Mesopotamia

Pyramids and ziggurats both provide archeologists with a great deal of information about the ancient cultures that constructed them. When comparing The Great Pyramids of Egypt with The Ziggurats of Mesopotamia and the Mesoamerican Pyramids, the differences between them are more apparent than the similarities that they share. The structures only appear to be similar. Both have the general form of a pyramid. Some other similarities shared by these structures can be interpreted from a religious context of those who had them erected and what role they served for the society.

Among the differences are their usage, how they were decorated, their designs, and the materials used in their construction. The Egyptian pyramids were built as the final resting place for the pharaoh. It was also where the Pharaohs possessions were kept for him to enjoy in the afterlife. What has been found inside of these tremendous pyramids are precise layouts. For example, page 51 in our first book shows a diagram of the pyramid and inside each of them is a narrow shaft that extends from the deepest chamber to the outside. Coincidentally it is aligned with the North Star.

The Great Pyramids are quite interesting. The stones are so tight that you cannot even put a knife in between the stones. It makes you think how could this be possible? It makes you think how did these pyramids get built? Some might say that they were moved on wooden sleds, but it is quite hard to imagine how they constructed something on this scale. While it is true that the forced labor of war prisoners was a common practice at the time, most people agree that the humongous labor force used in building the pyramids consisted of workers from throughout Egypt as it states in our book.

Another interesting fact is that they are also perfectly square and they are aligned almost precisely with a compass. So really the main purposes of these pyramids were to have a resting place for their Pharaohs as they entered the afterlife. The pyramids of Mesoamerica also had their dead buried inside just as the Maya had done as mentioned in Book III on page 105. Unlike the Ancient Egyptian pyramids, these pyramids are better known for serving as altars or bearers of sacrificial offerings. Like the ancient

Egyptians, the early civilizations of Mesoamerica were involved in agriculture and their lives depended on how successful the harvest is. Because of this, both the Mayans and the Aztecs preformed human sacrifice as part of agricultural renewal. The temples had a long stair-stepped design that shows their purpose. The stepped design isn’t the only difference from the pyramids of ancient Egypt, but it was also the function they served in the society. These were temples to gods, and each one had a staircase topped with a temple.

The Mesoamerican pyramids were the heart and center of the city and community. Its main focus was to serve as religious ceremonies and civic ceremonies unlike the Egyptians which had their pyramids away from the villages. The Pyramid of the Sun in Teotihuacan was designed to represent certain astronomical events providing a link between the culture and the universe. If you look at the Pyramid of the Sun compared to the pyramids in Egypt, it is exactly the same size in terms of base as the great pyramid, but its height is roughly half the size of the great pyramids.

It is actually more similar to the Mesopotamian Ziggurats than the Ancient Egyptians Pyramids. Ziggurats are a lot like the Mesoamerican pyramids, with their stair-stepped shape and temple tops. But ziggurats were not places of worship to the Sumerians, Assyrians, and Babylonians that built them, they were the gods’ actual homes. In fact, only the priests could enter. And while South American pyramids have long staircases, ziggurats have ramps and steps. Many ziggurats also had seven tiers, representing the seven known planets or the seven heavens.

For the most part, the ziggurats that still exist can be found mainly in Iran and Iraq. Ziggurats and pyramids do greatly differ with function and purpose. As I had stated, Pyramids were thought to be the final resting places of the pharaohs. Ziggurats, however, were built to house the gods. Because of this, only special priests were allowed to go inside the ziggurats. Ziggurats also function as a retreat spot for the priest in case of a flood at the ground level. It also is a complete temple with dwelling places, storages, and courtyards.

Zigguratss have steps and ramps with its sides receding. They pyramids have a long stretch of staircases as the Mesoamerican pyramids demonstrated and smoother sides, as the Ancient Egyptian Pyramids showed. The Ziggurats do lack internal chambers unlike the Egyptian Pyramids. The Ziggurats have seven layers that represent the seven planets of heaven. Studying these ancient structures gives us a chance to take a look at the past. It is amazing how these feats of engineering survived this long.

Because of this, we are able to look at the civilizations that built them and how they incorporated these structures into their society. For Ancient Egyptians, it was for the deceased pharaohs as they made their journey to the afterlife. For the Mesoamericans, it was for religious purposes and agricultural renewal. And last for the Mesopotamians, it served as a house where the gods lived. These structures were a representation of the whole universe to these people. It is hard to compare with anything that we have now.

This was Mesopotamia (Greek for “between two rivers”). It was around 4000 BCE that a people called Sumerians moved into Mesopotamia.

By 3800 BCE the Sumerians had supplanted the Ubaidians and Semites in southern Mesopotamia. They built better canals for irrigating crops and for transporting crops by boat to village centers. They improved their roads, over which their donkeys trod, some of their donkeys pulling wheeled carts. And the Sumerians grew in number, the increase in population the key element in creating what we call civilization. Civilization is a word derived from an ancient word for city. Livings around each city were fields of grain, orchards of date palms, and land for herding.

Besides planting and harvesting crops, some Sumerians hunted, fished, or raised livestock. In addition to an increase in population, civilization was also about variety, and enough food was produced to support people who worked at other occupations  such as the priesthood, pottery making, weaving, carpentry and smithing. There were also traders, and the Sumerians developed an extensive commerce by land and sea. They built seaworthy ships, and they imported from afar items made from the wood, stone, tin and copper not found nearby The Sumerians used slaves, although they were not a major part of the economy.

