Tartaria tablets

These signs are present in relatively large numbers. The problem of their meaning has been debated before and is still. I had a suggestion of approaching especially the sign H on pillar 18 (see picture below) with the Sumerian proto-cuneiform sign PA. The sumerian meaning of sign is related to life:

Sumerian Lexicon – Sumerian Language Pagewww.sumerian.org › sumerian << Sumerian lexicon has benefitted from several c … (ńiš)pa: leaf, bud, sprout; branch; wing; feather >>

This “leaf, sprout, branch” are good bedfellows. with basic sign T:”will to live”. Sign Pa is composed of elementary signs PAP

From https://www.ancient-origins.net/opinion/secret-gobekli-tepe-cosmic-equinox-and-sacred-marriage-part-1-002861 << We see also ambiguous symbols on some pillars. In addition to “”H” and “I” symbols, several sun and moon symbols were found engraved on some pillars, revealed Schmidt. The sun and moon signs which were engraved on the Temple D center pillars are quite remarkable. The moon is depicted as crescent, and the sun is portrayed with a cavity in its center. Some of these symbols will undoubtedly be vital to solving the secrets of Göbeklitepe. …..Sidharth also thinks the “H” sign on one of the center pillars symbolizes the Orion constellation. …. According to Schmidt, however, the H-like sign characterizes the male and female relationship [8]. When examined closely, it does seem a kind of relationship between two individuals: both thrusting out their hands to one another >> I relied on the fact that a number of G.T.’s signs were probably used later in the Middle East as pictograms, long before the advent of proto-writing. Otherwise the signs have a history that has no end back in time. I was not fully satisfied and now I resume the problem. Very interesting is the fact that I made the approach of this sign with the constellation Orion and with the fact that it could be a ligature of two Tau signs, but to my surprise I found that others did it as well.

I had the stubborn idea to see if the Sumerians used two Tau signs somewhere. The T sign meaning “ME” .I searched to see if sumerians used two ME signs. I found only in their writing, one sign folowing another.In monuments I haven’t found them ligated yet.

From New deciphering of Gobekli Tepe http://a9414495.eu5.org/origin/gobekli.html

I consider all the hypotheses to be virtually valid. But in the first part I will explain my “me-me” hypothesis and in the second part I will present the opinions of others. MY HYPOTHESIS: 2T=H= “ME-ME”

From http://www.saradistribution.com/oldesttempleofworld.htm

From http://thehiddenrecords.com/gobekli-tepe-taurus-bull

Here the same opinion as mine, that H is formed by two connected Tau’s…. but not connect further with Me, as being MeMe. From same ancientorigins.net, Cosmic Power of the Shaman and Symbols at Göbekli Tepe – Part II https://www.ancient-origins.net/opinion-guest-authors/cosmic-power-shaman-and-symbols-g-bekli-tepe-part-ii-005194 << The H Symbol One of the highly disputed symbols is the H-like symbol (and also “( H )” symbol) which is seen carved on  Enclosure D pillars. Some say this symbol emblematizes the Orion constellation. I think this is not true. Because, besides the “H “symbol, there is an “I-like” symbol, which can define as slanted “H”. Both of them are not related to Orion. To provide some intriguing and factual meanings based on cultural and archaeological datas: “H” symbol is not only a monolith symbol itself. It consists of two parts, which we can define as Tau. We encounter the same “H” symbol in Utah petroglyphs which are made by Anasazis. Indeed, we see the complete “( H )” symbol. Here the “H” symbol is not alone. On both sides there are other symbols. https://www.ancient-origins.net/sites/default/files/Utah-petroglyphs.jpg Ray Urbaniak interprets the “H” symbol to mean double T shapes. Two T shapes butted together form a double T. He also says that Tau represents half of which is in the spiritual world. So, we can imagine that the “H” symbol consists of two Tau symbols. In my opinion, both of the side symbols next to “H” symbol represent the rising and setting sun. This tripartite character matches a verbal expression of mythological ideas about the three states of sun throughout the day (or moon throughout the night). The Ancient Egyptian god says: I am Khepra in the morning, I am Ra at noon, I am Atum in the evening—the names of deities that represent the sun in its various states. The I Symbol The “I” symbol of ancient Mexican mythology not only exhibits a single Tau of two forms, but in different positions, as well as two double-headed figures joined in one, which illustrates the duality, above and below, or heaven and earth. >> ….”above and below”, the same opinion as mine, eugenrau

You see better the ligated Tau’s better in G.T.’s “I” signs, from folowing picture: http://thehiddenrecords.com/gobekli-tepe-taurus-bull or from https://i.pinimg.com/564x/5c/d1/94/5cd194173a978386122812f338d685e8.jpg

eugenrau: The doubling of icons is evident in the existence of twoo, pair double main pillars of G.T.’s oldest ones, layer A. If Tau shape could be the relation to life and divine, two Tau’s is making a new symbol; what could it mean? Suppose the double divine aspect: relation with earthen life and with the sky. So possible entire univers known by them. Only some hundred years human realised that the sky has a depth. Until then was imagined as a cover of Earth, where above T’s horizontal upper line. So T is relation of life with the sky and divine and upside down T the relation of life with the Earth.

