The politics of archeology concern the zero point of history. This zero point arbitrarily sets the beginning of the story of humanity, as taught in standardised history to students. For this reason large portions of the estates of industrial era oligarchs were in antiquities during the 20th century. These were investments in control of the chain of custody for primary source evidence of the zero point, mostly retrieved from the middle east during that century and the one prior. This was done through privately funding excavations to take possession of evidence, or purchases on the antiquities black market.
In this way the unfolding of ancient history can be finessed and curated like a museum exhibition, through concentrating efforts in certain areas while neglecting others, and by donating some of the fruits of these effort for public exhibition while withholding others in private collections.

The politics of the zero point largely concern the ethnic and racial origins of the Abrahamic religions, which up until the 20th century had been fixed as semitic by the creationist tradition. As this started to be replaced by a new secular understanding of history based on ethnic evolution, this zero point became flux and a political question beholden to the whims of potluck archeology being conducted in the middle east, and at a time when new nationalist forms of government based on citizen armies required their history to reverently define a clear ethnic identity.

The creation myth of Genesis often distracts from the accompanying genealogy of ethnic bloodlines and technical guidelines for the construction of sacred temples, both of which have very real and serious political consequences than the origins of human nature debated over by atheists and christians.

See, when Sumerian civilisation started to be uncovered in the 19th century, the Abrahamic religions started to lose their semitic origin. Up until that time Babylon had been considered the historical origin of the Abrahamic religions, all three of which traced the genetic lineage of their figurehead to the bloodline of the patriarch Abraham, whose own ethnic origins are given in the Old Testament as a location known as ‘Ur of the Chaldees’.
The reason they do this is because of Genesis 15, where it is written, “the LORD made a covenant with Abram, saying: 'Unto thy seed have I given this land, from the river of Egypt unto the great river, the river Euphrates;”

The bloodline of Abraham in Genesis is a genealogical will and testament of the divine right to inherit the territories of modern-day Palestine, Jordan, Lebanon, and Syria, collectively known as a regional cluster called the Levant. This is probably because when the Abrahamic texts were written the Levant was of great commercial interest due to it being a choke point between the mediterranean sea and arabian desert, allowing whoever controlled it to extract tolls on trade forced through this narrow corridor north to east, and from the seatrade coming in to dock in ports along the east coast of the mediterranean.

As a result the Jews traced their Messiah to the Abrahamic bloodline through King David. The Christians traced their Christ to the Abrahamic bloodline through King David. And the Muslims traced their Prophet to the Abrahamic bloodline through the Quraysh custodians of the Kaaba.

The geopolitical implications of the Abrahamic bloodline are why these religions came to be more about belief in the figureheads themselves than in their teachings(The Jewish messiah at present is Benjamin Netanyahu) And the politics which follow on from this have started to become particularly spicy in the 21st century with the advent of genomic testing. Claims are already being laid to the lineage of Zadok the priest. The same will inevitably follow for the Davidic bloodline itself, which is has long been reflected customarily in the coronation ritual of the British monarchy.

According to the Hebrew, English, and maybe Septuagint(probably not though) translations of the old testament, Abraham came from Chaldea, the name of the region of ancient Sumer during the first millennium, about a thousand years after Sumerian civilisation there had ended.

6 And Abram believed God, and it was counted to him for righteousness.
7 And he said to him, I am God that brought thee out of the land of the Chaldeans, so as to give thee this land to inherit.”
- Genesis 15, Greek Septuagint translated into english

6 And he believed in the Lord; and he counted it to him for righteousness.
7 And he said unto him, I am the Lord that brought thee out of Ur of the Chaldees, to give thee this land to inherit it.
- Genesis 15, King James Version

6 And he believed in Hashem; and He credited [emunah (faith)] to him as tzedakah (righteousness).
7 And He said unto him, I am Hashem Who brought thee out of Ur Kasdim, to give thee ha’aretz hazot to be the yoresh of it.
- Torah, Bereshit 15 (Genesis 15), Orthodox Jewish translation into english

