Sumer

KADİM SIRLAR, YENİ ANLAMLAR
• Tanrıların sayıları kutsal isimlerdeki gizli anlamların şifresini çözen ipuçları mıdır? • Sümerlerin günümüze kadar ulaşan gelişmiş genetik bilgi anlayışı hakkında ne biliyoruz? • Kitabı Mukaddes'in peygamberleri geleceği nasıl önceden bildirebilmişlerdi? • Kutsal Tapınaktaki platformu, Baalbek'teki İniş Yerini ve Gize' deki büyük piramitlerin altında uzanan platformu ustalıkla inşa edenler kimlerdi?

Uruk, Auruk or Warka was an ancient city of Sumer (and later of Babylonia) situated east of the present bed of the Euphrates River on the dried-up ancient channel of the Euphrates 30 km (19 mi) east of modern Samawah, Al-Muthannā, Iraq.

Uruk is the type site for the Uruk period. Uruk played a leading role in the early urbanization of Sumer in the mid-4th millennium BC. By the final phase of the Uruk period around 3100 BCE, the city may have had 40,000 residents, with 80,000-90,000 people living in its environs, making it the largest urban area in the world at the time. The legendary king Gilgamesh, according to the chronology presented in the Sumerian king list, ruled Uruk in the 27th century BC. The city lost its prime importance around 2000 BC in the context of the struggle of Babylonia against Elam, but it remained inhabited throughout the Seleucid (312–63 BC) and Parthian (227 BC to 224 AD) periods until it was finally abandoned shortly before or after the Islamic conquest of 633–638.

William Kennett Loftus visited the site of Uruk in 1849, identifying it as "Erech", known as "the second city of Nimrod", and led the first excavations from 1850 to 1854.

The Arabic name of Babylonia, which eventually became the name of the present-day country, al-ʿIrāq, is thought to derive from the name Uruk via Aramaic (Erech) and possibly via Middle Persian (Erāq) transmission.
In Sumerian, the word uru could mean "city, town, village, district, circular area"

The present contribution is devoted to the analysis of a fragment of a potter's wheel, made of baked clay, discovered at Abu Tbeirah during the survey of winter 2012. The focus of the discussion will be the surface treatment of the fragment, specifically the series of regularly-spaced perforations arranged in concentric bands, which offers clues to the actions and choices made by the Sumerian potter.

Chapter 1 of Ancient History Refined shows evidence for the first global empire, the Sargon (Nimrod) Dynasty, in all the king's lists of the first nations/cultures established after the flood. Naramin-sin is a key anchor point for this dynasty as he was the son of King Minos and had essentially the same name and caricature in Sumer, Assyria, Egypt, India, & Greece, portraying himself as a bull in each culture (the Minotaur, Bull of Minos, the Bull of Heaven).

ABSTRACT: This documentary (no. 3) contains mainly a series of hypothetical and chronological reenactments, following a few (fictional) family lineages across centuries and millennia, from early hunter-gatherers ca. 12,000 BP (10,000 BCE) to early sedentary hunter-gatherer folks ca. 9,000 BP (7,000 BCE), tribal societies and chiefdoms (a bit later in the sequence), and early cities ca. 5,500+ BP (3,500 BCE in the documentary: Uruk phase in Mesopotamia). The question sheet aids in furnishing a summary of the documentary's coverage and sequence of specific topics. The reenactments are interwoven with narrative and accompanied by selected interviews with and commentaries by a number of specialists (e.g., Bar-Yosef; George Willcox; Jean Guilaine; Yves Coppens; Ian Hodder; Jean Denis Vigne; Philippe Andrieux; Jean Marie Durand), aiding in following a sequence of archaeological data, theories, and broader extrapolations (and sometimes less convincing scenarios) regarding the rise of agriculture and animal husbandry, the emergence of urban societies, and various other key innovations (e.g., metal working; writing).  The documentary is a fairly decent visualization, albeit a major condensation and simplification (with a few technical errors in the narration/film: e.g., chronological misplacement of a chariot scene [presumably drawing upon the much later Ur III wagon depictions, or maybe even 4th millennium BCE+ European carts and wagons]), of the complex mechanisms and processes of change from the Neolithic through rise of early urban societies in the Ancient Near East (Despite some reservations, I'm using it in an introductory, college level survey of the Ancient Near East).

ABSTRACT: This documentary response sheet contains 50 sequential questions drawn from the TimeLife documentary, "Mesopotamia: Return to Eden" (episode 1 in the TimeLife series on Lost Civilizations, 1995), and a reflection question at the end.  The question sheet aids in furnishing a summary of the documentary's coverage and sequence of specific topics. The documentary is a little dated, but it does provide an overview of some early exploration, excavation, discoveries (e.g., Leonard Woolley and Ur), and other issues relating to the emergence of Near Eastern Archaeology and some questions and topics of interest to a broad audience (e.g., Eden; Flood Story and Epic of Gilgamesh; Tower of Babel; Hammurabi's Law Code; Moabite Stone; Assyrian siege of Lachish; Dead Sea Scrolls). It looks at Neo-Babylonia, the fall of Jerusalem and Exilic period (586+ BC), the compilation of biblical texts in Babylon, the Assyrians, the Sumerians, and the postulated location of "Eden" (perhaps fitting ancient Dilmun). For a more thorough treatment on this, see Susan Pollock, 1999. Ancient Mesopotamia: The Eden that Never Was. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. YouTube link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6tGyQqfXoSw