Slave women worked as weavers, pressers, millers, and porters. The social structure of the Sumerians was decidedly different from other societies of that and later times. The Sumerian communities were city states organized around a temple and ruled by a priesthood. There was a class of craftsmen in addition to the priests and peasants. The craftmen devoted most of their time to producing things for either the temples or the warrior-soldiers which protected the temple community. The people were to devote their lives to propitiating the gods to prevent calamities from befalling the community.

The Epic of Gilgamesh Bronze Age Mesopotamia had a distinct culture and tradition; their rich cultural heritage was passed down by some incredible fictitious and non-fictitious writings like the ‘Epic of Gilgamesh’. There are many inferences that can be made about Bronze Age Mesopotamia by reading the ‘Epic of Gilgamesh’. It’s clear from this document that the dichotomy between a tyrannical and a just leader existed in the society where the leaders were expected to be courageous, bold and adventurous.

The importance of the role of religion on leadership cannot be overlooked and religion seemed to mingle with and govern the lives of the leaders. One of the most powerful deductions that can be made about Bronze Age Mesopotamia is the constant struggle between a tyrannical ruler and a just ruler. In fact one can go as far as claiming that the entire document highlights the need for a leader who rules well over his people. In the end of the tale we see Gilgamesh, a tyrannical barbaric ruler, repent by pledging to become someone who loves the people he rules (Kovacs).

This shows that perhaps corrupt tyrants who thrived at the expense of the common people marred the Bronze Age Mesopotamia. Similarly another key deduction on leadership is the apparent divine mandate to rule. The Persian Empire is known to have solidified the ‘divine mandate to rule’ and it seems that the Bronze Age Mesopotamia wasn’t too far off from the same notion. In the story we see Gilgamesh as a ‘hero’ mandated by the Gods to rule and after he displeases the Gods we see the birth of another ‘hero’ once again mandated by Gods to challenge Gilgamesh (Kovacs).

This intricate relationship between heroes and Gods is something that seems to be a key feature of leadership as no ordinary person could simply become a leader. The Bronze Age Mesopotamian society had somewhat unique expectation from their leaders. The most important expectation dealt with courage and strength, which is to clear from the numerous incidents during the ‘Woe unto Gilgamesh who slandered me and killed the Bull of Heaven! ” We see Enikdu and Gilgamesh fight off ‘the bull of heaven’ as well as fight each other with courage, passion and determination. A leader who did not ave the courage to fight and the strength to win was considered no leader at all during the Bronze Age Mesopotamia (Kovacs). Similarly, the leaders were also expected to have a sense of adventure to test out their courage. During the ‘Epic of Gilgamesh’ we see Gilgamesh and Enikdu travel to the dark cedar forest to fight the great monster called Humbaba. There seemed to be no reason for both these leaders to fight this monster but in order to prove their worth and win over the love of their people they had to embark upon this journey and prove their courage as seen in this quote, “I am Gilgamesh, I killed the Guardian!

I destroyed Humbaba who lived in the Cedar Forest… I slew lions in the mountain passes! ” (Kovacs) . During the course of the ‘Epic of Gilgamesh’ we also find out about interesting and intricate relationship between Gods and leadership. The Bronze Age Mesopotamian notion of God was very different from our modern notion and God’s often had physical form and interacted with men and other beings. Its clear from the tale that Gods were deeply concerned about who rules and it what manner. As seen in tablet VI, after Gilgamesh rejected Ishtar’s proposal to her father, “the god of creation, brings about a curse upon the city of Uruk (Kovacs).

Even though the Gods do not have complete control over how the leaders behave they seem to be the ones who ultimately decide their fate as is evident from the death Enkidu. The Gods also seem to decide the creation of leaders and their qualities. The leaders can be seen as ‘appointed officials’ and whenever a leader is doing what the Gods would have him do the God’s can create a new one to bring about balance and harmony. To conclude, the ‘Epic of Gilgamesh’, one of the few surviving works of the ancient literature, provides with wonderful insights into the hidden world of leadership in the Bronze Age Mesopotamia.

From this tale we find out that the Mesopotamian society had experienced tyrannical rule but at the same time people seemed to have realized a way forward where rulers needed to be just. We also find out that Bronze Age Mesopotamian culture recognized courage, passion and a sense of adventure as important virtues in their leaders. Similarly a lot can be said about the close connection between leaders, Gods and the ultimate power of the Gods over the leaders. Works Cited Kovacs, Maureen. The Epic of Gilgamesh. N. p. , n. d. Web. 14 Sep 2012. <http://www. ishtartemple. org/epic. htm>.

From the prehistoric time period to 1500 C. E. there have been many technological advances in the way of transportation and the way that different cultures have used their advances. In this, the student will attempt to convey to the reader ways that certain world culture areas evolved in the way of transportation to become more successful in transporting their goods for trade.

Starting with Ancient Mesopotamia (my personal favorite) there are very many different ways that the Mesopotamians changed their method of travel to accommodate their growing needs for certain goods. Starting by traveling on foot, Mesopotamians would take sling bags and fill them with their goods when they only had a few small items to transport. Maybe a small amount of Barley or wheat to make some bread with or some pickled or dried, salted fish would fit into most sling bags and the person would hang it over one shoulder like the way women carried babies in slings and just walk their route to get the goods t their destination.

