Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

The Ancients Series | Part I: Sumerians

page: 21
220
<< 18  19  20   >>

log in

join

posted on Dec, 20 2009 @ 04:15 AM
link   
reply to post by serbsta
 


Neither do I. May I respectfully point out that Harte posts in the manner of a debunker, expecting me to do all the work, then states I am not worth his/her time. In the past I have not been able to make any headway with debunkers despite the man hours and eloquence brought to bear on my part. The mindset is akin to religious fanatics, and I have had plenty of run-ins with those types also. All we do is ad hominems, or ultimately the dialog degenerates to such levels.

In an effort to keep from going spare, I resorted to sarcasm and cynicism. I wish Harte truly believe I am not worth his/her time. Besides, being an artist we are notorious for being temperamental.




posted on Dec, 20 2009 @ 07:54 PM
link   
Can't wait to get home to read this. Always found the ancient Sumerians extremely intriguing, this looks well researched my friend.
S+F... I think... Hope I did it right this time.



posted on Dec, 20 2009 @ 11:26 PM
link   
reply to post by serbsta
 





Amon to that.



Now say it right Serb.

It's ANU to that.



posted on Dec, 21 2009 @ 06:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by undo


Now say it right Serb.

It's ANU to that.




Whatever floats your boat.

Anu to that, undo.



posted on Dec, 21 2009 @ 06:50 AM
link   
Excellent work - I've only been through the first few pages, but want to get this on my 'watched' list.

Very well done.



posted on Dec, 21 2009 @ 11:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by Matyas
reply to post by serbsta
 


Neither do I. May I respectfully point out that Harte posts in the manner of a debunker, expecting me to do all the work, then states I am not worth his/her time.


Pardon me?

You post an outrageous claim and I'm supposed to find my own details about it?

Besides, you don't even know enough about what you claimed to even post a short argument for why it could be true.

So I'm supposed to do this for you?

No thank you. You seem not to know how this sort of thing works. You make a claim, it's up to you to back it up.

Hiding behind your preconceptions of me only makes your claim look sillier (as if, in this case, that were even possible!)

Harte



posted on Dec, 21 2009 @ 12:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by Matyas
I keep Hermes Trismegistus as Thoth in my study. I understand the ibis' diet consisted largely of snakes, did it not? Or else it merely killed them in abundance.


The ibis eats a lot of things, including snakes. Cats were also useful as snake hunters.


Going back onto topic, I wonder if there were a Sumerian trinity and what it could have been depicted as. What do you think?


No. There were groups of major gods and minor gods, but no trinity. Ishtar-Tammuz were somewhat close to the Isis-Osiris myth, but three had no particular significance, while 30 and 15 did. 300 may have been a number of significance, since that's the number of Anunnaki assigned to Earth and to the heavens according to one source.



posted on Dec, 22 2009 @ 02:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by Byrd


Going back onto topic, I wonder if there were a Sumerian trinity and what it could have been depicted as. What do you think?


No. There were groups of major gods and minor gods, but no trinity. Ishtar-Tammuz were somewhat close to the Isis-Osiris myth, but three had no particular significance, while 30 and 15 did. 300 may have been a number of significance, since that's the number of Anunnaki assigned to Earth and to the heavens according to one source.


Hmm. What do you make of the following, though?


The historian S. H. Hooke tells in detail of the ancient Sumerian trinity: Anu was the primary god of heaven, the ‘Father’, and the ‘King of the Gods’; Enlil, the ‘wind-god’ was the god of the earth, and a creator god; and Enki was the god of waters and the ‘lord of wisdom’ (15-18). The historian, H. W. F. Saggs, explains that the Babylonian triad consisted of ‘three gods of roughly equal rank... whose inter-relationship is of the essence of their natures’ (316).


www.heraldmag.org...



posted on Jan, 10 2010 @ 12:55 PM
link   
reply to post by winston37
 


the first wheels most likely came from seeing tree trunks rolling along the ground.
triangles also most likely came from leaning a stick against a flat faced stone when making a shelter, and in time developed from there .

and don,t forget necessity is the mother of invention .



posted on Jan, 11 2010 @ 05:50 AM
link   
Byrd I'm still waiting for your input in regards to the Sumerian trinity. Would be great if you could give us your opinion on the text I quoted in an above post.