The inhabitants of (southern) Mesopotamia are sometimes referred to as the “black-headed people” (saĝ-ge6) in Sumerian texts. This term came to be used also in Akkadian texts (translated as ṣalmāt qaqqadi), including in Neo-Assyrian texts, much distant in time and place from ancient Sumer. This paper seeks to describe how the term is used in Neo-Assyrian rhetorical and mundane texts; how frequent it is, what it means, and what variations there are (and how these can be explained). With the aid of  various database searches and book surveys, 48 attestations were collected. These derive from the Middle Assyrian (3) and Late Neo-Assyrian (or Sargonid) (45) periods, and focus on how the black-headed are positioned in relation to the kings and the deities. The imagery of the black-headed as (shep)herded was found to be the most important one. As for variations in terms of frequency and meaning, while time period and ruler turned out to be explanatory factors, the same can not be said of provenance, genre, and subject matter. The texts in which the attestations appear are most often not (southern) building inscriptions and they are not very often from or about southern Mesopotamia.

At the end of the 24th century, c.2300±30 bce, Sargon of Akkade (2324–2285±30 bce) defeated Lugalzagesi, king of Uruk, unified the whole of Babylonia proper in a single territorial state, and laid the foundation of the Akkadian Empire. Sargon, his sons Rimush and Manishtushu, and his grandson Naramsuen led their armies as far as the Mediterranean in the west, reached the springs of Euphrates and Tigris in the north, and campaigned as far as highland Iran in the east and the Arabian Gulf in the south, dominating the political landscape of Mesopotamia for more than a century (2300–2181±30 bce). Under Sharkalisharri, westerners and Guteans penetrated the empire, provinces defected, and Akkade was reduced to a petty state. After a short period of confusion, Dudu and Shudurul (2177–2142±30 bce) presided over an Akkadian resurgence, but the Guteans successively conquered central and northern Babylonia and thus eliminated Akkade from the political stage.

Представлена детальная реконструкция систем мер длины, применявшихся на территории Древней Месопотамии до завоевания ее персами.
(There is detailed reconstruction of the systems of measures of length used on the territory of ancient Mesopotamia until its conquest by the Persians.)
(Das ist detaillierte Rekonstruktion der Systemen der Maßen der Länge, der  auf dem Gebiet des Alten Mesopotamien bis zur Eroberung durch die Perser  verwendet.)

Although pictographic writing was developed in the Climactic Phase of Old Europe between 5300-4300 BCE and equaled a script of its own kind (COG: 319), another or later form of writing was invented in Sumer, or southern Iraq, in the 4th mil. with the earliest literary documents c. 3100 BCE. (POTW: 22.) In addition to these documents, the Enuma Elish (When on High) was the first completed Sumerian text of mythology found in the Nineveh library, c. 668-626 BCE, providing “the earliest evidence of the complete inversion of the mythology of the earlier era.” (MG: 275.)

ABSTRACT: This lecture begins with an overview of the Jemdet Nasr period (ca. 3,100 – 2,900 BCE), looking at trends, the emergence of writing (including summing up briefly the prehistoric foundations), developments in art (particularly that of early "rulers" portrayed in different roles), selected technologies, transportation, and religion, deities and rituals. The next section proceeds with the Early Dynastic Period (ca. 2,900 – 2,350 BCE), focusing mainly on Sumer and Akkad (Babylonia/southern Mesopotamia), looking at city states, social organization (especially the elite), city states and religion (e.g., patronage of temple cults and deities), Sumerian legends and history regarding the Early Dynastic period (e.g., Sumerian King List) and an extrapolated patchwork of contemporary textual-pictorial accounts regarding this turbulent period,. This overview continues with a glimpse at the late Early Dynastic, Royal cemetery at Ur, some palaces, temples, and art. The lecture concludes with Late Early Dynastic period trends and the end of the Early Dynastic period in Southern Mesopotamia. The NEXT lecture (no. 7) will continue with a view of areas outside southern Mesopotamia, including SW Iran (Elam), the Zagros Mts., Indus Valley, Northern Mesopotamia, Eastern Anatolia, Syria, and Palestine, looking at some of the Sumerian exports and influences, plus some exports to Sumer, within these various regions. UPDATED: 2022 Spring offering.

In his book “The Seal Cylinders of Western Asia” William Hayes Ward wrote that Anu was half-forgotten, and that he was never a familiar god.
However, on a cylinder seal the sky god sits on his wife Uraš, who is depicted as a mountain, and he is surrounded by three children.