When they needed to carry moderate loads they would wrap a cloth around their bundle of goods that might also include some meats from beef, sheep, or goats and wrap the bundle onto their back and use their forehead as a balancing point to hold the package of goods steady and keep themselves balanced to be able to walk without problems. Heavier loads however, were loaded onto a quite large pallet and covered in a cloth and tied down with rope. Then the pallet was loaded onto the carrier’s back and carried that way.

Due to the strain and limited space, they usually only kept meats and fish within the same or very nearby cities to avoid spoiling. In 3000 BC the Mesopotamians began utilizing donkeys as a mode of travel to carry goods. This enabled them to carry more and heavier items, and also they were able to carry different items as it was not as taxing on the individual traveling and the donkey could bear the weight instead. With the introduction of donkeys as domesticated animals the Mesopotamians were able to transport textiles (cloth and/or fabric).

While this is too heavy for a human to be able to carry enough to make the trip lucrative for all involved, using a donkey made it a lot easier to transport. Tied to the back of a donkey in bundles, the ass could walk for miles without needing a break and was able to bear the heaviness of the load. Donkeys enabled Mesopotamians to be able to travel and carry goods as far away as Kanesh in Turkey. The donkeys were also able to transport items such as gold, silver, and precious stones.

In order to make the stones enough to make the trip worthwhile, they could not just carry it on foot because it was too heavy once you had enough of these metals to prove enough to accomplish all needs. They could carry more grains also. The donkey was also able to carry wine and lapis lazuli (Mined in Afghanistan large chunks of it were able to be transported to make jewelry to trade. Without donkey assistance they would not have been able to carry enough back at once to make the amount of items needed to trade for survival or profit).

Which were both very heavy and needed to be carried by an ulterior method to get to where it needed to go efficiently and effectively. Around 2500-2350 B. C. , boats began being introduced to the Mesopotamians for a way to travel and transport their goods from place to place. Starting with gulf boats, they were Stronger than common river boats, used to transport goods from South Mesopotamia to the Gulf. Made out of reeds and other woods covered in bitumen (A natural tar-like substance that is derived from petroleum to make the wood waterproof).

The Mesopotamians were able to continue to transport barley, wheat, and textiles, but now, more of them and much faster. They also became able to transport stone. Mesopotamian Kings sent expeditions in search of unusual stones and carried from the gulf into Mesopotamia. Special woods like pine and cedar from as far away as India were traded in Southern Mesopotamia in trading posts. Pearls, known as fish eyes to the Mesopotamians were also able to be harvested and transported. Pearls were used to make jewelry and were exchanged for Babylonian goods.

Carnelian, a red or reddish white mineral that usually came from India was used to make jewelry and to decorate objects was also moved this way first. Copper, mixed with Tin and Bronze, being one of the most important traded goods traded, it came from Anatolia, Iran, and the Gulf. Ivory became available to be moved with the use of the gulf boat as well. Also, reeds cut from along the river banks and woven into mats or tied together as bundles for building boats and houses. Reeds were easier transported by water than by land.

Another form of boat that was used later on as needs became greater and more abundant amounts of goods were needed to survive this period was the coracle. The coracle is a small round boat made of animal skins and covered with the bitumen and were paddled or drifted downstream. They mostly used these coracles for moving and transporting fish, (more of it, and some of it was even transported alive in large post. Reeds, grains, and meat from beef, goats and sheep were also moved using coracles.

Although the type of goods did not change, the amounts and condition of some of these goods were very different as opposed to the foot or donkey method of traveling. Rafts which were simply logs tied together and placed on top of inflated animal skins. Was good for easy storage of the equipment used for making the rafts as they could be floated downstream and then dismantled upon arrival and the wood could be sold. With rafts the Mesopotamians were able to move more and heavier logs by lashing them together and floating them in the river along with side raft.

Larger amounts of reeds and grains for beer and wine were able to be moved easier this way and then the trip was even more advantageous. Assyrians used rafts to move large flat stone slabs to use in decorating their palaces. River boats that were made of reeds bundled and lashed and often covered in bitumen also to waterproof just the same as the coracle and gulf boats were. Usually drifted downstream with the current but then needed to be towed back upstream by various means such as donkeys, oxen or even people. The Mesopotamians carried all of the usual items on these river boats (grain, reeds, logs, wool, wine, and beer).

Although, they were also able to carry and transport bricks with much more ease than was available before these boats were used. Bricks were made of mud of baked used to build structures. Normally made near the place to be used, but sometimes needed to be transported to different cities. Moving on to Medieval Europe we have a very simple people. They usually did not go very far if they did leave because everything was so far away that they had to venture for days or even weeks to simply thirty miles and back. Most of the civilians that did travel did so on foot.

Most people in Medieval Europe stayed near the places where they were born. Whenever one did venture out, the person would usually be able to walk up to ten or twenty miles to a village, work all day and then walk back again at the end of the day. If the road was well maintained, they could walk further, however, it was uncommon unless need was emergent to go further. If not traveling on foot, the second most available choice after 2500 CE was on horseback. Horses could go much faster and further than a human simply walking to and from a destination.

Horses could go as far as thirty miles without needing a break. Would leave it to where the rider was able to accomplish much more with his day and even be able to bring with him some goods to trade where he ended up riding to. When they needed to move more than just a small amount of goods such as locally grown foods to sell or trade or things like wool. Wool was very heavy and a horse could not carry a very large amount on just horseback. They used covered wagons pulled by horse or oxen able to transport silk, wool, and grown foods to trade.