But there is a Goddess Meme: List of Mesopotamian deities – Wikipediahttps://en.wikipedia.org › wiki › List_of_Mesopotamian… <<Deities in ancient Mesopotamia were almost exclusively anthropomorphic. They were thought … Both the Sumerian and Akkadian languages contain many words to express the … Ninkarrak, Meme, Bau, and Ninisina, is the Mesopotamian goddess of healing and the divine patroness of doctors and medicine-workers.>>

==== EARLY DIVINITY SIGN > later> GOD SIGN ? ========

From World’s First Known Written Word at Göbekli Tepe on T-Shaped Pillar 18 Means God Manu Seyfzadeh, Robert Schoch Institute for the Study of the Origins of Civilization, College of General Studies, Boston University, Boston, MA, USA https://www.scirp.org/html/1-1140123_90367.htm?fbclid=IwAR1kPHutMJikYFQzqFqkiI5-QIx_aKfA5-oB2_LoBOVksqVAPe5C64HjyFs << We examined if H-shaped carvings in relief on some of these pillars might have a symbolic meaning rather than merely depicting an object of practical use. On Pillar 18 in Enclosure D, for example, one such “H” is bracketed by two semi-circles. An almost identical symbol appears as a logogram in the now extinct hieroglyphic language of the Bronze Age Luwians of Anatolia and there it meant the word for “god”. Further supporting a linguistic connection between Luwian hieroglyphs and images at Göbekli Tepe are to date untranslated Luwian symbols resembling the T-shape iconography of Göbekli Tepe and an H-like symbol which was the Luwian word for “gate”.>>

eugenrau: Beeing Gate to the Universe, or Universe icon, that icon was used to adorn different stone elements, so used in different orientations. By no way we are expecting sumerians to accurately copy G.T.’s icons, so no wonder do not find this one in sumerian.

========================= From www.researchgate.net › publication Rezultate de pe web (PDF) Ancient Near Eastern Gods Enki and Ea: Diachronical … Enki-Ninki Deities and the God Enki in Old- Sumerian Sources 46. 3.5. Enki in Old- Sumerian … ME.ME the me-s. dEN.KI (of? / to?) Ea. AL6.

From www.jstor.org › stable The Accounts of the Origin of Writing from Sumer, Egypt and China – JStor me me available, first to gods, and then through them to the human world. So, if me are of divine origin, we have to admit that “the scribal art

From babylonian-collection.yale.edu › …PDF The Exaltation of Inanna, by William W. Hallo and J. J. A. van Dijk. Yale … true that the colophons of Sumerian and Akkadian literary series-which correspond to the … R-imin-bi, 5: “totality of me’s“; me-zi, 60. me-zu

From ore.ac.uk › download › pdfPDF Nippur Bibliography – CORE 1 ian. 1992 — Barton, G. A. Sumerian Business and Administrative … Zettler, R. L. ” The Genealogy of the House of Ur–me-me: A Second …

From krieger2.jhu.edu › pdf › jcooper “Enlil and Namzitara” Reconsidered [“Enlil and Namzitara”] is a Sumerian variation of a well-known theme, … The Genealogy of the House of Ur-Me-me: a Second Look. AfO 31:.

From hal.archives-ouvertes.fr › doc…PDF Masters’ Writings and Students’ Writings: School Material in … – HAL 7 apr. 2015 — learning cuneiform writing, Sumerian vocabulary and grammar, … The [ texts] in Sumerian and Akkadian, from A-A ME- ME.

From etheses.bham.ac.uk › eprintPDF Stealing the Enemy’s Gods: An Exploration of the Phenomenon of … accompanied by recitations of incantations in Sumerian and Akkadian; the incantations and the ritual … 23. me-me-ni ina IGI LUGAL

From etcsl.orinst.ox.ac.uk › cgi-bin › etcsl The Electronic Text Corpus of Sumerian Literature … udun-mah-e du8-a-zu. 20. zar gu2-nida-am3 si sa2-sa2-am3. 21. munu4 sahar jar-ra a sig9- ga-zu. 22. ur me-me nam gam-gam-ma-am3Ai trimis Azi la 12:45escholarship.org › content Rezultate de pe web UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN DIEGO Death …

From eScholarship.org The Electronic Text Corpus of Sumerian Literature, Black … me-me) noble guard (gam-gam- ma-am3) it even from the potentates (?)” ( ETCSL …

From www.researchgate.net › publication (PDF) Ancient Near Eastern Gods Enki and Ea: Diachronical … Enki-Ninki Deities and the God Enki in Old- Sumerian Sources 46. 3.5. Enki in Old- Sumerian … ME.ME the me-s.

If in the Sumerians there is the sign and the notion of ME, they refer to the fact that there were and used more, a lot of ME. The multitude of knowledge, their totality represents their knowledge about the whole Universe, the terrestrial one, and the celestial one, totally being worthy of a deep admiration and respect, such a divine invoice.

================================ OTHER OPINIONS REGARDING GOBEKLI TEPE H’s.