The Harappan seals contain several linguistic symbols which have not been properly understood so far.Through my works especially- Indus script decipherment breakthrough, PaNameTa-the troy tower weight  and measure system of Harappa, The Harappan Symbol Of 
Man+ Trident And Its Relation To Kausika Visvamitra  And The Kalinga Malla MeTas( Tower Weights), The Harappan Unicorn And The Kalinga Malla MeTas(Tower Weights) , The Harappan Symbol Of  Intersecting Circles And Its Relation  To Kausika Visvamitra And The Kalinga Malla MeTas( Tower  weights), The Harappan Contest Motif Of Nude Man With Six Locks Of Hair Fighting  Two Tigers And Its Relation To The Kalinga Malla MeTas( Tower Weights), The Harappan symbols of Roots, Nuts And Cocks And Their  Relation    To Kausika Visvamitra And The Kalinga Malla MeTas( Tower  weights), Identification Of KaNva In The Indus Script, Identification Of Troy In The Indus script,Identification Of Barley And Mustard In The Indus Script, Krishna’s Mathura And Dvaraka In The Indus Script, The Pinna In The Indus Script, The Identity Of Vedic Sarasvati And The Location Of Krishna’s Dvaraka, Identification Of Vedic Bharadvaja In The Indus  Script, Krishna’s Dvaraka  In The Indus Script, One Symbol  Of Indus Script Can Tell  A Lot About The Indus Valley Civilisation, The Identity Of Kasyapa In The Indus Valley And Sumeria, Kusa -The Son Of Rama-In Mesopotamia(Sumer),Indus -Sumer Trade, A Few “Copper” Names In The Indus Script, Janaka-King Of Mithila-In The Indus Script,The Vedic Asvins, Yama And Kartikeya In The Indus Script, The Goddess Sarasvati And The Origin Of Brahmi And Kharoshthi, The Origin Of The Roman Aes Grave From The Indus Valley Money, A Solution To The Mystery Of  The Gundestrup  Cauldron, The Eternal Soma Of The Vedas,              Vedic Roots Of Ancient Egyptian Religion, A Veiled Visvamitra Soma Sacrifice  In The New Testament , The Script Of Indus Valley Civilisation-1:The Script Of Indus Valley Civilisation-2,
The Punny Plough,The Bearded Kings Of The Ancient,
Bharata -The Language Of The Indus Valley Civilisation,
The Script Of Indus Valley Civilisation -3,The Script Of Indus Valley Civilisation-4,Harappan Vedic Sacrificial Feasts In Mesopotamian Art And In The Bible,The Script of Indus valley Civilisation-6 :A Vrishni Silver Coin And Its Harappan Source,The Script of Indus valley Civilisation-7: The Conversion Of Makha(Sacrifice) To Tanka(Mint) In The Indus Script,Script Of Indus Valley Civilisation-8:Vedic Root Of Gudea’s Akshayapatra,Three Men In A Boat Seal Evidence Of Indus –Dilmun Trade,The Script Of Indus Valley Civilisation-9: The Goodluck Symbols Of The Indus Script, The script of Indus valley civilisation-10:Identification Of The True Vedic Soma From Harappan Seals  Confirms The Indus Valley Civilisation As Vedic, The Script Of Indus Valley Civilisation-11:
Daksha (Soma) Yaaga-The Vedic Eucharist -In The Indus Script , The Script Of Indus Valley Civilisation-12:
Dāśarājñá And Dasaratha In The Indus Script, The Script Of Indus Valley Civilisation-13:The Silver Palm Seals Are Rosetta Stones Of The Indus Script -

I have shown that several seals contain vedic metrological terms,names of vedic ornaments,names of people, places and gods etc. My perception is that only a comprehensive study of ancient vedic  metrology can decipher the script symbols satisfactorily. A significant find herein is the existence of the Kalinga malla mana system during Harappan times challenging  the common perception of its origin from the later  Kalinga kingdom(Orissa).The unicorn is identified as the pala/nishka/soma/agni.Signs of intersecting circles, fish , crab,bud,tower etc. also indicate pala.The six locks of hair indicate  the paNameTa weight of six barley grains.Roots  and nuts indicate viira bhadra/ Drupada/ varaha/pala.We have located Lord Krishna’s Mathura and Dvaraka in the Indus valley scripts.
We have confirmed Mohenjodaro as the first Dvaraka
on the basis of the inscription on the copperplate B7C2 from there and textual evidences from the Rgveda, Mahabharata etc.We have located PadmakuuTa,one of the
palaces of Krishna there.Also we have identified the Sindhu(Indus) as the Vedic Sarasvati river.We have gone through the symbols  identifying the Bharadvajas,the clan of composers of the earliest vedic texts.In Krishna’s Dvaraka we gathered more details from the script on Lord Krishna’s Dvaraka and Sindhu/Sarasvati. We have looked into the
indications of the Harappan jar symbol with three forks on each edge.We have located  the Kasyapas in Hastinapura
trading with Sumeria.We have decoded the Mari Standard,went deeper into the meanings of several Sumerian images and confirmed Meluhha as Vedic Harappa/Indus valley. We have located Janaka,the king of Mithila,father-in-law of Rama, in the Indus script.We have identified the names of copper in the Indus script and located  the Asvins,Yama and Skanda  in the Indus script.In A Model For Indus Script Decipherment
we have identified the deity in the seal M-1181 and built a model for complete decipherment of the Indus script.
We have seen how  Brahmi and Kharoshthi evolved from the Indus Script and how the Indus script was in use along with Brahmi/Kharoshthi even into the  first centuries CE.We have seen how the coins of the ancient world,including the Roman coins evolved from the Indus valley money.
We have looked for  and located a Rosetta Stone for the Indus script, in the varaha/gadyanaka coin form.
We have gone into the relation of the Druids to the Indus valley civilisation and the role of their  Gundestrup cauldron
in the evolution of Christianity.
We have explored the relation of the Anau seal to the Indus Valley Civilisation.
We have gone into the relationship of the Egyptian and Harappan deities.
We have looked into a beautiful story from the New Testament
invoving  the vedic soma sacrifice in A Veiled Visvamitra Soma Sacrifice In The New Testament.
We have studied  the indications of some of the Indus script symbols with particular reference to their use on ancient coins of India .
We have looked into symbolism of the overflowing vase on the Sumerian statue of Gudea and through it we identified the indications of several Indus symbols including the Harischandra vaajapeya sacrifice.
We have seen how the Harappan glyphs served as goodluck symbols .
The identification of the right vedic soma has two important
aspects:First, it ends the long quest for the mysterious soma. Second,it confirms the Indus valley civilisation as vedic ,beyond any doubt.
We have studied the vedic Daksha Yaaga  and its relation to the soma yaaga.Also we have located  Dāśarājñá and  Dasaratha in the Indus seals.
We have explored the application of the palm seals as further rosetta stones of the Indus script .
In this article we are looking into the claim of mlecca as the language of the Indus valley civilation and concludes that Bharata,not mlecca, was the language of the Indus valley civilisation.