7 Thou art the Lord the God, who didst choose Abram, and broughtest him forth out of Ur of the Chaldees, and gavest him the name of Abraham;
8 And foundest his heart faithful before thee, and madest a covenant with him to give the land of the Canaanites, the Hittites, the Amorites, and the Perizzites, and the Jebusites, and the Girgashites, to give it, I say, to his seed, and hast performed thy words; for thou art righteous:
- Nehemiah 9, King James Trans,

7 Thou art Hashem HaElohim, Who didst choose Avram, and broughtest him forth out of Ur Kasdim, and gavest shmo Avraham;
8 And foundest his lev ne’eman before Thee, and madest habrit (the covenant) with him to give the eretz HaKena’ani, the Chitti, the Emori, and the Perizzi, and the Yevusi, and the Girgashi, to give it to his zera, and hast performed Thy words; for Thou art tzaddik;
- Nehemiah 9, Orthodox Jewish Bible

7 Thou art the Lord God, thou didst choose Abram, and broughtest him out of the land of the Chaldeans, and gavest him the name of Abraam:
8 and thou foundest his heart faithful before thee, and didst make a covenant with him to give to him and to his seed the land of the Chananites, and the Chettites, and Amorites, and Pherezites, and Jebusites, and Gergesites; and thou hast confirmed thy words, for thou righteous.
- Nehemiah 9, Septuagint Greek translation into english.

‘Chaldees’ meant the inhabitants of Chaldea, the south-east region of Iraq/Kuwait where the Chaldean magi were based prior to them taking over the Assyrian empire during the 7th century. The biblical periodisation of Abraham’s life approximated his birth to around 2100 bc, placing him historically within the Sumerian period of this region. Which meant ‘Ur of the Chaldees’ came to mean ‘Ur of Sumer’ during the 20th century, and ‘Ur’ to mean the specific name for ancient city state there. For this reason the ancient ruins of Chaldean(Sumerian) cities started to be scouted by religiously motivated British and Scottish orientalists working as agents of the British Foreign Office in the Ottomans between 1830-1850.

Most of the evidence for Sumerian civilisation comes from four archaeological sites located in the south-eastern region of Iraq, in addition to a fifth site located in the neighboring region of western Iran which belonged to another ancient civilization called Haltami(Elamite). These are:

1) Unug(Uruk) Sumerian
2) Urim(Ur) Sumerian
3) Nibru(Nippur) Sumerian
4) Girsu(Lagas/Lagash) Sumerian
5) Susun(Susa) Haltami

Artifacts excavated from these five sites dated to between 3500-2000bc make up almost all the primary source evidence for Sumerian civ. Unug, Urim, Nibru, and Susun were first excavated by agents of the British East Indian company in the early 1850s. Among these were William Kennett Loftus, Austen Henry Layard, John George Taylor, and Hormuzd Rassam, all working under the supervision of Henry Rawlinson who was the first to identify one of the sites as Ur of the Chaldees.

The two earliest candidates had been Unug(Uruk) and Urim(Ur), where ziggurats built by ancient Sumerian rulers had undergone restoration work a thousand years later by the Chaldean rulers of the Neo-Babylonian Empire.

This dynasty took over the Assyrian Empire during the 7th century bc and ruled it as the Neo-Babylonian Empire until the time of Cyrus the Great around 540bc. During this period the ruling class of Judah, no more than 5% of the population, had been taken to Babylon as per an imperial policy of assimilating the ruling groups from each conquered territory. The biblical accounts of this history along with those given later by Babylonian Jews in the talmud, are what led to a western convention which traced the historical origins of its religion through the Jews, to an ancient semitic tradition in Babylon derived from astrological teachings of a priesthood called the Chaldean Magi. According to this convention, the Chaldeans had been ancient Jews and Chaldea the ancient Jewish homeland, from where the Hebrew patriarch Abraham came.

Now, this Chaldean dynasty was founded around 630bc by an Orcheni priestking named Nabopolassar, who came from a priesthood that governed the Chaldean city of Unug(Uruk) under his father Nebuchadrezzar. Orcheni meant ‘men from Uruk’. The names of Nebuchadrezzar, Nabopolassar, and Nabopolassar’s son and successor Nebuchadrezzar II, were all found inscribed upon restoration bricks of a ziggarut in Unug(Uruk) built by rulers of the Sumerian period, in dedication to an ancient goddess named Inanna. Which is taken as archaeological evidence of an ethnic continuity between the ancient Sumerian priesthood in Unug and the Orcheni priesthood a thousand years later. This is also evidenced anthropologically.