From https://ttlawson.com/in-plain-sight-the-identity-of-the-twin-pillars-of-gobekli-tepe/ << Figures such as the “O”,”C”, and “H” are pictograms or ideograms: pictorial signs for something of broader import; they might more recognizably be called, in the digital age, icons. There seem to have been but few pictograms deployed at Göbekli Tepe.  …… ….Dietrich treats the “H” and “C” pictograms as being of the same order as the bucranium, recognizing therefore that the bucranium is present on the pillar as a pictogram or icon.  … ….There is little doubt that the bucrania at Göbekli Tepe are symbols, if not of the bull, then nevertheless bull symbols in some sense. Let’s focus therefore on the “H,” the “O,” and the “C.” They appear as a set at the throat of the pillar paired with the bull pillar in enclosure D. On the belt of that pillar the “C” and “H” motif also appears. I have found both configurations to be drawn from the night sky and to represent the moon. By contrast to this pillar, the belt of the bucranium pillar is blank.

…. At the throat of that pillar, it takes the form of the full and crescent phases of the moon, in association with the “H” figure. And, on the belt of that pillar, what I see as the waxing and waning stages of the crescent moon are carved, embracing the “H.” As noted, there is no corresponding marking on the belt of the bucranium pillar. Finally, the crescent moon symbol appears in conjunction with the “H” on one of the smaller pillars of Enclosure C, and there the “H” also appears separately.One fact is particularly striking. These four figures, the circle “O” with the “C” and the “H”; the paired “C’s” with the “H”; the “H” alone, and the bucranium are quite possibly the only pictograms on the entire site. And they are replicated throughout the site, and in several configurations. Conclusion No one thought up the goddess or the bull, or thought to put them together in a singularly strange pairing; the two simply materialized in the evolutionary play of chance and circumstance that brought about the miracle of the human mind. One begins with the earliest evidenced milieu of thought — a magical realm of spirit, rooted in life’s implicit interplay between life and death. From that emerged the figure of a goddess, associated with both birth and death and balancing the two. An affront to her sanctity meant death to the living. The bull, her masculine counterpart, was also her sacrificial victim. The complementary emblems strategically placed at the necks of Göbekli Tepe’s paired central pillars all but of necessity specify the pillars’ respective identities. One pictogram, the bucranium, is unmistakably the symbol of a bull. The symbol at the neck of the other depicts the full and crescent stages of the moon. The moon, owing to the correspondence between the cycles of women and the moon, vouches a feminine aspect for this pillar. As if to underscore the point, the artisans added crescent moon symbols on the belt of the pillar and elsewhere. The evidence is perforce circumstantial — one cannot look into the Neolithic mind — but, taken all together, the circumstances fit into a coherent whole warranting the conclusion that behind the ritual activities of Göbekli Tepe lay the woman and the bull — the divine pair that carried forward into the Bronze Age religions of Mesopotamia. ================================= Anatolii I. Kharchenko New deciphering of Gobekli Tepe http://a9414495.eu5.org/origin/gobekli.html sais: <<On the belt, the alternating symbols C and H. C are the image of the new moon, H is the symbol of the sexual act (vertical sticks are man and woman, the horizontal stigma is the male’s organ, and H is the symbol of the man and woman associated in the sexual act).
The woman’s hands are pressed to the bottom of the belly and indicate the place of concentration of her attention. During pregnancy – it’s a child in the belly and caring for him, during intercourse – the center of sensuality and attention.
On the front of the belt there are 2 H symbols in the normal position and 3 H symbols in the rotated (lying) position. Ordinary H symbolizes the sexual act in standing pose, lying H – the sexual actin in lying pose. Image of a fox on a woman’s torso. This is the symbol of sexual intercourse on the body. It is a symbol of sex as the main action that is dominant for this woman and in this place. This is the power of the given goddess H and the strength of specific Neolithic women who being the most skilful in sex in their tribe, first served as the image for the goddess H and for the pillar 18, and later they were priestesses and servants of this goddess. Pillar 18 embodies female sex, childbirth and is its symbol in general.
The symbol H is like a pendant on a necklace on the neck of a woman. It is a symbol of sex as the meaning of this woman’s life. This H on the necklace differs from the other H in that it has two connecting sticks instead of one. The upper stick is a kiss, the lower one is the sexual intercourse or the connected hands. This is already a symbol of not only sex, but also love as a social and emotional phenomenon. Where did this knowledge and these skills come to the goddess H from? This is an even more complicated question, the answer to which is approximately the same as the question of how Newton discovered the law of gravitation. God the Creator gave it to her at the right time.
2. Pillar 31 of Eclosure D, which stands next to the goddess H. This is her husband or her man.>> From In Plain Sight: The identity of the Twin Pillars of Göbekli Tepe Thomas T. Lawson https://ttlawson.com/in-plain-sight-the-identity-of-the-twin-pillars-of-gobekli-tepe/

<< The figure there appears to combine basic forms that are mimicked in three letters as shown in Figure 1. The uppermost is the shape of an “H”. Directly below it is a circle “O” figure, and directly below that, a “C”, lying on its back. I suggest that the latter two images, the “O” and the recumbent “C” represent, respectively, the full and crescent phases of the moon. As they are carved, they fit this interpretation cleanly. The moon, by reason of the facts that the lunar cycle parallels the menstrual cycle and that lunar rhythms imply birth and renewal, and hence motherhood, is associated with the feminine at the deepest levels of the human imagination. I venture that, as with the “O” and the “C,” the “H” also represents a celestial figure, and furthermore that a likely candidate would be Orion — a highly visible and widely recognized constellation. Orion can be visualized as an “H.” A row of three bright stars, the readily identifiable “Orion’s belt,” would constitute the crosspiece, with the four most brilliant stars in the constellation serving in pairs as the uprights, forming, roughly in parallel, two imaginary straight lines.