SUMMARY
This thesis shall identify the date origin of the composite bow within Mesopotamia and Elam. and both identify and quantify the design factors which lead to increased performance possible with composite construction. To accomplish this, the thesis begins by summarizing the problems and flaws that currently exist in the field of history as it applies specifically to archery and bow use. With problems identified, the thesis will then introduce the reader to the basics of bow mechanics, thereby laying the basis for physical testing. This in turn will empirically demonstrate flaws in the current iconographical method of bow identification. The thesis will then devise a new method for iconographic identification of composite construction that has greater proven accuracy, based upon proportional length, which will link extant artifacts with both physical test results and iconographic evidence.

The reader shall then be led through a complete reevaluation of iconographical evidence for Mesopotamia and Elam starting at the beginning of the second millennium BCE and working backwards using this new method of iconographic evaluation to determine the point at which composite bow technology first appears in the ancient Near East. The thesis will finish with an overview of the above accomplishments and their potential impact on the study of ancient and military history.

KEY TERMS
Ancient History, Military History, Archery, Bow, Composite, Experimental Archaeology, Egypt, Mesopotamia, Elam, Arrow

COURSE DESCRIPTION (updated and expanded):
“War & Peace in Ancient Mesopotamia” (ca. 10,000 - 323 BCE) begins with an introduction to the advent of farming, urban life, various crafts, writing, and other innovations in the region of the "Two Rivers," namely the Tigris and Euphrates' flood plain.  It proceeds with the rise and fall of early state complex societies and empires in the Bronze and Iron Ages, and terminates in the Persian period.  Although providing much focus on diverse issues dealing with war, alliances, diplomacy, treaties, and peace, this course also integrates a comprehensive background context and overview of other aspects of past societies in this region, including history, archaeology, language, literature, religion, architecture, art, material culture, and trade.  The course material is introductory, with no specific prerequisite, but a prior enrolment in either ANTH.245 (Peoples of the Mediterranean), or ANTH.340 (Archaeology & History of Bible Lands), is helpful since these courses introduce past societies from contemporary, adjacent regions frequently in direct contact with Ancient Mesopotamia.

OVERALL COURSE OBJECTIVES:
This course aims (1) to educate students in the broad archaeological, cultural, and related developments in Ancient Mesopotamia and selected adjacent regions, including various key issues, from 10,000 BCE to 332 BCE, with the addition of historical data in pertinent periods. The documentaries and written responses serve (2) to illustrate and reinforce selected time periods and topics, providing visual references, specialist views, and general narration. (3). The in-class seminars and (4) class member presentations are designed to provide students with more in-depth understanding regarding key concepts and subject materials, and experience in presenting one’s essay research and results.  The mid-term and end-of-term examinations, accompanied by pre-posted, focus-learning guides, should (5) aid students in focusing upon, comprehending, and memorizing the most salient data and broader trends that characterize each period’s time span (within the Neolithic to 323 BCE area coverage), including society, architecture, material culture, technology, art, religion, and other aspects.  The research essay enables students (6) to explore in more depth and in a more critical fashion a topic of interest not covered in sufficient detail in class, including guidance and feedback to assist in learning and refining the composition of college essays. This course also aims (7) to provide a sufficiently comprehensive overview as a “gateway” course to allow students to assess whether they wish to pursue more advanced studies regarding this cultural area, period, or a related aspect.

ADDED RESOURCE LIST: The syllabus contains an updated temporary extensive list of key resources being compiled in Sterne Library (UAB), which include a listing of reviewed documentaries, lectures (mostly from the Great Courses), books, articles, and other materials. These materials are being transferred into a separate, larger resource guide to aid students in using and optimizing the fledgling Sterne Library collections on the Ancient Near East: Arabia, Mesopotamia, Levant, Anatolia, Iran, and a bit on the Indus Valley as well.