The Orcheni priesthood were advanced astronomers who used statistical projection to predict future astronomical events like full moon eclipses. They then leveraged this knowledge in the form of astrological omens to play with the superstition of Assyrian rulers for political gain. Much like modern day epidemiology, the trick relies upon a deterministic religious outlook where fate is decided(called determinism by modern day rationalists), so that when a statistically predictable event occurred, the omen attached to it would be accepted and the proscribed preventative action taken. If prediction is correct, then do this, or else.

If
Then
Else

The oldest programming in the book.

If moon rise over sun at given time and place in future, then people will die unless offerings made to temple.
If temperature degrees rise at given time and place in future, then people will die unless carbon taxes are paid to state.
If virus cases rise at given rate in future, then people will die unless vaccinations are taken.

The reason this is so effective is that it is both empirical and faith based, as if you always take the prescription then you'll never know if it actually works. This is why the greek word for medicine is the same one for poison. pharmakon. Because even if people die, these oracles of statistics will tell you that many more would've died without the preventative action taken. Which may or may not be true. Faith-based. It takes a great leader like Alexander the Great, tutored by Aristotle, to overcome such devious superstition, which is why they poisoned him(maybe).

The Orcheni priesthood were the most advanced at this because Unug(Uruk) was the birthplace of the earliest form of cuneiform writing, with administrative texts dated to as early as 3500bc. Because of this their priesthood’s record keeping of astronomical events was likely the oldest, and thus their estimations using this dataset the most accurate, regardless of whether the mathematical methods remained trade secrets. By around 400bc Orcheni astronomers like Naburimanni and Kidinnu could predict full moon eclipses within minutes of the occurrence and gave calculations for other phenomena which wouldn’t be surpassed until the 18th century.

Because of this statistical religious power they were able to maintain a college in Babylon and remain within earshot of the various imperial dynasties that passes through it. This has often had them be confused as Babylonians. But they are distinctly referred to by Greek and Roman sources as the Orcheni of Chaldea, and from the ancient Sumerian city of Unug(Uruk). Not Babylon.

When they eventually took over the Neo-Assyrian Empire themselves they upheld the supremacy of Babylon’s solar deity Marduk through the following dynastic period, called the Chaldean(Neo-Babylonian) Empire:
Nabopolassar 626–605 BC
Nebuchadrezzar II 605–562 BC
Amel-Marduk 562–560 BC
Neriglissar 560–556 BC
Labashi-Marduk 556 BC
Nabonidus 556–539 BC

Succession begun to fall apart under Amel-Marduk due to a series of conspiracies and assassinations, from the chaos of which a ruler named Nabonidus came to power. Nabonidus was not Chaldean nor had he been related to the Chaldean dynasty, but rather came from a city called Harran, where his mother Adad-guppi was a priestess of a lunar deity called Sin.

Harran was a former trading post of the Sumerian city Urim(Ur), founded sometime during the 3rd millennium. By the 2nd millennium it had developed into a religious center that greatly influenced the ruling dynasties of the Assyrian empire through the cults of Sin and Nuska, which brought it into rivalry with Babylon. Nuska was the personal fire deity of a Sumerian king named Dungi(Shulgi) of Ur Dynasty III, who reigned over the Neo-Sumerian empire(2100-2000) around the same biblical time of Abraham(2094– 2046bc). Dungi and his father Ur-Nammu built a ziggarut in Urim(Ur) dedicated to a Sumerian deity named Nanna. The original characteristics of Nanna are shrouded. This deity may have originally been a female archetype associated with wild cows; later replaced by a male archetype of the moon called Suen(Sin) by the first known semitic rulers of mesopotamia called the Akkadians, who conquered Sumer around 2350bc. This anthropological connection to the Akkadian worship of a male moon deity is the underlying reason for why Urim has been identified as Ur of the Chaldees. For in genesis 11:

“And Terah took Abram his son, and Lot the son of Haran his son's son, and Sarai his daughter in law, his son Abram's wife; and they went forth with them from Ur of the Chaldees, to go into the land of Canaan; and they came unto Haran, and dwelt there.”
- gen 11:31 king james trans

See Nabonidus had attempted to occult the Babylonian solar deity Marduk, and exalt the lunar deity Sin to the top of the Mesopotamian pantheon. His efforts were seemingly part of a perpetual conspiracy by vested interests within the cults of Sin and Nusku, who in the prior century had attempted to overthrow the Neo-Assyrian king Esarhaddon in 670bc, to replace him with a mysterious figure named Sasi whose divine right to the throne was being foretold in a series of prophesies spread by a fire priestess known as the Oracle of Nusku.
As a result Esarhaddon became paranoia and started slaughtering suspected officials throughout the Neo-Assyrian empire, which then split under the joint rule of his two sons, whose untenable power sharing arrangement eventually led to the fall of the dynasty, and the curious rise of a ruler named Sinsharishkun, which translated to, “Sin has established the king”. And it was Sinsharishkun who was overthrown by the Chaldean ruler Nabopolassar who then upheld the solar deity Marduk, whose dynasty in turn was then upended by Nabonidus, who upheld the lunar deity Sin.

—Neo-Assyrian Empire—
911–891 BC Adad-nirari II
883–859 BC Ashurnasirpal II
859–824 BC Shalmaneser III (Rebuilds Sin temple in Harran)
745–727 BC Tiglath-Pileser III
722–705 BC Sargon II (Sargon)
705–681 BC Sin-ahhi-eriba(Sin - destroys Babylon)
681–669 BC Esarhaddon (Sargon) (Rebuilds Babylon)
669–631 BC Ashurbanipal (Sargon)
631-627 BC Assur-etil-ilani (Sargon)
627- 626 BC Sinsharishkun (Sin)
—Chaldean Empire—
Nabopolassar 626–605 BC (Marduk)
Nebuchadrezzar II 605–562 BC (Marduk)
Amel-Marduk 562–560 BC (Marduk)
Neriglissar 560–556 BC (Marduk)
Labashi-Marduk 556 BC (Marduk)
Nabonidus 556–539 BC (Sin)
—Persian Empire—

Mesopotamian civilisation ends with Nabonidus, the last king of Babylon, attempting to overthrow its solar religion for a lunar one. Which is interrupted by the Persian conquerer Cyrus, at which point Mesopotamian religion becomes dominated by Zoroastrianism, which is fire worship with strong philosophical tendencies towards binary thinking. Binary thinking is two-value logic or dialectic analysis. The outlook that things are either bad or good but never both, as this would be a contradiction. This was quite different from the conditional logic of elemental paganism, which categorized things according to their separate aspects depending on certain conditions. Hence why monotheism has one good God and one bad Devil. While paganism had three different Sun deities for each aspect of the day - sunrise - midday - sunset.

Basically,
Monotheism = rationalism
Elemental paganism = natural science

When Urim(Ur) was first excavated by John George Taylor in 1853, he found cylinder seals that belonged to Nabonidus within the Ziggarut dedicated to Nanna by the Sumerian rulers of Ur Dyn III. Translations of inscription on these then led Henry Rawlinson to declare Urim as Ur of the Chaldees as early as 1855.

But why? Nabonidus was not Chaldean nor had Sin been a Chaldean deity. While the actual Chaldean dynasty was from Unug(Uruk) and upheld the solar hegemony of the Babylonian Marduk. The reason was an agenda to trace the biblical origin of Abraham to an ancient historical semitic tradition via an anthropological connection of worship of the moon as a male deity.

This deity is first found worshiped under the name Enzu, or Zuen, or Suen, by the Akkadian dynasty of Sargon, who conquered and occupied the Sumerian city states between 2300bc-2150bc. Sargon’s legacy was venerated by later Assyrian rulers such as Sargon II, who founded the ‘Sargonid’ dynasty in 722bc, which Adad-guppi, the aforementioned priestess of Sin from Harran, and mother to the last Babylonian king Nabonidus, had claimed royal lineage to.

