only with the "accepted" "orthodox" "mainstream" etc. sources  -- in an attempt to figure out if an overview of those "legitimized" sources might be sufficient to draw any non-legitimized conclusions about what the original creators of our present lifestyle were really up to -- before trying to jump to any conclusions regarding who they were.   

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Regarding the 'settlers arriving and  no one knows where they where from'  ;

 

The Sumerian civilisation emerged from the Ubaidian culture that had been living in the region for thousands of years, and was forced to adapt to climate change.

 

Some climate change refugees may have added to their numbers, perhaps bringing additional new ideas and concepts, though there's no direct evidence for this

 

Sumer  ; 

 4500 – c. 1900 BC
 
Ubaid ;
 

c. 6500 – c. 3800 BC

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ubaid_period

 

and before that ;

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samarra_culture

 

 

Various theories of origins, including Anatolia  ;

 

http://www.antropologia.uw.edu.pl/SHA/sha-04-07.pdf

 

There have been people going up those rivers for a LOOOOOG time ,  - since leaving Africa , they probably followed whatever shoreline there was depending on whether a sand bar  blocked the gulf  and river mouths ,then they may have gone up the Persian Gulf, the Red Sea,  Tigres / Euphrates , Indus or ended up in Australia .

 

979.jpg

 

 

 

But as I see,  it really is not about where they where from , but  ....

 

What they where  REALLY   ' up to'   ?

 

Hmmmmm ....

 

 

 

source.gif

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited by Nungali
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also I have a bit of a problem with this 'out of nowhere' idea .

 

It could also mean that origins have not been found yet, nor ever may be  *.   Its a fault of 'scientists' and 'professionals' they often write as if they know everything . 

 

Rarely a good one pops up and explains 'This is what has been found and indicates things ... SO FAR  . "

 

* many old civilisations and settlements would have been on shorelines, now far underwater, or on river deltas under heaps of sediment  and in some cases under cities and new settlements that cannot be dug up.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You are talking things that were decided upon in 1930 in order to package everything neatly.  Your other references are likewise concerned with theories and speculations, not decisive answers to the "unknowns" I mentioned.  Whereas I am talking Sumerian sources per se. 

 

No Sumerian source claims knowledge regarding any of the things I said are unknown about Sumerians -- not a shred that would even remotely coincide with anything those orthodoxies of ours say about them when interpreting them.  I want to go with what they actually say, and hypothesize what it might mean utilizing my own brain.  If you don't mind letting me.  I sort of want to speculate here, not to stand corrected.  

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Everything said:

Something like this?

 

No, the other way around.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Taomeow said:

You are talking things that were decided upon in 1930 in order to package everything neatly.  Your other references are likewise concerned with theories and speculations, not decisive answers to the "unknowns" I mentioned.  Whereas I am talking Sumerian sources per se. 

 

No Sumerian source claims knowledge regarding any of the things I said are unknown about Sumerians -- not a shred that would even remotely coincide with anything those orthodoxies of ours say about them when interpreting them.  I want to go with what they actually say, and hypothesize what it might mean utilizing my own brain.  If you don't mind letting me.  I sort of want to speculate here, not to stand corrected.  

 

But  . I thought you where going on ' "legitimized" sources to get to 'non-legitimized conclusions ' .

 

And ;  " and staying only with the "accepted" "orthodox" "mainstream" etc. sources   ". Which is why I offered the above info .

 

I'm confused   

 

Or, did  you mean   sources that only appear in the original Sumerian  literature that we have found ?

 

I was offering  "legitimized" sources '   from the 'accepted orthodox mainstream' that  show a continuation from  the Zargos foothills (early 'rain agriculture' )  down into the valley plains ('hydrology'  agriculture ) , driven by climate change  thru   Jamo , Hassana ,  ancient Samara and Halaf cultures to Urbaid , 7000 to 500 bc . evidenced in pottery , tools ,  architecture, etc .   particularly temple architecture

 

I also have a other papers (yes very recent ) that link them to  eastern Central Asia  and western Tibet with a surviving mythology in ancient Avestas .