The Harappan seals contain several linguistic symbols which have not been properly understood so far. Several seals contain vedic metrological terms,names of vedic ornaments,metal names,names of people, places and gods etc. My perception is that only a comprehensive study of ancient vedic literature, temple legends ,vedic rites and rituals, and vedic  metrology alone can decipher the script symbols satisfactorily.A brief attempt in this direction is made through my different articles.
In previous articles we have confirmed the Indus script readings based on the Narayanastra shot by Asvatthama,the Kaurava commander-in-chief in the Kurukshetra war, by
the name of one of the samvatsaras in the 60 year Jupiter cycle followed by the Harappans and found mentioned in the seal L051a and by the Biblical story of Christ’s raising of Lazarus four days after his death.
We have identified the story of Sudasa in the Rigveda and the Traigarta and Trisiras in the Mahabharata.
We have used the Hebrew lmlk seal as a rosetta stone for reading the Indus script.
In the last article we have identified the Sumerian term Meluhha in the Indus script seals,which gives direct evidence of Indus-Sumer trade,confrming Bharata varsha as Meluhha.
Also we have looked into the origin of the word Meluhha in Vedic IVC instead of  in Sumer/Sumerian.
We have identified Satyabhama-the wife of Krishna in the Indus seals and confirmed  Meluhha as Bharata Varsha based on  Shu-Ilishu’s seal and  Harappan seals.
We have gone into the presence  of the treasury of the Bharatas in Taxila, Hastinapura,Ayodhya etc.in the north and Irinjalakuda,Thiruvanantapuram etc. in the south of India.
We have located the words  throne and koTTaram in the Indus script.
We have studied  a Kushana vohu manah coin with
a Harappan motif on it.
In the last articles we have confirmed the Indus script readings of the fish/jar signs from known Sumerian readings and attempted to read the Indus writing on a tin ingot from Haifa.
In this article we are studying the relation of the story of Gilgamesh to vedic stories and ascertaining the age of the Rigveda.

This volume represents a small, but specifically targeted contribution to a field of research and discussion which has increasingly come to the fore in the last two decades, regarding the practice of covering or veiling womens’ heads or faces over different times and places. “Dress is never value free”, as anthropologists state, and veiling functions as an assertion/communication of relationship dynamics in terms of gender, of social and cultural identity, of the phases and stages of life (puberty, marriage, death) or of religious beliefs – even reaching to a typical dichotomy of our times, the female condition between tradition and modernity.
This book stems from an international conference at the University of Graz on March 2, 2020 – just before the outbreak of the COVID pandemic. The conference brought together Austrian specialists from the Graz Department of Ancient History and Classical Studies and from the URANIA für Steiermark Association, with academics from different Italian universities connected by the Cultural Association A.C. CulturArti of Udine within the framework of its second Alpe-Adria Festival of Public Archeology – No Borders project, funded by the Friuli Venezia Giulia Autonomous Region.
A felicitous meeting between specialists from Austria and Italy, under the aegis of a mixed public and private management, now finds its outcome in the present volume, jointly edited by academics and organizers from both countries, with all papers in English.

Sídla, ktoré spĺňajú všetky atribúty v mnohých prípadoch aj súčasného mesta vrátane jeho správy a byrokracie, sa jednoznačne a plnohodnotne vyformovali aj počas existencie sumerskej civilizácie v dolnom povodí riek Eufrat a Tigris. V tých časoch začali byť neoddeliteľnou súčasťou riadenia a existencie mesta aj písomné, úradné záznamy.

Sümerlerin Ön Asyadaki hususî mevkileri: Sümerler İsa'dan üçbin yıl önceki zamandan evvel Irak'ın güne­ yini yurt edinmiş ve bu mıntakanın, yani Irak'ın kuzey kısmına bile tam mânasile yerleşememiş küçük bir kavimdir. Göçlerinin tarihini nisbî kronolojiye, yani kazılarla ortaya çıkan tabakalardan hangisine rast­ ladığına göre bile, tesbit edemiyoruz; kaldı ki mutlak kronoloji ile, yani müspet yıllarla tespit edilebilsin. Sümerler Irak topraklarını 1000 yıldan fazla bir zaman Sami Akad-larla paylaşmışlardır. Daha İsa'dan 2000 yıl öncelerinde bile, kendileri ve dilleri artık ölmüş bulunduğu halde, Sümer dili Babil mekteplerinde İsa'nın doğumuna kadar okutulmuş ve Babil mabetlerinde Sümer ilâhi­ leri terennüm edilmişti. Babil yazısının yayılması ile Sümer dili batıya kadar yayılmış bulunuyor, 1400 ile 1200 yılları arasına rastlayan dev­ rede Eti devletinin merkezindeki mekteplerde de Sümerce okutuluyor­ du. İkinci bin yıl ortalarında bir taraftan Babillilerin yurtları, diğer ta­ raftan Anadolu ve Mısır olmak üzere sınırlanmış bölgede de Sümerce okutuluyordu. Bu sebepten dolayı 4 üncü bin yıldan beri Ön Asyadaki yerleşmelerini takip edebildiğimiz müteaddit kavimler içinde, Sümerlerin ayrıca bir yeri vardır. Sümerlerin, gerek arkalarında bıraktıkları, ge­ rekse uzak illere kadar yaydıkları tesirlerde, Babil yazısına iyice hakim olabilmede, Sümerce bilmenin şart oluşunun büyük bir dokunağı oldu­ ğunu da anmamız lâzımdır. Fakat, bunu söylemekle de Sümerlerin asıl kültür tesirleri izah edilmiş olmaz. Hiç şüphe yoktur ki, Sümerler bu müstesna mevkilerini kendilerinin, o devirde diğer kavimlerin yüksele­ medikleri bir kültür seviyesine erişmiş olmalarına borçludurlar. Bu kül­ türün üstünlüğünü, bir kaç ana çizgi ile, tafsilâta girişmeden evvel be­ lirtelim: 1) Öyle teşkilâtlandırılmış bir memur devleti ki, hammalını, kırla­ rında çalı çırpı toplayan adamını bile bu teşkilât içine alabilmiştir. 2) Yalnız isimlerini öğrenebildiğimiz sayısız tanrılarından büyük bir çokluğu, bir sistem içinde yer almış bulunuyordu. Bu kavmin doğurucu fantazisi, bu tanrıları teolojik mücerret birer mefhum olarak bırakma­ mış; gerek kültte, gerek mitde kökleşmiş canlı ve belli simalar olarak ortaya koymuştur. 3) Edebiyatlarına gelince: bilhassa lirik mahiyette olan edebi