Could only go 20 Miles at a time when using horses for pull the wagon or 10 miles at a time (when using oxen oxen) before needed to stop and rest, or repair wagon due to condition of roads. Although this did make the trip take longer that with just one single horse, and also the trip was more lucrative because of the goods that could be carried back using a covered wagon. If there was more than just a moderate amount of supplies or goods they would use sailing ships to transport them. There were a few different types of sailing ship that was used, each one having its own purpose.

The first type of sailing ship that was used was a Knarr. This was the most common type used for most people. The Knarr had a sole square rigged sail and was mainly used to move light cargo. The next most available type of sailing ship used was the trade cog. These were single mast, flat bottomed ships with steep sides. The flat bottom allowed the sailors to come into port easier and go right up on land to be able to load and unload the goods and cargo better, faster, and easier. One more type of sailing ship that was used by Medieval Europeans was a hulk.

Also having a flat bottom like the trade cog, this ship was easy to dock on land to make boarding and de-boarding of cargo and persons easy. However, unlike the previous ships, the hulk had no mast making oceanic travel impossible in this craft. The hulk was used mainly in canals and rivers due to the limited controllability when attempting ocean traveling. The final two types of sailing ships that were used were the caravel and carrack. Both of these ships were mainly created by the Portuguese for exploration voyages.

The caravel had either both square and lateen rigged sails, or simply just lateen rigged sails. The carrack was a rather large ship, much larger than the caravel was. With six sails (a mizzen, a bowsprit, a spritsail, a foresail, and two topsails) this ship was very easily controlled no matter what the conditions. The many different sails made it so that the carrack could sail against the wind. In the Ancient Roman Empire transportation of goods didn’t really pick up too much until the Romans began using ships to move things, on account of how taxing everything was.

The invention of their roads did however help with the traveling but the items they had to trade and transport were so far away that they needed to be able to use shipping methods via waterways to get the items moved efficiently and in a method that was worthwhile to the people moving the items and the amounts of goods they needed to move The Romans started using ferries for transportation for crossing and traveling shallow passages. Although these passages could have been waded across, rivers like The Euphrates River had already begun to be inhabited by crocodiles and other harmful creatures.

Making it undesired to cross without being on a protecting contraption of some kind. Horse drawn chariots were two wheeled vehicles drawn by three or four horses (later on in history to be drawn by 2 horses) that were hitched side by side. This was a preferred method of transportations for Emperors and other royal persons. They were often made out of wood for the basket and wheels. The chariot was strengthened in some places by bronze or iron. The tires were also made of iron or bronze and the wheels had anywhere from four to eight spokes.

Sledges, pulled by oxen were used mainly to transport things that were very large and/or heavy. Sledges were known to carry large statues, animals, bricks and sunbaked soil. Sledges were made of Wood as well, but constructed much sturdier to be able to bear the weight of the large and heavy items that they were carrying. Last but not least, the Romans used ships to transport salves, silk from China, perfumes, cotton, precious stones, spices, and precious metals.

The romans differed on which ones they used the three most common types of ships that were used were rafts, sailing ships, and merchant ships.

References

1. Leokum, A. “When Were Ships First Used” The Free Lance Star October 24, 1968, Tell Me Why! Pg. 23 Print.
2. Beller, Steven. “Vienna. ” The World Book Encyclopedia. 2009 ed. Print.
3. O’Brien, Patrick Karl. “THE FIRST CIVILIZATIONS: MESOPOTAMIA AND THE INDUS REGION 4000-1800 BC” Oxford Atlas of World History. First published in 2002 by Philip’s an imprint of Octopus Publishing Group Second edition 2005 Reprinted with revisions 2007. Print.
4. Singman, Jeffrey L. Blaine, Bradford B. Daily Life in Medieval Europe Speculum Vol. 76, No. 2 (Apr. , 2001), pp. 523-524 Published by: Medieval Academy of America Stable URL: http://www. jstor. org/stable/2903521 Nelson, Eric.
5. “All Roads Lead To Rome” Complete Idiot’s Guide to the Roman Empire August, 2011 Print. Derived from: http://site. ebrary. com. proxy-library. ashford. edu/lib/ashford/docDetail. action? docID=10048566;p00=ancient%20roman%20travel%20trade

Joseph Reyes 2-B World History Ancient Civilizations People have been on the earth for hundreds of years. They have come together to become the best of the best. Civilizations were ways to put humans in to an organized group and to survive the ways of nature. Two civilizations were successful and survived for a long time. Ancient Mesopotamia was a much different civilization then Egypt, but both were organized in a similar way. They both developed by setting up their government, controlling their environment, and their values. In Mesopotamia the priest was in charge of dividing the farmers into groups to farm and take care of the land.

In Egypt the priests were in charge of making a record of their pharaohs and marking the most important happenings of their reigns. Mesopotamia used the Code of Hammurabi which was laws that concerned daily life, business, medicine, property, and family. It was based on an eye for an eye (revenge) and was to give justice for all. In Egypt the pharaoh was considered a god that ruled the Egyptians and had absolute power that made all the laws of the land and decisions. This is both civilizations form of government and was successful for years; some of those laws are still in modern day government.