After the British declared Urim to be Ur of the Chaldees they abruptly diverted their excavation teams back into Syria, where they unfruitfully prodded around the largely depleted sites of ancient Assyria, already well mined of their history. By 1860 British excavations of ancient Sumerian cities completely ceased and wouldn’t begin again for 60 years— well on the record that is, until Iraq fell under British administration after the collapse of the Ottomans during WW1.

An archeology team from the University of Pennsylvania visited Urim briefly during the 1890s but never published any findings. This expedition had been excavating the nearby Sumerian city of Nibru(Nippur) over four seasons between 1889-1900, financed by puritan bankers from Philadelphia via the Babylonian Excavation Fund of Philadelphia, put together by Edward W. Clark. Like Unug(Urik) and Urim(Ur), Nibru(Nippur) had been tentatively excavated by the British in the early 1850s before being suddenly abandoned.

This was because, much to the horror of British assyriologists like Rawlinson, the oldest cuneiform texts coming back from these sites were translating into phonetic sounds of a non-semitic language.

The implication of this was, that their effort to prove the historicity of the Abrahamic bloodright, could backfire and undermine the very biblical race terminology from which the term Semite was invented the century prior by the Gottingen school of history. And if you were a Rothschild, at that time purchasing up large swaths of land in Palestine to prepare for the eventual foundation of the state of Israel, this was an issue.

And this is why Sumerian civilization was actually discovered by the French twenty years after the British had discovered it.

In the late 1870s a French envoy to the Ottomans named Ernest de Sarzec had started to clandestinely excavate an area of Iraq called Tello, from where an intrigue of artifacts had started showing up on antiquities blackmarkets. Instead of going to Ottoman authorities in Constantinople for permission, which would have alerted British agents such as Hormuzd Rassam, Sarzec went to a local chieftain of the Kuwaiti Al-Muntafiq tribes to do his work silently under the permission and protection of tribal desert law. There, in the early 1880s, Sarzec started to unearth the ancient Sumerian city of Girsu where he discovered the Gudea cylinders. Then largely due to French scholarship derived from these findings, such as Francois Thureau-Dangin 1905 work ‘Les inscriptions de Sumer et d'Akkad’; by the turn of the 20th century Sumerian had to be accepted as a distinct non-semitic language and the most ancient language of mesopotamia.
This placed new emphasis on that Eastern Question. Gavrilo Princip went and got a sandwich as they say, and then we got some answers. Ancient Sumer no doubt ended up in British hands, and make no mistake, this was purely for archaeological reasons.

Around this time, early 20th century, an extremely technical linguistic reclassification of the mesopotamian language tree occurred, which regrouped the known semitic languages as stems of a root semitic language called Akkadian. This was an ancient language linguists determined had been spoken by the Sargon Dynasty.

The term Akkadian derived from Akkad, the semitic name for a Sumerian city or region named Agade(never been found), used as a capital by the Sargon dynasty. An Akkadian variant of cuneiform was standardized at this time(2300bc), replacing the traditional use of the Sumerian language throughout the region but keeping its writing script. Think — swapping from German to English. This was then reverted back to Sumerian during the Neo-Sumerian empire around 2100, which was then changed back to another form of Akkadian during the first Babylonian empire around 1800bc, which is what passed onto the Assyrian Empire right through until the Chaldean empire around 600bc.

3500-2300: Sumerian Cuneiform
2300-2150: Akkadian Varient
2100-1900: Sumerian Cuneiform
1800-500: Akkadian Varients

Due to the babel of tongues, linguists have been able to use their highly specialized and remote field to pick and choose cultural attribution between these two distinct copper age Sumerian and Akkadian cultures, to the point the waters have been so muddied in modern scholarship that the two are almost treated synonymously. For instance, the term ‘Sumerian’ is Akkadian, the “Sumerians” called themselves Saggig. The names of Sumerian cities are often referred to under their Akkadian name. It goes much deeper than this though. The entire pantheon of Sumerian deities have been replaced with the characteristics and even often names of their Akkadian or Babylonian derivitives through the use of composite texts. If you lookup the name of a Sumerian deity named ‘Ningirsu’ you’ll get information on an Akkadian one named Ninurta, whose cult center is listed in an entirely different city. This is not the result of an ancient syncretic agenda, but a modern academic one.