At the end of the 24th cent. Sargon of Akkade (2324–2285 BC) defeated Lugalzagesi, king of Uruk, and unified the whole of Babylonia proper for the first time into a single territorial state, thus laying the foundation of the Akkadian Empire. Sargon, his sons Rimuš and Maništušu (2284–2262 BC), and his grandson Naramsin (2261–2206 BC) led their armies as far as the Mediterranean in the west and reached the springs of the Euphrates and Tigris in the north. They campaigned as far as highland Iran in the east and reached the Arabian Gulf in the south, dominating the political landscape of Mesopotamia for more than a century (2300–2181 BC). Under Naramsin’s son Šarkališarri (2205–2181 BC), Amorites from the west and Guteans and Elamites from the east penetrated deep into the empire. Provinces defected and Akkade was reduced to a petty state. After a short period of confusion, when four members of the former Akkadian bureaucracy and army rivalled for the succession to the throne (2180–2178 BC), Dudu and Šudurul (2177–2142 BC) presided over an Akkadian resurgence. They established a late Akkadian territorial state, which encompassed parts of northern Babylonia, the Diyala valley, and Upper Mesopotamia. Eventually the Guteans and the Elamites under Puzurinšušinak would successively occupy central and northern Babylonia, conquer the capital, and eliminate Akkade from the political stage. Half a century later, the concept of the territorial state was revived under Urnamma, the founder of the 3rd dynasty of Ur (2110–2093 BC).
The Sargonic period brought about numerous political, socio-economic, and ideological transformations and is therefore regarded as a turning point in Mesopotamian history. Among these transformations, the unification of the whole of Babylonia proper into a single territorial state, the spread of ‘privately’ owned land, the integration of the former city-states into the royal palace economy, and the deification of the living ruler feature most prominently. The Akkadian empire’s geographical scale and reach, mode of administration, and conception of kingship had long-lasting influence. It became a paradigm for future dynasties, whose model-like character is also apparent in later literary texts. Nevertheless, repeated upheavals against Akkadian rule and the ambivalent tradition that evolved around Naramsin indicate that these transformations caused major political tensions especially in the Sumerian south of Babylonia.
The present paper describes Akkadian rule in terms of the concept of RESOURCECULTURES, i.e. the specific way in which resources are appropriated, used, and allocated. It argues that Akkadian rule meant the forcible implementation of a specific RESOURCECULTURE, which was politically, socio-economically, and ideologically incompatible with the RESOURCECULTURE prevalent in the Sumerian south. This ‘northern’ RESOURCECULTURE was borne by a secular and autocratic kingship with territorial claims to power, characterised by patrimonial dominion, a network of royal patronage, and a tributary or palace-economy based on royal land holdings.
The paper further demonstrates that royal land holdings were the base of the Akkadian economic power. They were appropriated through confiscation and purchase, and administered and exploited through a centralised administration, the inclusion of the provincial economies of the former city-states into the royal household, and the establishment of rural agricultural domains. Through allocations of crown land to affiliates of the royal court and members of the local elite the kings of Akkade established a far-flung network of royal patronage, which also included parts of the local populace.
Akkadian rule caused political, economic and ideological distress, which led to repeated rebellions of the south, and the downfall of the empire. Although this meant a return to political particularism, the concept of empire prevailed when the 3rd dynasty of Ur (2110–2004 BC) united Babylonia into a second territorial state and Hammurabi of Babylon (1792–1750 BC) finally brought about the end of particularism.

Testi tradotti gratuitamente disponibili online (http://www.mondadorieducation.it/media/contenuti/universita/verderame_letterature_mesopotamia/index.html) a corredo del volume L. Verderame, Letterature dell'antica Mesopotamia (2016) / Translated texts for the volume L. Verderame, Letterature dell'antica Mesopotamia (2016)  available for free online (http://www.mondadorieducation.it/media/contenuti/universita/verderame_letterature_mesopotamia/index.html):