Egyptians used the Nile River which provided food and water, farming, and transportation of goods. This helps them in their survival for the fact that they were living in the middle of a desert. In Mesopotamia, they developed city-states which were around the Tigris and Euphrates Rivers. These rivers were a key in their survival; they used these rivers for food, transportation, as well as plants. The rivers created a Fertile Crescent which allowed farming in Mesopotamia, the Fertile Crescent were important it was surrounded by desert and anything outside of it can’t be farmed. Using heir environment was an important key factor for the survival of these two great civilizations. As I said earlier Egyptians believed that the pharaoh was a god and was one with the divine. The Egyptians (supposedly) built the pyramids for the pharaohs to be buried in after they died and along with all of his possessions. The Sumerians and Akkadians practiced polytheism which was the worship of many gods. They believed that keeping the gods happy was the key to happiness and prosperity. They built big temples called ziggurats which were supposed to link Earth with the heavens and link people with the gods.

These were the beliefs of the civilizations and have shape humans in to believing in religion and God. All of this contributed to the success of the two civilizations. With their government controlling their actions and giving justice where needed. They also controlled their environment to use for their own advantage which allowed them to eat and use for transportation. Building great monuments for their beliefs and believing to obey all the rules of God as well. I believe all this contributed to the success of two giant civilizations.

Introduction

Readers of Zecharia Sitchin’s books, particularly The 12th Planet, will recognize the above seal, VA 243 (so named because it is number 243 in the collection of the Vorderasiatische Museum in Berlin). This seal is the centerpiece of Sitchin’s theory that the Sumerians had advanced astronomical knowledge of the planetary bodies in our solar system.

This knowledge was allegedly given to the Sumerians by extraterrestrials, whom Sitchin identifies as the Anunnaki gods of Sumero-Mesopotamian mythology. In the upper left-hand corner of the seal, Sitchin argues, one sees the sun surrounded by eleven globes. Since ancient peoples (including the Sumerians according to Sitchin) held the sun and moon to be “planets,” these eleven globes plus the sun add up to twelve planets. Of course, since we now know of nine planets plus our sun and moon, part of Sitchin’s argument is that the Sumerians knew of an extra planet beyond Pluto.

This extra planet is considered by Sitchin to be Nibiru, an astronomical body mentioned in Mesopotamian texts. Sitchin’s works detail his contention that Nibiru passes through our solar system every 3600 years, and so some believers in Sitchin’s theory contend that Nibiru will return soon. Some followers of Sitchin’s ideas also refer to Nibiru as “Planet X”. Is Sitchin correct – in whole or in part? Is Nibiru a 12th planet that will soon return? Does VA243 prove his thesis? Unfortunately for Sitchin and his followers, the answer to each of these questions is no. This paper will focus on the heart of his theory, VA243.

Nibiru is the subject of another paper on my website. Method and Approach The study of cylinder seals is actually a very specialized sub-discipline within Sumerology and Assyriology. a It is possible to determine, through the efforts of cylinder seal specialists of the recent past and current experts, to decisively say that Sitchin’s interpretation of this seal is deeply flawed and lacks scholarly merit. In short, his theory is false and is unsupported by the seal itself. In the discussion that follows, I will demonstrate that VA243 in no way supports Sitchin’s ideas.

My reasons / lines of argument for this are:

1. The inscription on the seal (left hand and right hand sides – which are not discussed by Sitchin) says nothing about planets or any element of astronomy. Rather than offering an independent translation, I will defer to authorities on Sumerian seal inscriptions in this regard to avoid any charge of bias.
2. The alleged “sun” symbol on the seal is not the sun. We know this because it does not conform to the consistent depiction of the sun in hundreds of other cylinder seals and examples of Sumero-Mesopotamian artwork.

I will describe the typical depiction (determined with certainty because it appears with texts about the sun god [Shamash Akkadian, known as Utu in Sumerian]) and provide image examples. Sources are provided for readers to check for themselves. The “sun” symbol is actually a star (which in Mesopotamian art could have six or, more commonly, eight points). Lest the modern reader retort that “well, the sun is a star,” I offer several images where the star symbol and the sun symbol (which again, is not that in VA243) are side-by-side and distinct from one another.

The Sumerians and Mesopotamians distinguished the sun from stars by using different symbols – and associating each symbol with the sun god and other gods, respectively. There is simply no ancient Sumero-Akkadian evidence to support Sitchin’s identification. 3) If the “sun” is not the sun, then what are the dots? The dots are also stars, as is best illustrated by the Sumerian-Mesopotamian depiction of the Pleaides (seven dots together with reasonable astronomical accuracy since they are visible to the naked eye). b The Pleaides are actually one of the most frequently depicted astronomical features in SumeroMesopotamian art.

As Sitchin points out (and this is corroborated by actual scholars in the field – it’s common knowledge), stars were associated with or considered to be heavenly beings – gods. In Sumero-Mesopotamian artwork, a star represents either a god or an astronomical body. The same can be said of the sun – it can either reference the literal sun or the sun god. There are three possibilities as to what VA243 is depicting: (A) It is singling out a deity or special star and associating it with other stars in some sort of zodiacal representation. I don’t consider this likely because there are other far clearer representations of zodiacal constellations.

