Originally posted by Byrd
Originally posted by Marduk
so to them the word eden was not on any occaison a noun
it was a descriptive term
Most interesting. Can you toss a link at me? I agree... I just want to read more.
in Sumerian texts paradise is always located in close proximity to heaven
and heaven is always on a mountaintop
That matches everything I've read about this. In fact, in most early cultures the gods lived on mountains and it was possible to walk to the homes
of the gods (this is also true of Native American beliefs.)
but in the ancient world the idea of a spiritual celestial heaven wasn't even thought of and in fact the Sumerians had no word for Celestial
or Cosmos at all
I'd dispute this, for I have a vague memory of this topic being addressed in the myths of the death of Tiamat, where her body becomes the sky.
Hmm.... but I see where you're coming from. They didn't think anything existed beyond the blue of the sky.
the link for the sumerian dictionary i have posted here a few times now
this is the part of the Enuma Elish that describes what happened to Tiamats body but like Undo pointed out and for which i commend her most highly,
Tiamat is a babylonian myth and not a sumerian one
Then the lord rested, gazing upon her dead body,
While he divided the flesh of the ... , and devised a cunning plan.
He split her up like a flat fish into two halves;
One half of her he stablished as a covering for heaven.
where it says of course that he used one half of her as a covering for heaven you have to remember that this is still not a celestial heaven
so he may just as well have been using her ribs as roof beams.
the Sumerians had the same legend as is found in many ancient cultures all of which coincedentally are those that used the winged sun disc to
represent their culture
"the world is built on the bones of a great serpent"
this question also caused some of the early Sumerologists to ask questions
the best I have ever heard was by Edward Chiera from a book he wrote a while back
this is an excerpt describing the aftermath of the fight between Tiamat and one of the Sumerian Deities (unknown)
"Then a question arose: what should he do with the gigantic carcass? It must have been immense in size, and in form it must have resembled that of a
huge flat vase."
very astute man that Chiera
one of the best
The trouble is, as is the tendency of Sitchin, the mainstream position on Sumer tends to bundle Akkadian and Babylonian thought, art and stories,
right in with the Sumerian ones
thats right they do that all the time
why just the other day I heard someone claim that Gilgamesh was a character in the Enuma Elish
According to the Enuma Elish, Gilgamesh searches out the gates of the Paradise/Garden, so he can learn from the equivalent of the biblical
Noah, the secret of immortality
i think it was actually in this thread halfway down page 2
but of course i chose not to say anything at the time because I'm nice like that
For example, Tiamat was not a sumerian word. In fact, the concept of Tiamat wasn't introduced till some time after the meso flood
this is a little erroneous Beth
the name Tiamat wasn't introduced until Babylonian times
but ušumgal/great dragon dates from at least 3000bce and specifically mušhuš/red serpent which is what Tiamat is later described as dates from at
then you should consider the actual narrative in which she appears which starts
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;
so these events tell of a time before civilisation and before the gods existed
so whatever particular language it is written in is irrelevant
they are retelling an ancient myth which is supported by the use of the name of some of the gods later mentioned in it using the Sumerian spelling
Most scholars agree that the Enuma Elish is a babylonian version of a Sumerian myth that we just haven't excavated yet
but the fact that the Akkadians called KI.EN.GIR (sumerian - land of the civilised lords) Shumer (Hebrew - shinar) which is derived from the sumerian
words for red serpent (SU.MIR) does point to the idea of a great red serpent having a lot to do with its history before the babylonians wrote it
and the meso flood that you're talking about wasn't the same flood as the one in which Upnapishtim/Atrahasis/Ziusudra and Noah appear
if you look at the kings list in its original format you'll find several floods marked on it and yet kingship doesnt break stride
so there was to start with one huge deluge that is immortalised in mythology and then a series of smaller floods
this of course is verified by the geology which proves that the only floods that affected mesopotamia were local ones and that the great deluge if it
happened anywhere happened somewhere else entirely
[edit on 20-11-2006 by Marduk]