It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


The Sumerian King List Spans for Over 241,000 Years Before a Great Flood

page: 1
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

+58 more 
posted on Jun, 12 2014 @ 10:28 AM
The title is quite intriguing, so is the material that will follow. However I'm not advocating anything. I just found interesting. Is along the lines of the Turin Papyrus or the Palermo Stone but instead of Egyptian rulers, the material deals with the Sumerian kings.

Out of the many incredible artefacts that have been recovered from sites in Iraq where flourishing Sumerian cities once stood, few have been more intriguing that the Sumerian King List, an ancient manuscript originally recorded in the Sumerian language, listing kings of Sumer (ancient southern Iraq) from Sumerian and neighbouring dynasties, their supposed reign lengths, and the locations of "official" kingship.

What makes this artefact so unique is the fact that the list blends apparently mythical pre-dynastic rulers with historical rulers who are known to have existed. The first fragment of this rare and unique text, a 4,000-year-old cuneiform tablet, was found in the early 1900s by German-American scholar Hermann Hilprecht at the site of ancient Nippur and published in 1906.

Since Hilprecht’s discovery, at least 18 other exemplars of the king’s list have been found, most of them dating from the second half of the Isin dynasty (c. 2017-1794 BCE.). No two of these documents are identical. - See more at:

posted on Jun, 12 2014 @ 10:32 AM
Noice Find!

+11 more 
posted on Jun, 12 2014 @ 10:39 AM
This fits nicely with the Talmud Chaggiga 13b-14a that states that there were 974 generations before God created Adam.
Wonder what else we will find out

+13 more 
posted on Jun, 12 2014 @ 10:42 AM
Don't be rediculous, this would go against present concensus. It is crazy to think that the truth applies to this subject. You have to go by what archeologists accept as real. Nothing else is acceptable.

posted on Jun, 12 2014 @ 10:49 AM
a reply to: Telos

SnF great data share... Makes 1 wonder if there is an influence NOW here on EA*RTH.


posted on Jun, 12 2014 @ 11:11 AM
very interesting I wonder if we will ever get back to living 1000 years.

posted on Jun, 12 2014 @ 11:16 AM
According to other researchers, the Sumerian King Lists have two main existing versions, the surviving tablets being known as Weld-Blundell (W-B) 62 and 144 respectively, and both are thought to have been originally compiled around the start of the second millennium BC. There is also a third version, a much later compilation by Berossus from the third century BC.

Not only do these lists contain a record of all the post-flood kings of ancient Mesopotamia through to the time of their compilation, but, at the beginning, we once again find a list of antediluvian rulers—and this time their total period of kingship does appear to stretch way back into antiquity.

The Lists Translated

The most recent and detailed translation that I have consulted is of W-B. 144, which was prepared by Samuel Kramer (we all know that he is the father of Sumerian language in the modern era) in The Sumerians. Unlike some others it is uncluttered by any attempts to place absolute dates on the more recent reigns, and is a straightforward rendering of the original text. The pre-flood section reads as follows

After kingship had descended from heaven, Eridu became (the seat) of kingship. In Eridu Alulim reigned 28,800 years as king; Alalgar reigned 36,000 years—two kings reigned 64,800 years. Eridu was abandoned, (and) its kingship was carried off to Badtibira.

In Badtibira, Enmenluanna reigned 43,200 years; Enmengalanna reigned 28,800 years; Dumuzi, the shepherd, reigned 36,000 years—three kings reigned 108,000 years. Badtibira was abandoned, (and) its kingship was carried off to Larak.

In Larak, Ensipazianna reigned 28,800 years—one king reigned 28,800 years. Larak was abandoned, (and) its kingship was carried off to Sippar.

In Sippar, Enmeduranna reigned 21,000 years as king—one king reigned 21,000 years. Sippar was abandoned, (and) its kingship was carried off to Shuruppak.

In Shuruppak, Ubartutu reigned 18,600 years as king—one king reigned 18,600 years.

(Total) five cities, eight kings reigned 241,200 years.

The Flood then swept over (the land).

When compared to Genesis, this list contains only eight rulers instead of ten, but with reported reign lengths that are far more exaggerated, and a total elapsed time of 241,000 years before the flood. Moreover, if we refer to Figure 2 in which the details from W-B. 62 and Berossus are also summarized, although they record ten kings once more, they almost double the total elapsed time to 456,000 and 432,000 years respectively


I got the above snippet from Ian Lawton's 2002 paper who despite the strong spiritual spin, still comes up with some interesting points. I'd suggest to read all his paper on the subject:

posted on Jun, 12 2014 @ 11:22 AM
Interesting thread. S&F.

I wander what other lies under the sands of time...