Unless there are clear zodiacal connotations, a star was symbolic of a deity, which brings us to the second option. (B) More probable is the idea that the central star stands for a deity that has some association with fertility (as in crops) since the inscription describes an offering made by a worshipper (who is named) to a seated god who is associated in the seal with fertile harvest. Since there are two other figures in the seal in addition to the seated god, and one is the offerer, the remaining figure is likely a deity also associated with the offering. In favor of this possibility are the “implements” a

An excellent general introduction is Dominique Collon, Cylinder Seals. I am not saying the star is depicted amid the Pleiades, only that the artistic depiction of the Pleiades provides an excellent example of “dots” = stars. The Pleiadean depiction is always seven dots/stars. b shown on the seal with respect to these two figures facing the seated god and the figure’s headdress. Also in its favor is the fact that there are literally hundreds of such “offering seals,” and many have a star in upper proximity to the figures’ heads, signifying the figure is a deity (see the example). C) Since the star is surrounded by eleven other stars (dots), the artistic depiction could stand for the lead god of the Mesopotamian divine council and its other eleven (upper tier) members. Recall that (as Sitchin again points out) the Mesopotamian council had 12 members. I have noted before that the 12 member council isn’t always consistent in Mesopotamian religion (at times eight gods are considered the council), but 12 is the more prevalent number. This thesis is attractive, but I can’t say there is much to commend it over option B.

The reader might be thinking at this point, “Well, isn’t the sun god the leader of the pantheon – so if this symbology points to the divine council the center symbol could still be the sun? ” This would be an erroneous line of thought since in SumeroMesopotamian religion the sun god is NOT the high god; the high god is Anu (later, Marduk), not Shamash. These options are admittedly subjective, but one thing is certain – the “sun” symbol does not conform to the abundantly frequent symbol for the sun in SumeroMesopotamian art. We are not dealing with a depiction of the solar system.

Astronomer Tom van Flandern pointed this out years ago anyway, since the sizes of the “planets” around the alleged sun do not conform to the correct sizes of the planets and there distances from the pseudo-sun are not depicted in such a way as to depict elliptical (or at least varying) orbits. The link to van Flandern’s critique is on my website. 4) There is not a single text in the entire corpus of Sumerian or Mesopotamian tablets in the world that tells us the Sumerians (or later inhabitants of Mesopotamia) knew there were more than five planets.

This is quite a claim, but is demonstrable through the work of scholars who specialize in cuneiform astronomy. Below I list all the major works on cuneiform astronomy (catalogues of texts, dissertations / books) and invite readers to check them out of a library and look for themselves. Literally every cuneiform text that has any astronomical comment (even with respect to astrology and omens) has been translated, catalogued, indexed, and discussed in the available academic literature.

The tablets are often quite detailed, even discussing mathematical calculations of the appearance of planetary bodies in the sky, on the horizon, and in relation to other stars. The field is by no means new, and is considerably developed. All of the above facets of the discussion are now offered in more detail with bibliography. I. The Inscriptions on VA 243 VA243 has three lines of text (“line 1” is actually repeated on both sides of the seal):

The seal is transliterated (the Sumero-Akkadian signs in English letters) and translated in the principal publication of the Berlin Vorderasiatische Museum’s publication of its seal collection, Vorderasiatische Rollsiegel (“West Asian Cylinder Seals”; 1940) by Mesopotamian scholar Anton Moortgat on page 101. This book is in German, so I offer the German and an English translation: Line 1 = dub-si-ga “Dubsiga” [a personal name of an apparently powerful personc] Line 2 = ili-il-la-at “Ili-illat” [another personal name, this time of the seal’s owner] “dein Knecht” [German for “your servant”d] Line 3 = ir3-su

So the full (rather boring) inscription of VA243 reads: “Dubsiga, Ili-illat, your/his servant. ” Nothing in the inscription suggests anything remotely to do with astronomy or planets. In an email correspondence with Dr. Rudi Mayr, whose dissertation was on cylinder seals, Dr. Mayr commented on the inscriptions and the seal [and I interject a few comments in blue]: “The seated figure is a god; the ‘flounced’ garment is normal for deities (though kings start wearing them a little later); deities also have the distinctive headdress. Most scholars call it a ‘horned’ headdress, but I’ve always thought it looked more like flames than horns.

Ancient texts often refer to deities having a bright, shining, brilliant aspect [this is true across the ancient near east – witness the “shining one” terminology I discuss in The Facade and in several papers on my website]; they don’t mention horns . . . The introducing figure also has the ‘horns’ of divinity” [this is a strong contextual argument that the symbol – again, it’s not the “sun” – to the upper left of the introducing figure is a star. Precisely because they SHINE, stars were associated with deities. Shamash, the sun god, had his own symbol of the sun.

See below for what it looked like]. c Personal email communication on Dubsiga with Dr. Rudi Mayr, whose dissertation was on cylinder seals. Dr. Mayr is also the source of the comment on the second line, which conforms to typical cylinder seal patterns. d Dr. Mayr noted to me in an email that the third line might also read “his servant”, which was his preference.

The “Sun” Symbol

This is perhaps the biggest problem with Sitchin’s interpretation of VA243 signifying the solar system. Simply put, if the central symbol in his solar system isn’t the sun, the interpretation collapses completely.

There’s actually a good deal of evidence to demonstrate decisively that Sitchin is wrong here. Toward offering that evidence, we’ll first introduce a few general comments on Sumero-Akkadian symbols and move to the specifics. A. General Comments Like all ancient religions, Sumero-Mesopotamian religion had a great concern with heavenly bodies that could be observed with the naked eye. In particular, the sun, moon, and Venus were important focus points because of their ease of visibility, and each was artistically symbolized and stood for a deity.

In Sumer-Mesopotamian religion, the sun god symbology was very clear: Sun god = Shamash (Utu in the Sumerian languagee) The symbol of the sun god in Sumero-Mesopotamian religion was a central circle with four extended “arms” with wavy lines in between each “arm” (most common), or a circle with only wavy lines. The entire symbol was itself nearly always [I don’t know any exceptions, but there may be one – just being cautious here] inside a circle, as below:f The reader should note immediately that this is NOT the symbol on VA243.