 

Unless I got all the above wrong and what you want are only sources of  'accepted orthodox mainstream legitimate  from Sumerian writings themselves   ?

 

:huh:

 

 

But if you just want to speculate  and have some fun  ...... 

 

 

 

source.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
40 minutes ago, Nungali said:

But if you just want to speculate  and have some fun  ...... 

 

 

 

Central Asia and Western Tibet seem interesting.  Yes, if you drop a reference to those recent papers, I'll take a look, thank you.  The rest I sort of am not buying at all, but don't feel like going in depth into the reasons why. 

 

Yes, I originally meant "consecrated by academia" translations of original Sumerian texts when I said "legitimized" (i.e. as opposed to Sitchin's translations which I am familiar with but whose accuracy I have no linguistic capabilities to personally verify or refute, and whose story derived from those translations is very far from "legitimized" by mainstream.  Which in and of itself is not enough to make it true.  Or false for that matter.)  

 

Mostly, however, it's not about "what they were really up to" -- that seems to be pretty clear -- there's literally thousands of years' worth of writings that all tell the story of what they were after and that part is mostly a no-brainer.  It's about why it never changed once installed, and only spread wider and wider, in exactly the same pattern.  No, not even that.  How to demolish that pattern.  And one can even begin to hope to understand how to go about dismantling a pattern if the pattern is visible.  I don't think treating the effects ever cured anything whose cause persevered and remained unknown and unaffected by the treatment administered.  I usually seek to address the cause.    

 

Please feel free to have more fun now with more cartoons, but be informed that providing entertainment for you was not the main goal of the OP.   Just FYI.  

 

Edited by Taomeow
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is that quote in the OP from Gilgamesh?

 

Perhaps I can mention Gobekli Tepe - some kind of link to Anatolia?

 

Otherwise -good subject!  I wait patiently for more :)

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, Taomeow said:

 

 

Central Asia and Western Tibet seem interesting.  Yes, if you drop a reference to those recent papers, I'll take a look, thank you.  The rest I sort of am not buying at all, but don't feel like going in depth into the reasons why. 

 

 

 

giphy.gif

 

 

 

 

 

 

its to do with  what the ancient Avestas are hinting at regarding Airyana Vaeja and some  current research done on Lapis Lazuli, . something VERY important to the Sumerians, and its source in  ( present) Afghanistan  ( ie, they have identified lapis in Sumer as coming from there)  .  

 

I cleared my desktop of  it as I wasnt sure what you were meaning regarding  legitimate sources .....  I'll put it up later .

 

 

Quote

 

Yes, I originally meant "consecrated by academia" translations of original Sumerian texts when I said "legitimized" (i.e. as opposed to Sitchin's translations which I am familiar with but whose accuracy I have no linguistic capabilities to personally verify or refute, and whose story derived from those translations is very far from "legitimized" by mainstream.  Which in and of itself is not enough to make it true.  Or false for that matter.)  

 

Ah !  Legitimate sources  of the Sumerian texts .   Good not use Sitchen as he cant actually translate them.

 

But its about more what they where up to ?

 

Quote

 

Mostly, however, it's not about "what they were really up to" -- that seems to be pretty clear -- there's literally thousands of years' worth of writings that all tell the story of what they were after and that part is mostly a no-brainer.  It's about why it never changed once installed, and only spread wider and wider, in exactly the same pattern. 

 

Oh, okay not that, why they never changed . 

 

Ummmm .... okay.

 

 

Quote

No, not even that.  How to demolish that pattern. 

 

Oh .  okay  ( Damn she moves quick !  :D )

 

 

Quote

 

And one can even begin to hope to understand how to go about dismantling a pattern if the pattern is visible.  I don't think treating the effects ever cured anything whose cause persevered and remained unknown and unaffected by the treatment administered.  I usually seek to address the cause.    

 

You write very cryptically .

 

I am going to take a guess at what you mean about all this pattern and demolishing and   curing.