+24 more 
posted on Jun, 12 2014 @ 12:54 PM
This is definitely not the first time such enormous life spans of kings have been recorded. The ancient Hindu Vedic text describes that during different ages or "yugas" human life could have exceeded over 100000 years. Lets try and put an astronomical spin on this shall we. The sun takes around 250 million years to revolve around the galaxy once. Now during this time the earth moving along with the sun may pass through different interstellar mediums such as gas, dust, and be exposed different types of radiation from in space. What if ? i mean just what if ? there was a chance while orbiting around the galaxy during certain phases the human lifespan increases dramatically due to some external influence.

posted on Jun, 12 2014 @ 01:00 PM
Noice. Noice! Noice? I assume we are referring to the same thing, lol. Anyway, hasn't it been established that the earth is only 4,000 years old? No? Fine. I do find it perplexing that the list would switch between myth and reality, from outrageous numbers to more realistic numbers, but I think it is plausible that these numbers representations of some kind. I think one possibility that I did not see mentioned in the article is the idea that these large reigns represented multiple rulers, likely descendants from the previous ruler, all who held the same name or title. The number would represent the aggregate. That would be a lot of rulers though.

I had never heard the idea of the Biblical ages being representations of importance, but that actually makes a lot of sense. The parallels between pre-Biblical history and the history in the Bible have always intrigued me, and it could be indicative of the Bible being based on earlier accounts, or could simply suggest that the same history was recorded by two different peoples at different times. This may or may not shed light on the authenticity of such claims, depending on how one views the issue.
edit on 6/12/14 by JiggyPotamus because: (no reason given)

posted on Jun, 12 2014 @ 04:02 PM
Maybe I'm missing something here. Whenever I heard about all those guys in the bible that lived for hundreds of years I always thought they were talking about moon cycles and not solar cycles. I always took the number and devided it by thirteen to get what I thought their real age might be.

When I divide 240,000 by thirteen, I get 18,000 something. This is much more believable to me than 240,000. Maybe I'm crazy.

Thinking about an 18,000 year history of civilisations makes me giddy to learn more. That number sounds about right to me.

posted on Jun, 12 2014 @ 04:44 PM
a reply to: JiggyPotamus

Each Cycle of Humanity lasts 3600 years.resulting in a valid timeframe on one hand but an invalid one on the other hand which doesnt consider this 3600 year time period to be a Cycle which repeats.

A Kingship could last many Cycles if it were properly maintained.

Humanitys history is not optimally illustrated as one long linear line,it is best represented as a series of stacked circles,each one complete and layered on top of the one before it looking like a Slinky.

+7 more 
posted on Jun, 12 2014 @ 04:45 PM
You guys forget, the Sumerians used a base 60 number system and not the base 10 like we use today. Our clocks still run on base 60. So for accurate times, you need to convert those lengths of time into base 60, or maybe they are in base 60 and need to be converted to base 10. So, those lengths of time should drop dramatically when converted to our modern system. The Sumerians probably never thought someone would be using a non base 60 number system when reviewing their records.

posted on Jun, 12 2014 @ 05:11 PM
Maybe these where actually the names of dynasties that ruled rather than one specific person ie the Ubartutu dynasty reigned for 18,600 years and the meaning got lost in the translation.

+2 more 
posted on Jun, 12 2014 @ 06:13 PM
divide any of them huge numbers by 365 and you get a realistic number.

Perhaps year = day and something was lost in translation. 28800 / 365 = 78.9

posted on Jun, 12 2014 @ 06:18 PM
It is very interesting. The Sumerians were very interesting.

I think Sitchen was onto something with his research but I think he made too many leaps of faith.

posted on Jun, 12 2014 @ 07:55 PM
a reply to: amazing

In order to be effective, any disinformation operation must contain elements of truth…

That is why even to this day, so many refuse to believe that Zecharia Sitchin was a fraud and a puppet for the elite.

It's pretty clear Sitchin was a psy' op' as he was groomed at the London School of Economics.

Undeniable evidence makes it clear that Mr. Sitchin's fabricated translations were being funded by Rothschild and several other reliable sources have confirmed it as well.

posted on Jun, 12 2014 @ 08:07 PM
a reply to: Murgatroid

Okay, I'll bite. To what end would someone fund him to give us an alternative theory of creation based on the Sumerians?

What's the end game and what truth were they diverting us from?

posted on Jun, 12 2014 @ 08:18 PM
I wanna think outside the box one this on for the sake of conversation

what if the way that kings ruled was different during those times, what if the people only knew the name of one king for all that time but it was never actually the same person, I am sure some relatively more modern cultures have emulated this.
edit on 12-6-2014 by Darolla because: (no reason given)

posted on Jun, 12 2014 @ 08:23 PM

originally posted by: Darolla
I wanna think outside the box one this on for the sake of conversation

what if the way that kings ruled was different during those times, what if the people only knew the name of one king for all that time but it was never actually the same person, I am sure some relatively more modern cultures have emulated this.

It's simple, those are how many days each king ruled, not years. Why they mistranslated is the only conspiracy here.

top topics

<<   2  3  4 >>

log in