The academic authority on these matters was put together in the early 20th century by New York’s Eastern Establishment, namely the Rockefeller and Guggenheim family estates among others, using the universities of Chicago and Pennsylvania as conduits, as well as a fraternity of interlinked privately funded scholarly societies, such as the American Anthropological Association, American Oriental Society and American Philosophical Society.
At the University of Chicago an Oriental Institute was founded in 1919 with funding by John D. Rockefeller Jr., who appointed an eygptologist named John Henry Breasted as director. Breasted initiated a project called the Chicago Assyrian Dictionary in 1921 which was continued by a Polish born linguist named Ignace Gelb, who under the support of a Guggenheim fellowship laid much of the foundational scholarship for what now serves as the authoritative resource for translating Akkadian dialects to english.
The english language history of ancient Sumer, derived from these translations, then started to be pieced together by archaeologists such as Henri Frankfort and Thorkild Jacobsen from the University of Chicago, sent on periodic 20th century expeditions to Iraq on the purse strings of the Oriental Institute.
At the University of Pennsylvania a Museum of Archeology and Anthropology(Penn Museum) was setup by the same fund of Philadelphia bankers that financed the 19th century American excavations at Nibru(Nippur), which included a brief visit to Urim(Ur) in the 1890s.

In 1918 agents of the British Intelligence Service named Reginald Campbell Thompson and Henry Hall returned to Urim(Ur) after a 60 year hiatus to briefly recommence excavations abruptly halted the following year. At the initiative of Penn Museum director George Gordon, the site was then handed over in 1922 by an expedition jointly sponsored by the University of Penn and British Museum under the supervision of Leonard Woolley.[ ‘Ur of the Chaldees: A record of Seven Years of Excavation’, C. Leonard Woolley,]

Woolley unearthed a royal cemetery in Urim(ur) housing tombs of the rulers of Ur Dynasty I(approx 2600-2400bc). These had all been looted except for one containing the skeletal remains of a female associated with the royal court of Ur Dyn I named Puabi. Some academics have since claimed her name, found on a cylinder seal, was of the Akkadian spelling, and have tried to identify her as the second wife of the Sumerian king Meskalamdug(2600bc app.). For if this were true, then according to the Hebrew tradition of matrilineal descent, the Sumerian royal bloodline in Urim could have possibly become semitic well before the time of Abraham. In fact, the earliest evidence given for the Akkadian language appearing in the Sumerian written form, was a name inscribed on a bowl dedicated to Meskalamdug’s grandson Meskiagnun by his Queen, Gan-Saman. So there are two separate theories attempting to wed Akkadian women to rulers of Ur Dyn I, which could in theory flip that bloodline to a semitic one.

Inspite of the looting, Woolley discovered the greatest haul of Sumerian artifacts that would provide the first clear insight into the lives of the Sumerian royalty from that period. See the website sumerianshakespeare.com for an accounting of these items.

In Woolley’s published account of his findings he stated that visual inspection of skeletons discovered in gravesites around Urim(Ur), including those in its royal cemetery that contain human sacrificial ‘death pits’; had led him to believe the Sumerians had been Indo-European. Interestingly, throughout the book Woolley also maintains the Sumerians were the ancient ancestors of the Hebrews. And concluded, just like Rawlinson 60 years before him, that Urim had been the biblical ‘Ur of the Chaldees’, the historical home of Abraham.

“I have already said that we do not quite know who the Sumerian are ; tradition would make them come from the East ; the study of their bones and skulls shows that they were a branch of the Indo-European stock of human race resembling what is called Caucasian man, a people who in stature and in appearance might pass as modern Europeans rather than Orientals. ”
- ‘Ur of the Chaldees: A record of Seven Years of Excavation’, C. Leonard Woolley

All of Woolley’s recovered artifacts, including these skeletal remains, were split between the British and Penn Museums, in whose custody they’ve remained ever since for almost 100 years. The bones of Puabi went to the British Museum, who have no doubt sequenced them within the last 20 years, meaning they now have the DNA profile for a female royal from the time of Ur Dyn I. For whatever reason they are keeping the results private, and not from a lack of public interest.Zecharia Sitchin became convinced the British Musuem were withholding evidence of ancient aliens. If you were wondering what purpose the Gratham Hancock types serve, it’s to direct conspiracy theorizing beyond real world political motivations.