VA 243’s “pseudo-sun” lacks the wavy lines and is not set inside a circle. This sun symbol is ubiquitous in Sumero-Mesopotamian religious artwork. The other common symbol for the sun god was the god in flight upon a set of wings (a depiction akin to the winged disc in Egyptian religion). e See Jeremy Black, Gods, Demons, and Symbols of Ancient Mesopotamia: An Illustrated Dictionary (University of Texas Press, in conjunction with the British Museum, 1992): 168. This is an excellent reference source. Dr. Black is a well known Sumerian scholar.

He was formerly the Director of the British School of Archaeology in Iraq and is now university lecturer in Akkadian and Sumerian at Wolfson College, Oxford. f See above source, p. 168. The above classic solar disk iconography in Sumero-Mesopotamian religion is contrasted with the star symbol, used to symbolize either stars in constellations, any deity (the star is either over the deity’s head or above it to the left of right), or Ishtar (Sumerian Inana), who stood for Venus, the most visible object in the sky aside from the sun and moon:g Note that this example has eight points.

This is the most frequently attested style in Sumero-Mesopotamian religious art. The star also is found with six (like VA 243) or seven points, and the points even vary within the same seal or stela carving. It wasn’t consistent in points, but what the symbol stood for was consistent – either a star, planet, or deity – but NOT the sun. The star symbol is either set within a circle or, far more often, not within a circle. It is clearly distinct from the sun symbol. How do I know that the symbol of VA 243 is a star and not the sun disk?

Other than the obvious noted above – that VA 243 does not have the wavy lines between the “arms” of the symbol and is not set within a circle – Sumero-Mesopotamian religion often grouped the symbols for the sun god with that of the moon god (Akkadian = Sin; Sumerian = Nanna) and Ishtar (Sumerian = Inana). This isn’t surprising since they were so readily viewed. In short, they didn’t confuse the symbols and neither should we. This grouped threesome is very prevalent in Sumero-Mesopotamian art, and compels the observation that the sun symbol and star symbol were distinguished from each other:

Source: Ursula Seidl, Die Babylonischen Kudurru Reliefs, Tafel 11, Zweite Gruppe, stela “a” = The Babylonian Kudurru Reliefs, Plate 11, 2nd Group, stela “a”. Note the wavy lines and encircled sun symbol on the right. Ursula Seidl, Die Babylonischen Kudurru Reliefs, Tafel 19, Vierte Gruppe, stela “b” = The Babylonian Kudurru Reliefs, Plate 19, 4th Group, relief “b”. Note the wavy lines and encircled sun symbol on the lower right. g See Black, 143. The symbols for sun and star/planet are also distinguished clearly in zodiacal artwork from Mesopotamia:

The sun symbol (Left) and star symbol (Right) are next to each other under the snake (Draco). Note the wavy lines of the sun symbol Source: Ursula Seidl, Die Babylonischen Kudurru Reliefs, p. 47 = The Babylonian Kudurru Reliefs, p. 47 Here is a close-up of the sun (L) and star (R) symbol above. Note that the star in this case has eight points: A second zodiac example: The sun symbol (center) and star symbol (R of center) are next to each other under the snake’s tail. Note the wavy lines of the sun symbol Source: Ursula Seidl, Die Babylonischen Kudurru Reliefs, p. 0 = The Babylonian Kudurru Reliefs, p. 60 In the above example, note that: (1) the star has seven points, and (b) the stars below it have six points. Note also that these smaller stars also LACK points – they are just dots. This seven dot/circle arrangement is one of the most common motifs in Mesopotamian art, and denote the Pleiades. The point here is that dots = stars in Mesopotamian art when in an astronomical context (or a context where a deity is identified with a star). This is important for our consideration of VA 243. Again, here is a close-up: A third zodiac example:

Note that the star symbol here has six points as does the VA 243 star. Source: Ursula Seidl, Die Babylonischen Kudurru Reliefs, p. 23 = The Babylonian Kudurru Reliefs, p. 23 Some commentary on this last example is in order. The previous two examples clearly are in zodiac context, as is this one. Those previous two examples clearly have the sun symbol drawn in a manner consistent with expected Sumero-Mesopotamian features (wavy lines, encircled) that unmistakably distinguishes the sun from the star symbol. The star symbol signifies the same astronomical body in each case, yet the number of points varies.

This means that the number of points is unimportant for identifying the star symbol as a STAR or planet, NOT the sun. Hence one cannot say, “well the star symbol usually has eight points, and the Sitchin seal has six, therefore it’s not a star but the sun. ” This is erroneous because these examples demonstrate clearly that a star symbol can have 6, 7, or 8 pts. , and LACKS wavy lines. The symbol on Sitchin’s VA 243 is NOT the sun. It is a star, and thus denotes a star, a god, or a single planet. This isn’t my opinion, it’s the Sumero-Mesopotamian art convention.