There have been a number of technical interpretations of celestial configurations having to do with Göbekli Tepe, many with respect to the positioning of the structures themselves in relation to heavenly events. These have support in the orientation of Stonehenge and other Stone Age monuments in respect to the solstices. My finding the “H” of the moon emblem to stand for Orion is of a different sort, but it does present a perplexity having to do with the time and place of the observer. As it happens, owing to the precession of the equinoxes, in 9000 BC Orion would have been visible in the southern sky at Göbekli Tepe only from the belt up. This, need not necessarily, however, stand in the way of the interpretation. The constellation would have been visible in full in southern Mesopotamia. And there had come into play in the late Upper Paleolithic and Neolithic high levels of intergroup communication and interchange over the whole of the region: “This was a highly connected world. There were multiple channels of communication along which a symbolic repertoire could have spread and been renewed” (Hodder and Meskell, 2011, p. 259). It is therefore by no means implausible that the constellation in full might have become a fixture in the human imagination throughout the region, even though Orion was visible in full in only part of it. Moreover, such a bright and distinctive figure in the night sky as Orion would invite interpretation. Consider that someone today, looking up at Orion, would not, without its being in some way explained, readily conjure up the image of a mighty hunter. That the constellation is seen as such, however, supplies a further ground for the idea of Orion here: Orion is portrayed in myth as a hunting companion of the Great other goddess Artemis — whose emblem was the crescent moon — and who was also goddess of the hunt. Another notably bright star, Sirius, is directly associated with Orion, appearing in a straight line from Orion’s distinctive belt. Called the “Dog Star,” it is linked in legend with Orion as one of his hunting dogs. All taken, these connections should warrant a provisional treatment of the “H” as a symbol for Orion, at least until a surer explanation might present itself.

The moon symbol appears in two different forms on the mate to the bucranium pillar there. At the throat of that pillar, it takes the form of the full and crescent phases of the moon, in association with the “H” figure. And, on the belt of that pillar, what I see as the waxing and waning stages of the crescent moon are carved, embracing the “H.” As noted, there is no corresponding marking on the belt of the bucranium pillar. Finally, the crescent moon symbol appears in conjunction with the “H” on one of the smaller pillars of Enclosure C, and there the “H” also appears separately. One fact is particularly striking. These four figures, the circle “O” with the “C” and the “H”; the paired “C’s” with the “H”; the “H” alone, and the bucranium are quite possibly the only pictograms on the entire site. And they are replicated throughout the site, and in several configurations. This makes the pictogram a unique feature among the thousands of stone engravings, reliefs, statues, and monuments peopling the structures at Göbekli Tepe.

From http://thehiddenrecords.com/gobekli-tepe-taurus-bull THE KANAGA SYMBOL IS THE “H” WHICH IS ORION << I am convinced that the Kanaga symbol -)-(- represents Orion. The two dots seem to be Orion’s belt. Some show it more like a lizard with a tail and others more like a man. The latter seems more fitting since myth has Orion as a hunter… either hunting a bull or more logically for me… showing the way with his arrow or three belt stars something sacred near the bull.>>

From HAMLЕT  MARTIROSYAN. THЕ LION CHARACTЕR THЕ PETROGLYPHS OF SYUNIK AND THЕ ANCIENT WORLD https://www.academia.edu/12277907/Lion_Character_in_the_Petrogliphs_of_Syuniq_and_the_Ancient_World << All that was said above concerning doors shows that in ancient mythological worldview perceptions, doors linking different worlds were amongst the most important elements of the world order. In short, if there is no door, there is no way to communicate with God. This mythological-worldview symbol of doors or columns forming doors had been developed early on and we see its oldest sources in the temple complex at Portasar (Göbekli Tepe) (X millennium BC) and the Syunik (Southern Armenia) petroglyphs (before XIII millennium BC). Certain facts indicate that different gods had different numbers and forms of gates. We saw above that we can read the T-shaped stones of Portasar (picture 61, first image) as objective ideograms with the meaning of “aperture, door, gateway”. We also saw that much later, that ideogram was used with the same meaning in both Sumer and Egypt 82 (T =ME character and Egypt.T=rw= “door” hieroglyphic). These and other facts concerning Portasar presented above (the door cavity carved from monolith stone with lion carvings on the columns, the twin columns of the subterranean temple with lion-images) attest that at Portasar doors had an important ritual-religious significance and were linked to the worship of specific gods.>>

Göbekli Tepe, atentie forma monumentului, stelei: Din https://anthropology.net/2010/02/22/gobekli-tepe-temple-in-turkey-predates-the-pyramids-of-giza/

Apoi, semnul sumerian proto-cuneiform “ME” Din https://cdli.ucla.edu/tools/SignLists/protocuneiform/archsigns.html https://cdli.ucla.edu/tools/SignLists/protocuneiform/archsigns/ME~a.jpg