 

Is it about the beginnings of   '  oppression '     ( the black hats against the red faces  ? )  , about how we 'changed'  ( eg, archaeologically, from open settlements to fortified settlements, from an 'Old Europe'  a la Marija Gimbutas   -  egalitarian, matriarchal, co-operative etc .   to patriarchal 'warlord' culture   .....  and still continue that pattern ever since  ?

 

 I am actually fascinated by that topic .... if that;s  the topic .   I'll enjoy reading anything on that

 

 

Quote

 

Please feel free to have more fun now with more cartoons, but be informed that providing entertainment for you was not the main goal of the OP.   Just FYI.  

 

 

 

Oooow ... I was just about to post the coke and popcorn gif !     As , inadvertently or not, such a thread would be very entertaining for me  .

 

- I know, ! I will go back and post a cartoon at the beginning of this post  (  ... I like feeling free   :) )

 

 

(  Edit:  In case some dont know what I am talking about ;    

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Old_Europe_(archaeology)   )

 

 

.

Edited by Nungali
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, Apech said:

Is that quote in the OP from Gilgamesh?

 

Perhaps I can mention Gobekli Tepe - some kind of link to Anatolia?

 

Otherwise -good subject!  I wait patiently for more :)

 

I don't remember it in Gilgamesh, but then, there's different translations, so who knows.  At first glance I noticed some things in common with Laozi's opening lines.  :)  

 

Yes, do tell me about Gobekli Tepe, I honestly don't know what to make of it.  Saw a couple of extended accounts on Youtube from Russian archeologists working there.  They came away believing it was either from a civilization unknown that went before everything we know, or else a civilization unknown that was from elsewhere.  Much about the stones cut in a way our modern technology can't come close to replicating -- some unimaginable precision.  Been a while since I watched though.

  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, Taomeow said:

 

I don't remember it in Gilgamesh, but then, there's different translations, so who knows.  At first glance I noticed some things in common with Laozi's opening lines.  :)  

 

Yes, do tell me about Gobekli Tepe, I honestly don't know what to make of it.  Saw a couple of extended accounts on Youtube from Russian archeologists working there.  They came away believing it was either from a civilization unknown that went before everything we know, or else a civilization unknown that was from elsewhere.  Much about the stones cut in a way our modern technology can't come close to replicating -- some unimaginable precision.  Been a while since I watched though.

  

 

 Its the Enuma Elish - I looked it up.  Mesopotamia is not my strong subject so can't comment too much except some similarity to Egyptian myth especially primaeval watery chaos.

 

As to Gobekli Tepe this is much earlier and somewhat of an anomaly with its megalithic structures and stone carvings which some (like Sweatman) speculate are astronomical records of the Younger Dryas impact - this may be so or not but certainly these structures pre-date anything we know as 'civilization'.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Apech said:

 

 Its the Enuma Elish - I looked it up.  Mesopotamia is not my strong subject so can't comment too much except some similarity to Egyptian myth especially primaeval watery chaos.

 

As to Gobekli Tepe this is much earlier and somewhat of an anomaly with its megalithic structures and stone carvings which some (like Sweatman) speculate are astronomical records of the Younger Dryas impact - this may be so or not but certainly these structures pre-date anything we know as 'civilization'.

 

Thanks.  Yes, definitely, Gobekli Tepe is a separate can of worms which for the moment I'm not ready to open. :)  Mesopotamia is my relatively new suit, so whether it might grow strong with time remains to be seen.  For now, I'm trying to put together assorted pieces of the puzzle but at this point, a lot of the puzzle is, well, puzzling.  

 

Moving on.

 

The Code of Hammurabi, consisting of 282 legal demands written in the form of "if... then" (which our "wherefore...  therefore" of modern legalese still imitates), in cuneiform carvings into a monolithic 4-ton black stele shaped as a finger ("carved in stone"), used to be publicized as the first code of written laws in history, but later other Sumerian legal codes were discovered, ones that predate it by hundreds of years and in their turn may not be the earliest ones.  The U.S. Supreme Court building features Hammurabi on the marble carving on the south wall of the courtroom that celebrates outstanding lawgivers of history.  

