![]() | This ![]() It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I cut {{ Arabic}} since it was wrong. "Eridu" is an approximation of the Sumerian word for this place, and Sumerian was not, of course, written in Arabic script. TCC (talk) (contribs) 19:59, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
Tisk tisk tisk this article lies
Eridug comes from Eri.dugga means "Good City" in Sumerian. It was also called Habur (because near Habur River).
The first city by the sea, at extreme south of Sumer (at the mounds of Abu-Shahrain). At that time it was not sand but sea.
King-God Enki came from Dilmun (Bahrein) and created the city. He will be called later Ea. Adapa (Adam) lived there.
Tell Abu Shahrain was excavated in the 1940s by Fuad Safar and Seton Lloyd. It is near actual Bassora.
See : http://www.atlastours.net/iraq/eridu.html
I will add these infos to main article. Saggiga
Eridu dates to the earliest phase of the Ubaid period 5,300 BCE - a lot older than 3,900 BCE. John D. Croft ( talk) 15:05, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
The Biblically asserted date of creation, though popularly held to be 4004 BC, is still contested. According to one version, it is 4004 BC. The Masoretic Hebrew, Greek Septuagint, Samaritan Pentateuch, Latin Vulgate, Syriac, and Targum all assert possible dates between 3800 and 6200 BC, an almost 2500 year gap. However, Christians and Jews can be at least assured that the Bible, if its genealogies are taken literally, states that the earth was created at least within the last 10,000 years. However, carbon dating, though highly inaccurate, does point to dates such as 3 million years ago, which we may conservatively take to mean tens of thousands of years ago (depending on calibration). In either instance, this seems to disprove the merit of taking biblical genealogies literally. Still, when God created the earth and its surrounding objects in 6 "days," these could be figurative days. Because we measure time by the revolution and rotation of the earth, it is difficult to say that the days mentioned in Genesis chapter 1 can be taken to mean literal days as we know them. I personally believe that the days mentioned in Genesis chapter 1 are merely a partition between periods of creation (of undetermined length)that are symbolic. It is curious, however, to note that government and 'cities' as we know them seem to date mostly within the last 10,000 years, despite the supposed existence of humanoid hominids for almost 4 million years prior. But I am not a scientist. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.35.91.209 ( talk) 16:17, 18 October 2010 (UTC)
Unexplained, Contradicting Dates for the Earliest Settlement of Eridu:
"In Sumerian mythology, it was said to be one of the five cities built before a flood occurred. Eridu appears to be the earliest settlement in the region, founded ca. 5400 BC..."
Kate Fielden reports "The earliest village settlement (c.5000 BC) had grown into a substantial city of mudbrick and reed houses by c.2900 BC, covering 8-10 ha (20-25 acres).
[[>>Eridu<< can be really called/translated in Hungarian to >>Erôd<< which means the same as Mighty City and not "good city". Contemporary science does not agree with the Bible's 4004 BC. The "flood of the Bible" was written in cuneiform writings way before the oldest text of the Bible. Bold text]] —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.144.215.46 ( talk) 18:58, 29 June 2009 (UTC)
7 miles is approximately 12 kilometers. Since Wikipedia is not just an American encyclopedia, I suggest we use both miles and kilometers John D. Croft ( talk) 15:25, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
I did my best to match the organization of this article to the other sumerian city articles for a consistent style. I moved some text around, but deleted nothing. However, this article still needs a rewrite for clarity contrast it to Uruk and Nippur for example.-- Gurdjieff ( talk) 12:05, 18 September 2008 (UTC)
In which governorate and municipal district is Eridu located in? -- Criticalthinker ( talk) 12:37, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
I took a bunch of stuff out about Rohls theory because it is basically wrong, and anyway it probably belongs on the Rohl article. Left the basic idea though. For example, there was an area of Babylon that is named Eridu. I'll stick what I deleted here, just in case.
Ploversegg ( talk) 05:58, 19 January 2009 (UTC)ploversegg
Ok. Not a big deal. Seemed like, if anywhere, the material belonged somewhere else, like the Rohl page or in a seperate section of Eridu (since it's not really archaeology). The wikipedia directions for editors was to "be bold", so I was. :-) Ploversegg ( talk) 17:51, 19 January 2009 (UTC)ploversegg
I moved to Tower of Babel material to its own History section, where it seems better suited. In exchange, I put in proper Rohl references. Hopefully that is a satisfactory compromise. Ploversegg ( talk) 21:22, 5 October 2010 (UTC)
Rohl's thesis involves the localisation of key biblical events, the making of connections between figures from Genesis and characters appearing in ancient Mesopotamian literature, and the argument that the development of civilisation in Egypt should be attributed to the seaborne movement around the Arabian peninsula of sophisticated groups of Mesopotamian origin. At times I found the detailed discussion rather hard to follow, and so was pleased to be reminded of where we were heading by the regular appearance of highlighted boxes, each containing a short, sequentially numbered conclusion.
However, readers should note that Rohl's argument requires major modifications to the accepted geographical and chronological reconstructions. If these are judged unacceptable, then the whole project founders. Sadly, geographical discussions follow what Rohl terms `the name game' through which place and personal names occurring in different sources are rendered equivalent through changing the odd letter or two. Chronological arguments rely upon a combination of carefully selected archaeological evidence, the juggling of dynasties and king-lists, some of which are of doubtful veracity, and the deployment of evidence drawn from ancient myths and literary texts.