Cheers.



posted on Jan, 22 2010 @ 01:38 PM
link   
I've been trying to find books that are just about Sumerians and there art for awhile. My local library has nothing! Anyone that has a book in mind please give it up.



posted on Apr, 25 2010 @ 04:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by undo
the ONLY surviving statue (so far) from enki's city of Eridu
source:
front view
oi.uchicago.edu...
side view
oi.uchicago.edu...

the statue has six or more fingers on each hand, and the mouth has fangs.

what's that look like to you?


News flash! The bee king. The spheres are souls or eggs.



posted on Apr, 27 2010 @ 10:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by serbsta
Byrd I'm still waiting for your input in regards to the Sumerian trinity. Would be great if you could give us your opinion on the text I quoted in an above post.


Cheers.


Sorry... you asked this question just as I hit the busiest semester of my academic career. I haven't been here much and missed it.

However, I will say that trinities weren't that important to the Sumerians. They do exist (since the social structure of gods reflects the social structure of the people who believe in them.) I will answer in more detail at a later time... however, while identifying a father-mother-son combination in any set of deities is not that unusual, tying them to a cultural trinity elsewhere in time or space is usually a great mistake.



posted on Apr, 27 2010 @ 05:00 PM
link   
Okay...


Originally posted by serbsta
Hmm. What do you make of the following, though?


The historian S. H. Hooke tells in detail of the ancient Sumerian trinity: Anu was the primary god of heaven, the ‘Father’, and the ‘King of the Gods’; Enlil, the ‘wind-god’ was the god of the earth, and a creator god; and Enki was the god of waters and the ‘lord of wisdom’ (15-18). The historian, H. W. F. Saggs, explains that the Babylonian triad consisted of ‘three gods of roughly equal rank... whose inter-relationship is of the essence of their natures’ (316).


www.heraldmag.org...


In checking the magazine, I find that it's a Christian (Jehovah's Witness) magazine... so right there I would say it's a biased source. Furthermore, Jehovah's Witnesses are NOT known for good scholarly research, so that's two marks against it to start.

His founding statements, that " the triads of paganism which were eventually absorbed into Catholic Church dogmas" is not correct (though iconography did borrow the Isis-Horus concept to rework to Mary-Jesus in some cases.) He also states a JW belief:

there is no question that ancient man believed in ‘one infinite and Almighty Creator, supreme over all’ (Hislop 14); and in a multitude of gods at a later point.

...which is not correct. The first beliefs are animism (spirits everywhere) then multiple gods. When the group develops a structure with a single leader, then we see the rise of Leader Gods.

He then continues with:

Hislop devotes the first 128 pages of his book The Two Babylons to proving that the Christian Trinity is directly descended from the ancient Babylonian trinity. In particular, he convincingly proves that the origin of the Babylonian trinity was the triad of Cush (the grandson of Noah), Semiramis (his wife), and Nimrod (their son). At the death of Cush, Semiramis married her son, Nimrod, and thus began the confusion between the father and son so prevalent in early paganism.

Alas for Hislop (he wrote in the 1800's), there are earlier versions of Noah's Flood. The Semiramus-Nimrod link is not a believable one.
en.wikipedia.org...

His identification of the "three gods sequences" is not entirely correct:


From ancient Sumeria’s Anu, Enlil, and Enki and Egypt’s dual trinities of Amun-Re-Ptah and Isis, Osiris, and Horus to Rome’s Jupiter, Juno, and Minerva the whole concept of paganism revolved around the magic number of three.


Amun, Re, and Ptah are three separate gods (originally) that arose at different times and were sometimes "kit bashed" into one god (and not one with 3 parts. Ditto Anu, Enlil, and Enki. Jupiter/Juno/Minerva were never really a big deal (Minerva isn't Juno's child, for one thing) -- Jupiter/Mars/Venus were an important trio, but not seen as a triad.


The concept of the Trinity finds its roots in Pagan theology and Greek philosophy

Actually, I tend to agree with that and in particular with its identification with Greek Mystery Schools. There's no doubt of the borrowing there. But the Greeks didn't get that from Egypt or from Sumeria.



posted on Dec, 11 2010 @ 10:07 AM
link   
Wow, can't believed I missed this GEM!!!!
Can we have a Best Of Ancient Civiliazations Thread created by staff?

Is there no part 3 and on???






top topics



 
220
<< 18  19  20   >>

log in

join


Help ATS Recover with your Donation.
read more: Help ATS Recover With Your Contribution