 

Hammurabi was what one might call an imperial expansionist ruler, dedicating his long reign to wars aimed at land grabs, overthrowing the kingdoms of Assyria, Larsa, Eshunna and Mari and subjugating all of Mesopotamia toward the end.  The slaves were promptly put to work on grandiose military and civil projects -- irrigation (we'll look into the origins of "climate change" in the area closer at some point), fortifications, and of course construction of numerous temples dedicated to his patron dragon deity, Marduk.  

 

It is interesting to compare this code, which seems to be demanding harsh punishments for the wrongdoers for the first time in written records, often including the removal of various body parts (tongue, ears, arms, eyes) with the earlier codes -- Ur-Nammu,  Eshnunna, Lipit-Ishtar.  I read the Lipit-Ishtar code and it's like something the IRS might issue, all punishments appear to be financial, it's not yet as bloodthirsty (at least the parts surviving) as what was to come.  It is also formulated in the "if... then" fashion, and asks for higher payments for harming the aristocracy, medium sized fines for the freemen (the middle class), a token payment to a slave who has been harmed by a doctor,  and monetary compensation for the owner of a damaged slave or ox.  Slaves' rights are also defined to some extent and circumstances under which the person became a slave considered.  E.g., if he is a voluntary slave who came to work for the master because there was no other way for him to survive, the master is supposed to let him go if the slave so desires later.  A slave is also allowed to buy his freedom, and it costs only twice as much as the master paid for him.  Idyllic times...   In a hundred years, physical pain and suffering will be seen as necessary payment for deviations from the king's law more and more -- of course without replacing monetary punishments.  

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

The piece on Lapis and  origins

 

The Origin of Sumerians  by Metin Gunduz

 

 

ABSTRACT
Who were the Sumerians? Where did they originate? For those who are not familiar with this remarkable, resourceful and intelligent people, who not only invented writing but also established the true mythological foundations of all main religions of the world, simply put, they taught us almost everything. Four different points regarding the current known archeological evidence are evaluated separately, and the Sumerians’ unique and strongly sacred mythological beliefs related to the lapis lazuli stone and the myth’s origin are analyzed. The uniqueness of the lapis mine location in the Hindu Kush Mountains and the unique (fingerprint) trace element and other physical characteristics of this metamorphic sacred blue stone of the Sumerians are the primary points of focus. The only possible and provable location of their original homeland, “based on the analysis” is; between the Caspian Sea and the Hindu Kush and Kopet Mountains, which is in Turkmenistan. This analysis and conclusion are based on “multiple independent factors”: current archeological excavations, the uniqueness of metamorphic lapis lazuli as a stone and over 6000 years of lapis lazuli mining at a fixed location (absolutely necessary requirements for the origin of strong lapis mythology) and current credible biogeographic DNA evidence and the distribution of R1b haplogroup of “Arbins”, as recently described by Dr. Anatole A. Klyosov. The Sumerians initial migration presumably began with a persistent drought in their original homeland, that eventually forced them to abandon their home migrate and resettle in the southern fertile lands of the Middle East between the Tigris and Euphrates Rivers and eventually further south near the banks of Nile River in north east Africa.
 
The source on Avestan  locations of Airyana Vaeja  and the Kalachakra tradition
 
 
 
 
 
shambhala.jpg
 
 
 
PamirBoundaries.jpg

 

 

 

I have  more info linking them together ..... but this might not be the  beast you are hunting down . 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Apech said:

 

 Its the Enuma Elish - I looked it up.  Mesopotamia is not my strong subject so can't comment too much except some similarity to Egyptian myth especially primaeval watery chaos.

 

As to Gobekli Tepe this is much earlier and somewhat of an anomaly with its megalithic structures and stone carvings which some (like Sweatman) speculate are astronomical records of the Younger Dryas impact - this may be so or not but certainly these structures pre-date anything we know as 'civilization'.