===========================================

Din Cum a fost problema acum 11.600 de ani De la Sumerianul Me, meme, neurolingvistică și războiul informațional 22 aprilie 2007 de assuefazione https://assuefazione.wordpress.com/2007/04/22/sumerian-me-memes-and-neurolinguistics/?fbclid=IwAR0XLJVQcQxthLkfSMkGvAbfcEY9B_vnMKxYBYhYWWdHEGJu-Mhm6FhfH4g << Bine, inspirația pentru acest post provine din clasicul cult Snow Crash (Stephenson, 1992), așa că este posibil ca majoritatea dintre voi să fi întâlnit deja aceste lucruri.Merge așa, mai mult sau mai puțin:
Sumerienii au dezvoltat un set de reguli și reglementări numite ME care cuprindeau fiecare aspect al vieții, credințe, tehnologie, comportament și condiții umane. Au fost coduri timpurii, meme codificate pentru examinarea umană și pentru a se transmite mai departe. A fost o încercare de a programa neurolingvistic o întreagă populație. Aveau o importanță socială extremă și fiecare aspect al vieții sociale sumeriene era reglementat de ele. De exemplu. brutarului i s-a cerut să meargă la templu (unde scenariile sau orice altceva erau acestea [Klein, 1997; Emelianov, 2003], au fost plasate în custodia zeului Enki, inventatorul civilizației) și să obțină un ME (un meme, sau mai corect un set de meme) pentru panificație. Acel ME special a inclus instrucțiuni despre cum, când, unde să-și desfășoare mestesugul.
Închinarea, starea, sexul, fiecare aspect al vieții sumeriene au fost tratate în mod similar.Zeii mitologiei lor au purtat războaie pentru a cuceri și a mă poseda cel mai mult, furându-i unul de celălalt. Zeul (regele?) Cu cele mai multe ME a putut apoi să adune (vorbim politic, dar tipii aceia nu erau pentru separarea bisericii de stat) un număr mai mare de sumeri sub egida sa. Inanna, care deține 50 ME, îi amintește lui Ningirsu de la Gudea Cylinders: este o zeitate de război căreia tatăl ei Enlil îi dă 50 ME. Este curios că textele lui Inanna din vechile sumeriene au un număr suficient de ME pentru a câștiga și uni țările vecine. O astfel de stare de fapt contrazice aspru datele imnurilor scrise ulterior în care Inanna se plânge de lipsa ME și chiar le ia de la tatăl ei («Enki și Ordinea Mondială», «Inanna și Enki»). De asemenea, nu găsim aici nicio mențiune despre călătoriile cu ME sau călătoriile pentru acestea. (Emelianov, 2003).S-ar putea deduce că ME eram armele distrugerilor în masă ale epocii lor, când comunicarea era practic inexistentă și regresia către o viață primitivă foarte ușoară, dacă balamalele vieții sociale se spargeau.Acum, putem spune că sumerienii au fost o cultură total diferită de cea de astăzi (vorbim despre 3/4000 de ani î.Hr.), că interacțiunile lor sociale au fost embrionare, deși rigid codificate, sau putem spune că nimic nu s-a schimbat cu adevărat la toate… Dar astăzi, după 6.000 de ani, situația este diferită, datorită cunoștințelor tehnologice, în special situația este dinamică, iar societățile și popoarele cresc sau scad mai mult sau mai puțin rapid. Și, desigur, se poate vedea cum astăzi au putere cei care dețin monopolul informației. Ca să nu mai vorbim de competiția acerbă, chiar și de războiul mai mult sau mai puțin invizibil dintre serviciile de informații din întreaga lume. În termeni sumerieni, ME sunt armele distrugerilor în masă din epoca noastră. >>

NOTA Extrem de interesant, titlul este Cum a fost problema acum 11.600 de ani De la Sumerianul Me,meme, neurolingvistică și războiul informațional. Pentru ca acest domn, cu porecla “assuefazione”, pe care l-am gasit: Rocco Poiago, vorbeste “de acum11.600 de ani“, dupa mine referirea fiind directa, explicita la Gobekli Tepe, dar nu spune ca : – acum 11.600 de ani, aceia de la Göbekli Tepe, nu erau nicidecum sumerieni, (aria Mesopotamiei nefiind inca populata) ci altceva nu stiu ce, savantii le zic “proto Eufratici” – eu doar banuiesc ca a realizat ca forma in Tau a stelelor este semnul sumerian proto-cuneiform “ME”, devreme ce asociaza 11.600=Göbekli Tepe cu notiunea ME (? si presupun eu si cu semnul ME /forma Tau !?) dar probabil nu are curajul sa afirme asta avand in vedere alineatul meu imediat mai sus, si posibil ca om de stiinta se expune unui risc major. Alt om de stiinta, V.V.Yemelyanov, avand cunostinte vaste de sumerologie, dar nefiind de meserie sumerolog, ci specializat in genetica, in schimb face legatura intre notiunea Me si forma sa grafica, scrisa, dar nu face legatura cu Gobekli Tepe:

Din ON ТНЕ ORIGINAL МEANING OF SUМERIAN МЕ
(lmages of Weltanschauung and the Methods of Тheir Study) V.V. Yemelyanov

