
I'm still working on the inscriptions,... I've got all but 2 of them down,. they SHOULD be the Assyrian for "Babylon" (or Babel) and "Euphrates",... but I can't seem to find the mention of either anywhere! and i'm hesitant to use the phonetic cuneiform values as they are/were such important things.
Sadly all the photos i've got of the original tablet are rather low-res and the only transcription I can find in the original cuneiform is also a very low res scan from an old book,... if I can't find another source i'll have to go see if IC an get a look at the original tablet in person while i'm in London.
For some reason I can't get this map out of my head,... maybe it's important,. maybe it has something to do with irony,..... i'm sure it'll become clear with time,.
Sadly all the photos i've got of the original tablet are rather low-res and the only transcription I can find in the original cuneiform is also a very low res scan from an old book,... if I can't find another source i'll have to go see if IC an get a look at the original tablet in person while i'm in London.
For some reason I can't get this map out of my head,... maybe it's important,. maybe it has something to do with irony,..... i'm sure it'll become clear with time,.
Category All / All
Species Unspecified / Any
Size 775 x 736px
File Size 257.7 kB
Listed in Folders
Sounds like the same one. large portions of the lower sections are missing or damaged, but some of what's there can be interpolated by studying the rest of the tablet. For example, the 'spikes' around the edge indicate islands, the top three have additional information to do with distance writen next to them; we can assume that they all had such information about them but sadly that has been completely destroyed. But the inscriptions inside the surviving 'spikes' all says the same thing, basicly, "here is an island", so it's fairly safe to assume that the same is writen inside the lost 'spikes' too.
There's a certain amount of educated guess work involved and my knowledge of cuneiform is still far from masterly but from what i've got this should be a reasonably workable version of what the map looked like. :)
There's a certain amount of educated guess work involved and my knowledge of cuneiform is still far from masterly but from what i've got this should be a reasonably workable version of what the map looked like. :)
Well, early Sumerian was made up of hieroglyphic pictograms but that changed over time; these inscriptions are late Assyrian/early late-Babylonian.
The weird thing about Sumerian is that no other languages developed from it. There's indication of an influence of cuneiform script in some parts of the Phoenician alphabet and some phonetic correlation to very early Hebrew but other than that there's nothing. The Sumerian language is unique in that respect, that it was the language of such a long-lived and powerful civilisation and yet produced no off-shoots.
And, of course, the other really weird thing about Sumerian is that it's full of quirks that just don't make sense,. even if you understand it it doesn't exactly 'make sense',.. in some respects the people that wrote it must have viewed the world in a very different way than anyone has in all the centuries since. :-/
The weird thing about Sumerian is that no other languages developed from it. There's indication of an influence of cuneiform script in some parts of the Phoenician alphabet and some phonetic correlation to very early Hebrew but other than that there's nothing. The Sumerian language is unique in that respect, that it was the language of such a long-lived and powerful civilisation and yet produced no off-shoots.
And, of course, the other really weird thing about Sumerian is that it's full of quirks that just don't make sense,. even if you understand it it doesn't exactly 'make sense',.. in some respects the people that wrote it must have viewed the world in a very different way than anyone has in all the centuries since. :-/
Eric von Daniken wrote 'Chariots of the Gods'. Basically about how space aliens invented everything and taught monkeys how to use it then went away only to return occasionally to check on us in their shiny flying saucers. c_c
If you're a serious scholar, then there's a REASON you haven't heard of him.
If you're a serious scholar, then there's a REASON you haven't heard of him.
Aw, c'mon, his stuff makes more sense than "God created the world in seven days" or "everything was just good luck". Of course you cannot take him seriously, but you make him down without nowing his books. He never speaks of flying saucers. I just menat him to be a nice addition gag if you study ancient cultures.
Evolution is hardly about 'good luck'. It's about the best results of the last batch surviving to breed while the failures die. Success breeds success.
It's a lot more about inevitability of circumstances. Toss enough chemicals around at varying temperatures and pressures and you do get complex molecules sooner or later. Do that long enough and sooner or later some of those complex molecular strands get more complex. Looked at from a certain perspective, some form of life is an almost inevitable result.
It's a lot more about inevitability of circumstances. Toss enough chemicals around at varying temperatures and pressures and you do get complex molecules sooner or later. Do that long enough and sooner or later some of those complex molecular strands get more complex. Looked at from a certain perspective, some form of life is an almost inevitable result.
Comments