 

 

Its an anomaly  compared  to what we thought we knew   (again, they left the ' know so far' clause out )   but not an anomaly for the time and place . ie. many similar sites around the area

 

 

Captdxfdgfgjhkjlkure-1.jpg?resize=851,55

 

 

 

This looks interesting , G.T. as a centre for 'conflict mitigation'  ;

 

https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/violence-and-the-sacred-in-the-ancient-near-east/ritual-practices-and-conflict-mitigation-at-early-neolithic-kortik-tepe-and-gobekli-tepe-upper-mesopotamia/7D89ABA0D934E5E5616D1552466AAFC4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Taomeow said:

 

Thanks.  Yes, definitely, Gobekli Tepe is a separate can of worms which for the moment I'm not ready to open. :)  Mesopotamia is my relatively new suit, so whether it might grow strong with time remains to be seen.  For now, I'm trying to put together assorted pieces of the puzzle but at this point, a lot of the puzzle is, well, puzzling.  

 

Moving on.

 

The Code of Hammurabi, consisting of 282 legal demands written in the form of "if... then" (which our "wherefore...  therefore" of modern legalese still imitates), in cuneiform carvings into a monolithic 4-ton black stele shaped as a finger ("carved in stone"), used to be publicized as the first code of written laws in history, but later other Sumerian legal codes were discovered, ones that predate it by hundreds of years and in their turn may not be the earliest ones.  The U.S. Supreme Court building features Hammurabi on the marble carving on the south wall of the courtroom that celebrates outstanding lawgivers of history.  

 

Hammurabi was what one might call an imperial expansionist ruler, dedicating his long reign to wars aimed at land grabs, overthrowing the kingdoms of Assyria, Larsa, Eshunna and Mari and subjugating all of Mesopotamia toward the end.  The slaves were promptly put to work on grandiose military and civil projects -- irrigation (we'll look into the origins of "climate change" in the area closer at some point), fortifications, and of course construction of numerous temples dedicated to his patron dragon deity, Marduk.  

 

It is interesting to compare this code, which seems to be demanding harsh punishments for the wrongdoers for the first time in written records, often including the removal of various body parts (tongue, ears, arms, eyes) with the earlier codes -- Ur-Nammu,  Eshnunna, Lipit-Ishtar.  I read the Lipit-Ishtar code and it's like something the IRS might issue, all punishments appear to be financial, it's not yet as bloodthirsty (at least the parts surviving) as what was to come.  It is also formulated in the "if... then" fashion, and asks for higher payments for harming the aristocracy, medium sized fines for the freemen (the middle class), a token payment to a slave who has been harmed by a doctor,  and monetary compensation for the owner of a damaged slave or ox.  Slaves' rights are also defined to some extent and circumstances under which the person became a slave considered.  E.g., if he is a voluntary slave who came to work for the master because there was no other way for him to survive, the master is supposed to let him go if the slave so desires later.  A slave is also allowed to buy his freedom, and it costs only twice as much as the master paid for him.  Idyllic times...   In a hundred years, physical pain and suffering will be seen as necessary payment for deviations from the king's law more and more -- of course without replacing monetary punishments.  

 

 

Yes, you high lighted an aspect people usually gloss over , that law code was different (in punishment for the same crime) for the different classes of society , somewhat 'setting a trend' .   Later people that where 'more enlightened'  ,  'fixed it up '  ;

 

The Law applies equally to all men !  Lets make a constitution  !

 

... Hey !    This doesnt apply to black people ! 

 

.... Ummm , we said all   Men , they dont count .

 

What about the women ? 

 

No,  they dont count either , they aren't men .

 

< sigh >  ... its been a long struggle .

 

 

 

Interesting point about earlier law codes ;   if there is a connection between earlier times and their memories recorded in the early  Avestas, this was displayed in those people's concept of ' Good Kingship '  ..... some genius came up with the idea that if you treat people better and fairer and allow them to express their culture and help them establish it ( like building them temples and supporting their religion  and granting them certain freedoms  and rights , then the society might work better , be more peaceful and everyone might enjoy life more .  ( They where also the first people to make laws  for the protection of and better treatment of animals - also had a higher level of sexual equality ,  in latter times  they even had a  women admiral commanding a  fleet  )

 

http://www.heritageinstitute.com/zoroastrianism/aryans/prehistory.htm#epiccycle

 

Radical !   (for those times )

 

Look at the difference between  Nebuchadnezzar  (essentially an Assyrian)  and  Cyrus  (essentially a Persian )  !