1. Vicende divine 1
t1.1. Enki e Ninmah 1
t1.2. Discesa di Inanna / Ištar 5
Versione sumerica 5
Versione accadica 15
t1.3. Atra-hasīs 18
Introduzione: il lavoro e la ribellione degli dèi minori 18
La creazione dell’uomo 19
t1.4. Nergal ed Ereškigal 21
Versione da el Amarna 21
t1.5. Il matrimonio di Martu 23
2. Gesta dei re 27
t2.1. Enmerkar e il signore di Aratta 27
Introduzione 27
Il viaggio del messaggero ad Aratta 28
L’invenzione della lettera e l’ultimo messaggio al signore di Aratta 29
t2.2. Gilgameš e Huwawa 30
Versione A 30
t2.3. La leggenda della nascita di Sargon ovvero La saggezza di Sargon 35
t2.4. La leggenda kuthea o Narām-Sîn e le orde nemiche 37
t2.5. Il «codice» di Hammu-rāpi 41
Prologo 41
3. L’uomo si rivolge al dio 43
t3.1. Inno a Enlil (Enlil A) 43
t3.2. Dumuzi e Inanna 47
La preparazione all’incontro (Dumuzi e Inanna C, 3-18) 47
Dialogo tra una giovane e il suo uomo (Dumuzi e Inanna D) 47
t3.3. Inno del re Šulgi (Šulgi A) 48
t3.4. Inno a Ištar di Ammī-ditāna 50
t3.5. Inno acrostico di Assurbanipal a Marduk 52
t3.6. Grande inno a Šamaš 54
t3.7. Preghiere a mano alzata (šu’ila) accadiche 59
A Nabû 59
A Sîn 60
t3.8. Lettera di Inanna-ka a Nintinuga 61
t3.9. Lettera al dio della mia famiglia 62
t3.10. Lettera di Ur-Utu ad Annunītu 62
4. La riflessione sulla vita 64
t4.1. Giusto sofferente (Ludlul bēl nēmeqi) 64
t4.2. Dialogo del pessimismo (Arad mitanguranni) 74
t4.3. Diatriba contro Engar-dug 76
5. Altro 78
t5.1. Elegia (neo-assira) per la giovane sposa morta di parto 78
t5.2. Iscrizione dedicatoria di un cane per Nintinuga 79

In the Ancient Near East thousands of cylinder seals were produced and just a few of them depict a man and a woman making love. In this paper I try to identify this man and woman and I also try to understand what is happening on these seals.

On a number of Ancient Near East cylinder seals the sun god travels in a fantastic barge, its stern has a snake head and the prow is in the form a god. It symbolizes new moon, which arises when the sun and the moon conjunct. Together they radiate light, fertilize the fields and cause abundance.

As part of the supplementary material to Edouard d'Araille's verse translation of 'Adapa's Ascent' (First Edition, 2020) this text is presented as a 'translation sketch' of the earliest existing Sumerian versions of the Adapa legend (c.1760 BCE). It is introduced with four pages of prose analysis explaining the large degree to which this translation of his is experimental and speculative. The opening of the chapter, which sets this new translation in context, is in this file provided after the text of the poem, so the background of the text may be easily referred to after reading it. The translator of 'Adapa's Ascent', Edouard d'Araille writes that it is included in that volume, because, "it may not be without value to have an attempt at composing a ‘Translation Sketch’ of how an English version of this text may read in the future". Edouard d'Araille also writes there that: "It is my hope that in the not-too-distant future, many gaps in the Sumerian text will be filled in - thanks to deeper research and analysis - and a proper English translation will be produced. I hope that I will then be excused for this juvenile effort, a mere interim piece". Sincere thanks are due to Living Time™ Books, who have granted permission for this extract from 'Adapa's Ascent' to be uploaded here for educational purposes only.

ABSTRACT:  In relation to the early influences of biblical texts in the emerging exploration and archaeology of Ancient Mesopotamia, this documentary -(including multiple interviewed specialists)-- assesses biblical texts, similarities and differing details within various biblical and other tales (e.g., Adam and Eve; Lilith; Eden; Deluge/Flood), and the quest for Prester John, the Fountain of Youth, and Eden. It looks at the decipherment of cuneiform (Rawlinson), George Smith's discovery of the Mesopotamian Gilgamesh Epic in relation to biblical accounts about Eden/Paradise, the Flood Story, Creation myths, etc. It also examines postulated locations for "Eden" (see Zarins), such as ancient Sumeria, Dilmun, and (in passing) the Black Sea.  In essence, it helps place the emergence of the study of Ancient Mesopotamia (and the Near East) in its broader context and perspective, introduces a few issues in studying both biblical and extra-biblical texts, and is a useful aid (via its narrative, specialist interviews and visuals) for introducing students and the public to one aspect of Ancient Mesopotamia and Near Eastern Studies. A recommendation to and/or summation of S. Pollock's book (1999. Ancient Mesopotamia: The Eden that Never Was), is a crucial component to placing such documentaries in a broader and more scholarly perspective. Youtube LINK:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cbJ7Pc4_79c The question sheet aids in furnishing a summary of the documentary's coverage and sequence of specific topics.

Mulţimea de reprezentări feminine din a doua jumătate a mileniului al treilea î.e.c. demonstrează că rolul femeii în Mesopotamia nu mai era unul obscur. Femeia reuşea să uimească prin frumuseţe, inteligenţă şi astfel, avea capacitatea de a desfăşura afaceri şi de a deţine clădiri şi pământuri, lucruri care fuseseră până atunci rezervate exclusiv bărbaţilor.
Rolul şi statutul femeii în Mesopotamia au fost atât de importante în acea perioadă, încât putem spune că societatea mesopotamiană a fost „şocată” într-un mod plăcut. În urma şocurilor au rămas reprezentări cioplite ale acestora, includeri în textele literare, dar şi alterări ale modelelor artistice masculine, acestea căpătând caracteristici feminine.
Cu toate că femeile din Mesopotamia deveniseră mult mai apreciate în societate, acestea căpătând anumite drepturi şi statuturi, ele erau în continuare discriminate, afându-se sub autoritate patriarhală, iar multe dintre ele nu reuşeau să aibă drepturi.