<<The article discusses the problem of translating and interpreting Sumerian МЕ bу means of the Old
Babylonian cuneiform vocabularies and the Neo-Sumerian Gudea texts. The main supposition is that the
word was derived from the verb МЕ «to bе apparent, visible» and its original meaning was «will to live».
The author understands МЕ as the first stage of the life-process: transition of а subject from the inner
world to the outer space (as one can conclude from the cuneiform sign МE «tongue put out of mouth»).
This is why МЕ’s are so important in the New Year period of Sumero-Babylonian calender texts.>> In Lb.Romana:

<< Articolul discută despre problema traducerii și interpretării sumeriene a lui МЕ prin mijloacele vechilor Vocabulare cuneiforme babiloniene și textele neo-sumeriene Gudea. Principala presupunere este că cuvântul a fost derivat de la verbul МЕ «a fi aparent, vizibil», iar semnificația sa originală era «voința de a trăi». Autorul înțelege МЕ ca fiind prima etapă a procesului de viață: tranziția unui subiect de la lumea interioara către spațiul exterior (așa cum se poate concluziona din semnul cuneiform МE «limba scoasă din gură»). Acesta este motivul pentru care МЕ sunt atât de importante în perioada de Anul Nou a textelor calendarului sumero-babilonian. >> Vladislav Vladimirovitch Yemelyanov Saint Petersburg State University | SPBU · Department of Genetics and Biotechnology PhD

Asa incat, dupa cate stiu eu, pana acum sunt singurul care am afirmat cu tarie ca forma stelelor de la Göbekli Tepe este chiar simbolul vietii “ME”

Sumerian Proto-cuneiform sign GA2: https://ro.scribd.com/document/353794019/PROTO-LANGUAGE-MONOSYLLABLES-With-Their-Principal-Meanings-by-Patrick-C-Ryan

 From Archaeology of Food: An Encyclopedia Karen Bescherer Metheny, ‎Mary C. Beaudry file:///C:/Users/User/Downloads/Vessels_and_other_containers_for_the_sto.pdf                         “This frame or container sign is reletad to a symilar basket or box, namely the sign GA2”   

From  https://www.sumerian.org/sumerian.pdf&nbsp;                                                                              ” GA (pronounced nga,ñá): basket; house; stable (cf., ñar) [GA2 archaic frequency: 125; concatenation of 5 sign variants].
GA (nga,ñá): (cf., ñál, ñar, ñe26 and ma(3)) ” Sign No. 458 GA2

 with sign value https://www.oocities.org/proto-language/SumerianSignValueRegister.htm&nbsp; ba4, ga2, ma3, pisan, sita.

Sumerian Lexicon – Sumerian Language Pagewww.sumerian.org › sumerianPDFAug 11, 1999 — The Sumerian lexicon has benefitted from several classes at UCLA with … pisań(2/3), pisan(2/3): (open) basket; box, chest; frame 

The sumerian word for basket, container, chest is :

From www.bulgari-istoria-2010.com › …PDF Sumerian Cuneiform English Dictionary 12013CT – bulgari-istoria 5 mai 2000 — The niftiest ‘Sumerian Cuneiform English Dictionary’ in the university world: … GA2 (ĝa2 / gá), mal, bisag / bisaĝ [ 704x] (pisan) = basket | [208x] … The wooden

www.academia.edu › Interpreting_J… (DOC) Interpreting John.A. Halloran’s Sumerian Lexicon … *gá: basket; house; stable (cf., gar) [GA2 archaic frequency: 125; concatenation of 5 sign variants] . ga – has the composition- ka- and the meaning-of the word iskukai-cave…

www.federatio.org › mi_biblPDF Etymological Dictionary of Hungarian (EDH) 22 ian. 2007 — to a relative small common Sumerian-Hungarian basis of … have always adhered to the Sumerian-Hungarian theory or … Sum. gá + gur … Sum. ga2 (pronounced ŋa) “I”

Proposal ; ZATU 751~b

From https://cdli.ucla.edu/tools/SignLists/protocuneiform/archsigns.html sign URUDU~a

This is an exact shape of the hand-bag ! : URUDU~c

From https://www.sumerian.org/sumerian.pdf urudu, uruda, urud: copper; metal (ùru, ‘luminous object’, + dù, ‘to mould, cast’)

SO THE KNOWLEDGE WICH SUMERIANS RECEIVED WAS PICTURED IN THE SHAPE OF HANDBAG, WICH MENT METALLURGY KNOWLEDGE, TO OBTAIN AND WORK METALS (COPPER). As you will see metallurgy come from the North: From www.academia.edu › Sumerian_uru… Rezultate de pe web (PDF) Sumerian urudu and Kartvelian Metallurgy.pdf | Anna … <<In Kartvelian, we have the word uro ‘mallet’, which is phonetically similar to the … Thus, the ultimate meaning of the Sumerian urudu is uro ‘a big hammer’ + du ‘head, chief’, i.e. ‘the chief big hammer’, ‘the leading big hammer’ >>

Possible at the origin the vord come from “the chief big hammer” , soo possible the Tau cross shape of monuments ment: “THE CHIEF (big hammer)” as you see the proto-cuneiform shape URU~a.