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
42 minutes ago, Nungali said:

 

The source on Avestan  locations of Airyana Vaeja  and the Kalachakra tradition
 
 
 
 

 

 

Thank you.  I read a bit of it, then went searching for the information on the author -- someone named K.E. Elujee.  Couldn't quite figure out what his claim to fame might be.  He is a Zoroastrain/Aryan theories proponent, this much is clear, the rest, not really.  The illustration does resemble the Four Corners of the World that can be encountered in Sumerian and pretty much all other early traditions (of course in taoism too), except Sumerian originals quite clearly indicate totally different locations for their domain without mentioning any "earlier" ones.  To wit, Akkad,  Elam, Amurru and Subatru, corresponding to the four compass directions, and Larsa in the center.  These are further subdivided into northeast, northwest etc., eight directions like in the taoist bagua.  And, just like with the bagua, they are way more than merely geographical locations and refer to "winds" of particular nature (closely resembling qi of different phases in the taoist bagua), corresponding deities, and are utilized in a long tradition of geomantic divination (with similarities to feng shui), what not.  I'm guessing the author just recognizes in Sumer some of what he's better familiar with from his own area of interest -- just like I spot taoist tidbits or even huge chunks when I look at any ancient tradition.   

 

Also, there's a lot of nationalist sentiment that got interwoven with all those studies (which is one reason, out of many, I mostly only want to look at the original documents and bypass what "experts" have been trying to shape, each to his or her liking or to the liking of a mothership institution).  I've read Tajik, Uzbek, Kyrgyz and so on articles, each proving that Sumerians really spoke Tajik, Uzbek or Kyrgyz, and that they are direct descendants who taught everybody everything.  Which may be true or false but can't all be true simultaneously methinks.  Also, in the ongoing Russia-Ukraine conflict, a lot of "proof" has been produced recently by the Ukrainian side aimed at delegitimizing "Russians" as a nation, ethnicity, or anything other than an evil fantasy of (usually) Finno-Ugric origins, while stating that everything that ever happened in that part of the world was accomplished by Ancient Ukrainians who were the true Sumerians.  So...  meh...          

Edited by Taomeow
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow ! You threw a lot together there, very quickly .

 

The Sumerian 'systems' and the 'Avestan systems'  seemed 'at odds' with each other .  They seemed to not know of each other (at certain times in history   eg, the 'nations' listed in Vendidad do not seem to indicate Sumer ) .   These 'nations'  ( trade or culturally connected groups )  seemed to have spanned from the Pamir Mts, through the southern oasis route of Central Asia, through the Zargos and into Anatolia, 'avoiding' the Tigres and Euphrates   lower regions  and plains .  Eventually they coalesced  to the east as 'Persia'  and attacked (back) the Assyrians .

 

One group held the lower part of the rivers and associated territory and the other the upper  parts  - there must have been SOME interaction where territory abutted on the rivers ?

 

Language studies  of Tajik and in Pamir region is very interesting and has similarities with others far afield .

 

-----

 

Funny you should mention Ukraine   I was thinking this while  writing about the  'Old Europe'  above ^ .  The 'Old European'  'egalitarians'  had HUGE settlements around Ukraine ( 'The Burnt House Horizon'  ) .....  huge !

 

Then the 'Indo Europeans' ( warlords)  came in and changed the face and ways of Europe .  If you trace them back, thru Central Asia, they came in  from the north through Kazakhstan  and from a belt across the top of that from east to west ('over' Mongolia ') ... essentially today's Russia .

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Everyone's origins are obscure.  There was no "Italy" the country until 1861, no "Germany" the country until 1871, and no "Ukraine" the country until 1991.  (Which really gives me pause when 23AndMe tells someone they are "67% Italian" or "13% German" or what have you.)  Imperial consolidations and break-ups have little to do with genetics.  There's more genetic diversity among descendants of various African tribes than in the rest of the world combined. 