Let’s move on to some cylinder seal examples of star symbols. As noted above, the star was designed to signify a deity or literal star or planet. Here’s an example of a cylinder seal with Ishtar signaled as the deity by a star: Source: Henri Frankfort, Cylinder Seals: A Documentary Essay on the Art and Religion of the Ancient Near East (London: MacMillan and Co. , 1939): Plate XXVI-seal L In this example, the obvious star symbol has eight points, and is very similar in design to the star symbol of VA 243. We know it’s a star and not the sun because the goddess depicted is Ishtar. Another star symbol of very similar design to VA 243 is shown below:i The upper left-hand side of this seal contains the winged sun disk above the head of what scholars refer to as a “scorpion man” (note his tail). Just to the right of the winged disk is our star symbol. This time the star has seven points, and is quite similar to VA 243. Note as well h See the discussion in Frankfort (pp. 177-178, 236, 254) and Black, p. 168. See also the magisterial survey: E. Douglas van Buren, Symbols of the Gods in Mesopotamian Art, Analecta Orientalia 23 (Pontificum Institutum Biblicum, 1945): 8485. Frankfort, Plate XXXIII – seal b. the far upper right corner – the seven stars grouped together are the Pleiades (to which we will return in our discussion). Below are several examples of seals with six pointed stars: (Frankfort, Plate XXXIII – seal d): Comments: Note the six-pointed stars in the upper left and upper right corners. In both cases, note the presence of accompanying “dots” in groups of seven – again, the Pleiades (the “extra dot” over the head of the smaller standing figure denotes a deity as it is a star).

The seven dots = the seven stars of the Pleiades (the dots were interchangeable with pointed stars to denote stars). As E. Douglas van Buren, an expert on Sumerian and Mesopotamian art comments: “In the earliest representations of the 7 dots as yet known it can be seen that . . . they formed a ring or rosette around a central dot . . . [From] the early Babylonian period onwards it is increasingly common to find the 7 dots arranged like stars in the constellation of the Pleiades, and in the last quarter of the second millennium the dots are shaped for the first time as stars. j This observation is important because it demonstrates that the “pointed star + Pleiades” pattern does not require a certain number of points on the stars. Recall that the same situation was true with the zodiac – it does not matter how many points a star symbol has – it’s a star, not the sun. Another example: j E. Douglas van Buren, “The Seven Dots in Mesopotamian Art and Their Meaning,” Archiv fur Orientforschung XIII (1941): 277; see also E. Douglas van Buren, Symbols of the Gods in Mesopotamian Art, 74ff. and E.

Douglas van Buren, “The Rosette in Mesopotamian Art,” Zeitschrift fur Assyriologie and vorderasiatische Archaeologie, new series, vol. 11 (1939, vol. 45 from old series): 104ff. (Frankfort, Plate XXXV – seal h): In this seal the star has six points surrounding a central dot. Note again the Pleiades symbol (see below under the next point on the “dots” in VA 243). Before leaving the discussion of the star symbol, take note of the close similarity in style between the star on VA 243 that Sitchin says is the sun and the star symbols we have noted above: Frankfort XXXIII-b VA 243

Ishtar star Now compare these with the actual sun symbol: III. The Surrounding “Dots” As I asked in the introduction to this paper, if Sitchin’s “sun” is not a sun, then what are the dots? The most apparent answer, based on the examples above, is that they too are stars. We have already seen that dots were used to depict the stars of the Pleiades, and showed that the seven dots = the seven star symbols elsewhere used for the same constellation. We also saw above in the seal of Frankfort Plate XXXIII-d that a single pointed star can be associated with dots which are also stars.

It is almost that the “star + seven dots” symbology is saying, “constellation = Pleiades. ” There is therefore abundant precedent for asserting that these dots in VA243 are stars. It could be that this seal is “saying”: “Constellation = the one with 11 stars”. Since I don’t know astronomy well, I’ll let the reader ponder that one. The introduction also noted that the symbology of the seal could just point to a deity and perhaps the divine council. Enough said on that.

On Sumerian or Mesopotamian Astronomical Knowledge

In this regard I offer the reader an opportunity to challenge my assertion above (and I am just quoting specialists in cuneiform astronomical tablets) that there is not a single text in the entire corpus of Sumerian or Mesopotamian tablets in the world that says the Sumerians or Mesopotamians knew of more than five planets. Below are bibliographical references that anyone can access (the scholarly, dissertation level materials that one needs some knowledge of semitic languages and/or cuneiform, as well as a background in mathematics or astronomy, to really use are noted in their own category).

In my paper on Nibiru (available on my website), I’ll briefly go into what the Sumerians and Mesopotamians knew about the planets. For now, though, giving the reader these sources will suffice.

General Sources

1. Francesca Rochberg, “Astronomy and Calendars in Ancient Mesopotamia,” Civilizations of the Ancient Near East, vol. III, pp. 1925-1940 (ed. , Jack Sasson, 2000)
2. Bartel L. van der Waerden, Science Awakening, vol. 2: The Birth of Astronomy (1974) Technical but Still Readable Wayne Horowitz, Mesopotamian Cosmic Geography (1998) N. M.
3. Swerdlow, Ancient Astronomy and Celestial Divination (2000) Scholarly (Technical) Resources: Otto Neugebauer, The Exact Sciences in Antiquity (1953)
4. Otto Neugebauer, Astronomical Cuneiform Texts (1955) Erica Reiner and David Pingree, Enuma Elish Enlil Tablet 63, The Venus Tablet of Ammisaduqa (1975)
5. Hermann Hunger and David Pingree, MUL. APIN: An Astronomical Compendium in Cuneiform (1989)
6. Hermann Hunger and David Pingree, Astral Sciences in Mesopotamia (1999)
7. N. Swerdlow, The Babylonian Theory of the Planets (1998) David Brown, Mesopotamian Planetary Astronomy-Astrology (2000)