From https://cdli.ucla.edu/tools/SignLists/protocuneiform/archsigns.html Sign “DUB”

𒁾 – Wiktionaryen.wiktionary.org › wiki Borrowed from Sumerian 𒁾 (dub). NounEdit. 𒁾 (ṭuppu). (clay) tablet · document · letter.

From https://www.crystalinks.com/Anunnaki.html Ea. Enki was a deity in Sumerian mythology, later known as Ea in Babylonian mythology. The name Ea is of Sumerian origin and was written by means of two signs signifying “house” and “water”. Enki was the deity of water, intelligence, creation, and lord of the Apsu, the watery abyss. Me. He was the keeper of the holy powers called Me. The exact meaning of his name is not sure: the common translation is “Lord of the Earth”: the Sumerian en is translated as “lord”, ki as “earth”; but there are theories that ki in this name has another origin.

In the handbag were holy powers called Me

A River Runs Through It: the Semiotics of Göbekli Tepe’s Map (an Exercise of Archaeological Imagination) Dragoş Gheorghiu National University of Arts, Bucharest. (PDF) A River Runs Through It:: the Semiotics of Göbekli …www.researchgate.net › publication › 281366206_A_Riv…Sep 29, 2020 — PDF |

I was astonished how the author choosed between many interesting subjetcs and approaches, on a hunter-gatherer society, this one with water/rivers.

“In the 20th century, archaeologists paid attention to this relationship between humans and water,
especially in the arid zones of the Earth, for example, Pumpelly (1908) and later Childe (1928, 1936), proposed
the oasis model to explain the emergence of agriculture and the domestication of animals (Verhoeven 2004: 192).Other archaeologists also tried to explain the emergence of domestication due to the proximity to water (Price and Gebauer, 1995: 7–8; Smith, 1998: 210), since “plants were first domesticated near rivers, lakes, marshes or springs” (Verhoeven 2004: 189).Paleoeconomies were dependent of water resources (see Brown 1997: 282) not only because of the acquisition of food, but also because of trade exchanges. It is well known
that there was a relation between site location and water sources (Jackson 1988; Dobrzanska et al. 2004; Byrd
2005; Gheorghiu 2006).>>

From Archeology and the Domestication of Animals in the Old Worldanthrosource.onlinelibrary.wiley.com › doi › pdf In the light of the current evidence, a Neolithic economy based in part on four domestic animals (cattle, sheep/goat, and pig) was first developed in the Near East by the fifth millennium B.C. From this area the practice of domestication spread through the Old World in two ways: (1) as an idea which was applied …

ARCHAEOLOGICAL DOCUMENTATION OF ANIMAL DOMESTICATION
Melinda A. Zeder, Section Editor (PDF) Archaeological approaches to Documenting Animal … http://www.researchgate.net › publication › 285767160_Archae… <<Efforts to document the domestication of sheep and goats in the Near East have drawn heavily on both zoogeographic and abundance markers. Early work in the Zagros region of the eastern Fertile Crescent effectively used zoogeographic arguments to buttress the case for the domestic status of goats on the arid, lowland Deh Luran Plain (Hole et al. 1969), and, less convincingly, to make a case for the domestic status
of sheep in highland Iraq (Perkins 1964). These markers have played a much larger role in more recent work, which focuses on the piedmont and steppe regions of the Taurus Mountains in the central Fertile Crescent and on its far western arm in the Levant. Beginning about 9000–8500 BP, a manymillennia-long concentration on gazelles was replaced in this region by a dramatic increase in the importance of caprovines, especially goats. ….. Early research in the Fertile Crescent focused on the Zagros region of Iran
and Iraq, where the earliest evidence of the domestication of sheep and goats seemed to coincide with, or perhaps even slightly precede, the domestication of cereal grains (Hole 1989). With the shift in research away from politically troubled regions like Iran and Iraq in the 1970s and the explosive growth of research in the Levant, particularly in Israel, Jordan, and the piedmont and steppe regions of northern Syria, a very different picture emerged. Here, there was very early evidence for cereal domestication but no corresponding evidence for animal domestication.Although people in this region may have been auditioning the gazelle for a possible role as a future domesticate, gazelles are not behaviorally suited to domestication. Domestic animals do not appear in the Levant until as much as a millennium after the initial domestication of certain types of barley and wheat, when goats begin to play a major role in local subsistence economies alternatively attributed to either a local process of domestication (Horwitz 2003) or to the introduction of already domesticated animals from outside the region (Bar Yosef 2000). Emerging evidence from recent work in the foothills and mountain valleys of the Taurus Mountains is pushing back dates for initial domestication of sheep, goats, and pigs, promising, once again, to rewrite the story of the domestication of plants and animals in the region
(Peters et al. 1999; Vigne and Buitenhuis 1999; Hongo and Meadow 1998; Ervynck et al. 2002). >>

So,1. “a dramatic increase in the importance of caprovines, especially goats” ,not specifically domestication, between 9000-8500 BP is 7.000-6.500 BC. But Gobekly Tepe is between 7.500-9.000 !! 2. At Gobekly Tepe were found only bones/remaines of gazelles wich were eate. No other animal was availeble for hunting. Gazelles as obove:not suited for domestication !