 

So stating that the origins of Sumerians are "unknown," only more so than the origins of others, is nothing if not stating the obvious.  Who are the "gypsies" by the way -- "Egyptians?"  Why do Cherokees have blood type B occurring with the same frequency as it does in the Middle East -- twice as often as among Europeans -- while nearly 100% of all other Native Americans are type O?  Why do Basques have almost 100% type O blood and all their European neighbors only around 50%?  Why do I surprise dentists who consistently discover that they need to use the "Asian angle" on the machine when taking an X-ray of my back teeth even though I don't look Asian?  There's more things in heaven and earth, Horatio...          

Edited by Taomeow
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Taomeow said:

Everyone's origins are obscure.  There was no "Italy" the country until 1961, no "Germany" the country until 1871, and no "Ukraine" the country until 1991.  (Which really gives me pause when 23AndMe tells someone they are "67% Italian" or "13% German" or what have you.)  Imperial consolidations and break-ups have little to do with genetics.  There's more genetic diversity among descendants of various African tribes than in the rest of the world combined. 

 

So stating that the origins of Sumerians are "unknown," only more so than the origins of others, is nothing if not stating the obvious.  Who are the "gypsies" by the way -- "Egyptians?"  Why do Cherokees have blood type B occurring with the same frequency as it does in the Middle East -- twice as often as among Europeans -- while nearly 100% of all other Native Americans are type O?  Why do Basques have almost 100% type O blood and all their European neighbors only around 50%?  Why do I surprise dentists who consistently discover that they need to use the "Asian angle" on the machine when taking an X-ray of my back teeth even though I don't look Asian?  There's more things in heaven and earth, Horatio...          

 

Good points.  And I am fairly sure that 23Andme and Ancestry.com are a bit of a con.  However geneticists have been able to map Europe and there is some correlation between geographic area and genetic heritage but not as you point out political entities or nations as such.

 

genetic-map-europe-4.jpg

 

All European based people are of course hybrids with Neanderthals and most Asian people with Denisovians - so who any of us were 'originally' is an obscure question.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
16 hours ago, Nungali said:

 

 

Its an anomaly  compared  to what we thought we knew   (again, they left the ' know so far' clause out )   but not an anomaly for the time and place . ie. many similar sites around the area

 

 

Captdxfdgfgjhkjlkure-1.jpg?resize=851,55

 

 

 

This looks interesting , G.T. as a centre for 'conflict mitigation'  ;

 

https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/violence-and-the-sacred-in-the-ancient-near-east/ritual-practices-and-conflict-mitigation-at-early-neolithic-kortik-tepe-and-gobekli-tepe-upper-mesopotamia/7D89ABA0D934E5E5616D1552466AAFC4

 

in case anyone wants to read that link:

 

https://sci-hub.tw/10.1017/9781108567626.006

pdf

 

So the argument here is fascinating. I cite in my 2012 free book the detailed archaeological evidence for the first ecological crisis in Western Asia - from limestone "water proofing" of houses - made by deforestation, that then caused drought. Forcing the first white people to flee into Europe as ecological refugees - the white skin created by lack of vitamin D in the wheat monocultural farm diet.

 

This pdf is arguing that those T huge limestone megaliths are the indication of an anthropocentric religion of ritual sacrifice developed.

 

 

Edited by voidisyinyang

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 13.8.2019 at 10:43 AM, Apech said:

 

 Its the Enuma Elish - I looked it up.  Mesopotamia is not my strong subject so can't comment too much except some similarity to Egyptian myth especially primaeval watery chaos.

 

As to Gobekli Tepe this is much earlier and somewhat of an anomaly with its megalithic structures and stone carvings which some (like Sweatman) speculate are astronomical records of the Younger Dryas impact - this may be so or not but certainly these structures pre-date anything we know as 'civilization'.

 

What I find particularly intriguing is that (as per Sweatman's book) the signs of the zodiac were already being depicted on pillars found in Göbekli Tepe.

 

Those same zodiacal signs (for the most part) that have so far been considered an invention of the Sumerians.