"The flaws in Rohl's arguments are too numerous to cover in detail, so a few instances will have to suffice. To begin, the account of the archaeological evidence from Mesopotamia (Chapter 3) is based upon Mellaart's now substantially out-of-date contribution to the Cambridge Ancient History (published in 1970). Moreover, Rohl regularly neglects to mention important evidence which contradicts his theories. His chronology is inconsistent with the evidence of radiocarbon dating, and his cavalier dismissal of the technique is disingenuous. Even more alarming is the fact that the most conclusive evidence for dating `the Flood' (thought by most scholars to be mythical) comes from claims for a great flood mentioned in Mayan records and occurring in 3113 BC. Sadly, the source for this astounding new evidence is another recent piece of pseudo-scholarship, entitled After the Flood: the Early Post-Flood History of Europe Traced Back to Noah. Legend is recommended if time hangs heavily during your next alien abduction."
Graham Philip is Lecturer in Archaeology at the University of Durham
http://www.worldagesarchive.com/Reference_Links/Legend_Review.html
74.109.33.112 (
talk)
19:51, 28 January 2011 (UTC)
Currently the article lists NUN.KI as a Sumerogram for Eridu's name. But Eridu WAS a Sumerian city. It's not like Hittite or Akkadian where they would write the Sumerian name and presumably still pronounce and decline it as though they were writing the name in their own language. Nunki would've simply been another name or nickname for the place, and the article still needs the cuneiform for Eridu(g). - LlywelynII ( talk) 16:36, 14 December 2010 (UTC)
yeah, I checked this out on ePSD as often happens, someone confused SIGN names with translitertion of words NUN is the sign name for several different sumerian words including one "eridu" which means guidence in english, KI is the sign name for several other sumerian words one of which "iri" was the determinative symbol for a city KI could also mean "ki" (English: place) and is the determinative for place as well. I cross checked the name as it appears in the kinglist transliteration with ePSD. Eridu should be (sumerian:Eridu(g) cuniform:NUN.KI literal:place of guidence) appropriate for a temple city, no? Gurdjieff ( talk) 07:38, 16 July 2011 (UTC)
Did someone honestly just try and claim European Vinca Culture created cities? Herpaderpa. Vinca is impressive for neolithic Europe but its no Eridu. And by the way neither is Eridu Semitic (if so only moderately) as Sumerians (for the most part though it now seems Akkadian Semitics mixed with from the start) are not Semitic. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.101.154.255 ( talk) 22:34, 4 March 2015 (UTC)
I should suggest you to remove this occult nonsense about "oldest city of the world"; there were found much older cities in Siberia than any Shumerian "old city". In Europe is example Vinča culture, which predate for thousands of years any semitic culture. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.196.91.138 ( talk) 14:42, 19 June 2012 (UTC)
>> What about the wikipage on Mehrgarh (
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mehrgarh)? That page claims that it existed about 6000 BC. — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
Kulkarniv (
talk •
contribs)
00:32, 29 October 2012 (UTC)
Why is this claim made and then when one clicks on the "oldest city" link provided, there is not a mention of Eridu? Do you people not even read what you link to? 2601:140:8301:4B70:5DDC:615F:4841:D282 ( talk) 23:00, 17 October 2015 (UTC)
This article has been getting worse and worse as time goes on.
for example in the intro: "His temple was called E-Abzu, as Enki was believed to live in Abzu ("Deep Ocean")" then within the same article E-Abzu is spelled three different ways and the meaning of Deep Ocean/aquifer/whatever is repeated another three times.
We need to be very precise and CONSISTENT about the names not in the least because it is a translation so here are the variants
1. "E-Abzu Temple" this is a double signal since "E" means temple already 2. "E-Abzu" better but incorrect Sumerian transcription 3. "House of the Aquifer" literal English translation 4. "Abzu Temple" merges sumerian transcription and english 5. "E2-Abzu" correct sumerian
The Ziggurat is listed as being built by Ur-Nammu and Amar Sin which one was it? -- Gurdjieff ( talk) 15:38, 19 March 2013 (UTC)
Eru = Impregnate
http://www.ping.de/sites/systemcoder/necro/info/sumerian.htm>-- Prestigiouzman ( talk) 10:52, 7 September 2013 (UTC)
Eridu (Eri+du), similar with "İridağ" or "Eridi", comparing with modern Turkish, "iri" (means "big", "great" in Turkish), "dağ" (means "mountain" in Turkish, also "tog", "tu", "duh", "taw" in Uzbek, Kazakh, Karachay and many other Altaic/Turkic-Uralic languages)("dağ" pronounciation with Turkish "ğ" according to English: "daah"). So, Eridu might mean "Great Mountain (land)" with that. Thanks. K₳R₳US ( K₳R₳US) 03:45, 4 March 2015 (UTC)
I'm confused by this site being described as "near Basra" since the spot marked on the map on this page and spot marked on the map for Basra's page look pretty far apart to me.-- JaredMithrandir ( talk) 09:43, 3 March 2016 (UTC)
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 21:52, 4 July 2022 (UTC)
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 22:36, 4 July 2022 (UTC)
I am gonna rearrange the sections to match wikiarticles Uruk Nippur Kish. Every sumerian city should have the same structure. Generally 1. Etytmology followed by 2. History followed by 3. Archeology Gurdjieff ( talk) 17:38, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
Hi team, I added back the geographic names that got deleted. Lets keep these in, it was A LOT of research to find a source these in English. The unique geographic context of Eridu is written about in every popular book on the subject. I think it is notable and important to have the names and details for the site physical geography and ecology. If this (somehow) controversial to you, lets work it out here on the talk page. Gurdjieff ( talk) 16:55, 29 October 2023 (UTC)
it was good stuff you little not slay idiots 216.241.207.58 ( talk) 21:17, 13 November 2023 (UTC)