Emergence of livestock husbandry in Early Neolithic Anatolia …www.oxfordhandbooks.com › view › oxfordhb › oxfo… Despite interaction with humans since the final Pleistocene, domestication of Sus in southeastern Anatolia is only evidenced after 8500 bce. 

Spread of domestic animals across Neolithic western Anatolia …journals.plos.org › plosone › article › journal.pone.018… Oct 18, 2017 — … adds new zooarchaeological data to the existing body of research on the spread of domesticated animals across Neolithic western Anatolia.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domestication#Animals   <In the Fertile Crescent 10,000-11,000 years ago, zooarchaeology indicates that goats, pigs, sheep, and taurine cattle were the first livestock to be domesticated.  Cereal crops were first domesticated around 11,000 years ago in the Fertile Crescent in the Middle East. > My note. 9.000 BC for animals and plants but in Fertile Crescent. 9.000-10.000 BC in any case is out of range and out of any domestication !

From Gheorghiu’s paper: <<Assuming that the presence of the various species of animals acts as evidence of a specific ecosystem, the iconography acquires meaning and structure. Peters
and Schmidt (2004: 211-212) already approached this semiotics of the landscape, by stressing that “[w]hile the
combination of gazelle and Asiatic wild ass on P[illar]21 is indicative for dry, open landscapes, other species such as aurochs, wild boar and cranes are partial to moist, riparian habitats. Such a mixture of biotopes is found at the ecotone of steppe and river valley vegetation, and this must have been the case along most water courses in both the Euphrates and Tigris drainage regions.” >>

None of above animals could be domesticated: gazelles, aurochs,wild boar and cranes.

Göbekli Tepe https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G%C3%B6bekli_Tepe

The inhabitants are presumed to have been hunters and gatherers who nevertheless lived in villages for at least part of the year.^{[11][unreliable source?]} So far, very little evidence for residential use has been found.^{[dubious – discuss]} Through the radiocarbon method, the end of Layer III can be fixed at about 9000 BCE (see above), but it is hypothesized by some archaeologists^{[by whom?]} that the elevated location may have functioned as a spiritual center during 10,000 BCE or earlier, essentially, at the very end of the Pleistocene. ….. <<Around 10.000 YBP, a new way of life emerged for humans through the management and exploitation of plant and animal species, leading to higher-density populations in the centers of domestication, the expansion of agricultural economies, and the development of urban communities>>

10.000 YBP=8.000 BC, out of Göbekli Tepe range 9.000-10.000 BCE !

<<Around the beginning of the 8th millennium BCE Göbekli Tepe lost its importance. The advent of agriculture and animal husbandry brought new realities to human life in the area, and the “Stone-age zoo” (Schmidt’s phrase applied particularly to Layer III, Enclosure D) apparently lost whatever significance it had had for the region’s older, foraging communities. >>

Göbekli Tepe’s foraging communities left the site after advent of agriculture and animal husbandry !

WIKI: <<Schmidt also interpreted the site in connection with the initial stages of the Neolithic.^[6] It is one of several sites in the vicinity of Karaca Dağ, an area that geneticists suspect may have been the original source of at least some of our cultivated grains (see Einkorn). Recent DNA analysis of modern domesticated wheat compared with wild wheat has shown that its DNA is closest in sequence to wild wheat found on Karaca Dağ 30 km (20 mi) away from the site, suggesting that this is where modern wheat was first domesticated.>>

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karaca_Da%C4%9F#:~:text=The%20results%20strongly%20suggest%20that,in%20the%20Battle%20of%20Yass%C4%B1%C3%A7emen. The results strongly suggest that slopes of Karaca Dağ provided the site for the first domestication of einkorn wheat approximately 9,000 years ago.

me: wheat domestication in the area at 7.000 BC, 2.000-3.000 years later!

Wiki: <<Schmidt also engaged in speculation regarding the belief systems of the groups that created Göbekli Tepe, based on comparisons with other shrines and settlements. He presumed shamanic practices and suggested that the T-shaped pillars represent human forms, perhaps ancestors, whereas he saw a fully articulated belief in deities as not developing until later, in Mesopotamia, that was associated with extensive temples and palaces. This corresponds well with an ancient Sumerian belief that agriculture, animal husbandry, and weaving were brought to humans from the sacred mountain Ekur, which was inhabited by Annuna deities, very ancient deities without individual names. Schmidt identified this story as a primeval oriental myth that preserves a partial memory of the emerging Neolithic>>

From Cereals, feasts and monuments at Göbekli Tepe – The Tepe … https://www.dainst.blog › 2019/05/09 › cereals-feasts-a.. <<At the same time, Göbekli Tepe´s remote location on a barren mountain ridge is very unusual compared to the setting of contemporaneous Neolithic settlements, which are regularly located next to water sources.>>

From Losing your head at Göbekli Tepe – The Tepe Telegrams https://www.dainst.blog › 2016/05/05 › losing-your-he.. <<Göbekli Tepe is a special site in many respects: its location is hostile to settlement, no water sources are in vicinity; clear evidence for domestic building types missing so far in Layer III; only selection of material culture is present (very few bone tools, clay figurines absent); and there is a considerable investment of resources and work.>>