 

The issue is that in 4450 BC a new world age started and things get hazy when we try to look back further than that.

 

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Apech said:

 

Good points.  And I am fairly sure that 23Andme and Ancestry.com are a bit of a con.  However geneticists have been able to map Europe and there is some correlation between geographic area and genetic heritage but not as you point out political entities or nations as such.

 

genetic-map-europe-4.jpg

 

All European based people are of course hybrids with Neanderthals and most Asian people with Denisovians - so who any of us were 'originally' is an obscure question.

 

(BTW, I corrected my typo "1961" for Italy to "1861."  I wonder how much of our understanding of history of the ancient times is the outcome of typos -- or should I say scribos or carvos.)  

 

Yes, much (but not all) can be gleaned from circumstantial evidence coming from multiple sources -- but one has to integrate it -- and the bigger the picture, the less important it becomes to see the individual trees, the more important to see the forest (or its absence.)  The tendencies and traits that persevere.  I have learned to never draw any conclusions from any one source of information that's not first hand,  nor from any multiple sources that are just repeating the repeaters of this or that consecrated, sanctimonious, institutionalized (and often either unknown or hiding behind a facade meant to be known so as to obscure what's behind it) source, all saying the same thing over and over again until the issue seems like yet another cozy case of "multiple sources agree."  Whereas they may well all be traceable to each other like a set of mirrors placed to face each other, and the reality which is not one of those mirrors may be just one hand that installed them all. Finding that hand usually  answers many questions, but it's a hidden hand.  And the mirrors all proclaim in unison it's not there.

 

  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, Taomeow said:

Everyone's origins are obscure.  There was no "Italy" the country until 1861, no "Germany" the country until 1871, and no "Ukraine" the country until 1991.  (Which really gives me pause when 23AndMe tells someone they are "67% Italian" or "13% German" or what have you.)  Imperial consolidations and break-ups have little to do with genetics.  There's more genetic diversity among descendants of various African tribes than in the rest of the world combined. 

 

So stating that the origins of Sumerians are "unknown," only more so than the origins of others, is nothing if not stating the obvious.  Who are the "gypsies" by the way -- "Egyptians?"  Why do Cherokees have blood type B occurring with the same frequency as it does in the Middle East -- twice as often as among Europeans -- while nearly 100% of all other Native Americans are type O?  Why do Basques have almost 100% type O blood and all their European neighbors only around 50%?  Why do I surprise dentists who consistently discover that they need to use the "Asian angle" on the machine when taking an X-ray of my back teeth even though I don't look Asian?  There's more things in heaven and earth, Horatio...          

 

Indeed !   I dont have 'Spanish' genes   but ' Galitian' ones    ( Celtic people that lived  in he NW area of what is now Spain )   ;)

 

No point getting tested for Aboriginal genes as they dont have the genome down and on record for any testing companies that offer it  - which leads to a lot of confusion  ( Aboriginal women go  for the testing and it comes back no aboriginal genes  as there are non on record to match it too )

 

 

 

remember this ?     

 

anish

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Apech said:

 

Good points.  And I am fairly sure that 23Andme and Ancestry.com are a bit of a con.  However geneticists have been able to map Europe and there is some correlation between geographic area and genetic heritage but not as you point out political entities or nations as such.

 

genetic-map-europe-4.jpg

 

 

Its a huge Issue for  .....   :D  now I  dont  know what to say  ... ah hell  - Its a huge issue for Indians .  In discussions on  ancient settlement patterns in the  sub-continent   ( see what I did there  :)  ) there is HUGE controversy and they often talk about a real or true Indian or an inport or invader or migrator or  'Aryan invasion / migration Theory or out of India theory or .....

 

argue a lot about what an Indian is .

 

I keep tellin them !   Its a person that has an Indian passport  or is considered an Indian national .

 

 

13 hours ago, Apech said:

 

All European based people are of course hybrids with Neanderthals and most Asian people with Denisovians - so who any of us were 'originally' is an obscure question.

 

 

 

These guys ;

 

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this