The chapter presents the results of the excavation carried out during the second season of excavations at Tell Zurghul in 2016. Area D is located on the top and South-Western slope of Mound A, that is nearly at the centre of the site. Archaeological evidence, although scanty and poorly preserved due to the heavy erosion of the mound, and written evidence dated to Gudea of Lagaš actually confirm that Mound A is the result of artificial superimposition of strata and buildings dating back at least to the beginning of the 3rd millennium BC; on its top the temple Sirara of the goddess
Nanše, celebrated by Gudea in his inscriptions, was built.

'Adapa's Ascent', one of the oldest stories ever told, dates back to the beginning of the Second Millennium BC. This appendix to Edouard d'Araille's recent verse translation of that work provides a glossary of the key characters featuring in its narrative. In fact, the story of 'Adapa’s Ascent' revolves around only a very few characters. There are only seven players altogether, although just three of these are at the core of the drama : Adapa, Enki and Anu. As some readers may wish to have some basic knowledge of the characters of 'Adapa’s Ascent' before reading the text, here are thumbnail sketches provided there for each of them. This extract has been provided here courtesy of Living Time™ Books.

In this article I deal with the description of two groups of " seven warriors " in two Sumerian literary compositions: the Hymn to Hendursaĝa and Gilgameš and Huwawa. Thus, I discuss the relevant passages of the compositions, analysing the parallels and supporting the hypothesis that these seven warriors may be Sumerian literary forerunners to the hep-tad, later known as the Sebettu. In the conclusion, I discuss the number seven and the Heptad, adding a further parallel (Lugalbanda in the Mountain Cave), as well as further comments on demonic descriptions and iconography.

Atatürk, Türklerin dünya tarihindeki yerinin tespit edilebilmesi için, Türk tarihinin belgelere dayandırılarak, gerçeğin dışına çıkılmadan araştırılmasını istemiştir. Yapılan çalışmalar sonrasında Türklerin dünya üzerinde tarihin en eski dönemlerinden beri farklı toplumlar, medeniyetler hatta devletler kurdukları ve kendi dönemlerindeki diğer toplum, medeniyet ve devletleri etkiledikleri belgelerle ortaya konulmaya çalışılmıştır. Nitekim bu çalışmalar neticesinde ortaya çıkan “Türk Tarih Tezi”nde, Sümerlerin Altaylardan ayrılarak Mezopotamya’ya yerleştikleri ve Türk oldukları görüşü ortaya atılmıştır. Buna karşılık son yıllarda araştırmacıların üzerinde durduğu -Türklerin ilk ata yurdunun Altaylar değil Ön Asya olduğunu öne süren- “Urmu Teorisi”nde, Urmu Gölü etrafında yaşayan Proto Türklerin MÖ 4000-2000’lerde Sümerlerle komşu oldukları ve bu komşuluk neticesinde birbirleriyle etkileşimde bulundukları görüşü de ortaya atılmıştır. Ortaya atılan bu tezler ve Sümerlerin dillerinin Ural-Altay dillerine benzemesi, arkeolojik bulgular, yer adları ile kültürel benzerlikler araştırmacıları Sümer-Türk ilişkisini değerlendirmeye itmiştir. Pek çok araştırmacı, arkeolojik kazılar neticesinde bulunan Sümer tabletlerinden hareketle dillerini, yer adlarını, kral adlarını ve kültür izlerini Türklerinki ile kıyaslamışlardır. Yapılan karşılaştırmalar sonucunda elde edilen değerlendirmeler Sümerlerin Türklerle akraba olabileceği ya da komşuluk ilişkisi içerisinde birbirlerini etkilemiş olabilecekleri gibi görüşleri destekler nitelikte olmuştur.
Biz de bu çalışma ile Sümer destanı Gılgamış ve Altay-Türk destanı Maaday-Kara’yı karşılaştırarak aralarında yukarıda işaret edildiği şekilde bir ilişkinin olup olmadığını ortaya koymaya çalıştık.

In order to determine the place of the Turks in world history, Atatürk wanted Turkish history to be based on the documents and investigated without going out of reality. With the researches conducted, it has been tried to put forward with the documents that the Turks have established different societies, civilizations and even states in the world since the earliest periods in history and affected other societies, civilizations and states in their period. In fact, it was suggested in “Turkish History Thesis” which emerged as a result of these studies that the Sumerians were separated from the Altars and settled in Mesopotamia and they were Turks. On the other hand, in Urmu Theory, which suggests that the first homeland of the Turks, which the researchers have emphasized in recent years, is not the Altai but the Front Asia, it is also claimed that the Proto Turks living around Lake Urmu were the neighbours with the Sumerians in the 4000-2000 BC and interacted with each other as a result of this neighbourhood. In addition to these theses, the similarity of Sumerian languages to Ural-Altaic languages, archaeological findings, place names and cultural similarities have led researchers to evaluate the Sumerian-Turkish relationship. Many researchers have compared their languages, place names, king names and cultural traces with those of the Turks as a result of the Sumerian tablets found in archaeological excavations. The evaluations obtained as a result of these comparisons have supported the views as Sumerians may be related to Turks or may have influenced each other in a neighbourhood relationship.
In this study, we tried to compare the Sumerian epic Gilgamesh and Altay-Turkic epic Maaday-Kara and to determine whether there is a relation between them as mentioned above.