See, what They(I’ve already named Them) would like to do is some time in the future, if possible, is use genealogy to “prove” bloodlines of some future ruling elect are scientifically traceable to the Abrahamic bloodline, under which then all three modern branches of the Abrahamic religions could be reunited at their common root. If this seems insane, it’s only because all organizing principles for world governance are insane. Even the humanist principle of public health used by the rockefellers.

The Vatican already claim to possess the DNA of Saint Peter, the ‘Rock’(baetylus) upon which Jesus built his Church.

So technically, and Catholicism is very technical, the Vatican could shift the succession of the Papacy from political election by council to birthright by blood. And it would be new scientific methods, much to the chagrin of atheists, that would allow this. Heraclitus says a thing can be pushed and pulled the same direction, like two men working a saw. Isn’t Holy communion just drinking the genetic linage of Abraham, so that we may all by birthright inherit his kingdom? What is zionism once you strip away its catchphrases? It is worship of the davidic bloodline. The western wall is the second temple.

Now, if the near 100 year chain of custody of Woolley’s Urim(Ur) artifacts wasn’t already suspect enough, Penn Museum claimed in 2014 to have rediscovered a previously unaccounted for skeleton in their basement. And it turns out this was the only skeleton excavated by Woolley from gravesites dated to the Ubaid period(5500–3700 BC). Which means Penn Museum now conveintly have DNA from the gestational period of Sumerian civilization. The significance of this has to do with something called “The Sumerian Question”.

After a decade of excavation and artifact procurement, the Urim excavations were ended in 1932 so the academics could begin deriving a history from the primary source evidence. This began through a dialectic set up between academics from the Universities of Pennsylvania and Chicago.

One side was led by Ephraim Avigdor Speiser, a Polish-born assyriologist from the University of Pennsylvania on a Guggenheim fellowship, who published a paper called ‘Mesopotamian Origins’ in 1930. This very cleverly argued through implication,[ The academic form of debate is based on implication. Unlike laywers they aren’t forced to pick sides. So they never state anything outright, as this allows them to maintain the impartiality used to innocently arrive at a natural conclusion. The unspoken rule is to never accuse an opponent of bias, because then the whole system of academic authority breaks down. Which leads to some pretty amusing explanations when they have to account for a lack of consensus.] that the Sumerians were a minority of foreign invaders who supplanted themselves as an aristocratic class on top of a native population of proto-Elamite agriculturists, right next to but not on top of a native population of Akkadians, who then conquered the Sumerian colonialists and restored the semitic heritage of the region.

The antithesis was provided by a Dutch egyptologist named Henri Frankfort from the Oriental Institute(Rockefeller), who published a paper in 1932 called “Archeology and the Sumerian Problem”, which posited the Sumerian were the first to settle in that area which was later invaded by an Akkadian migration form Western mesopotamia. What this did was start to shift focus beyond Sumerian civilisation, to the period before it, and thus the zero point of history back into a ‘prehistoric’ period prior to this new Sumerian advent of writing, to where the evidence for linguistic ethnic groupings could become purely metaphysical constructs unrestrained by the inconvenient discoveries of archeology.

The accuracy of racial linguistics is this

Ancient Jamaican Gangster:

Ancient Anglo Bankster:

After WW2 an academic wall started to be built around mesopotamia to artificially isolate Sumerian civilization from any northern cultural origin, so that this could be exclusively attributed to either:
1) a semitic cultural diffusion from the Levant via the Akkadians.
2) a mystery

This was easy to achieve because any theory of northern Sumerian origins could be dismissed as a Nazi race theory. Which meant academics avoided it like the plagu— a nazi race theory. This is despite it being well-known by that time who the Sumerians were.

The Sumerians had round skulls and had migrated into the area of their name from the Zagros/Taurus mountain regions which flank the northern perimeter of mesopotamian in south-east Turkey and western Iran. They had probably originally come from the Caucasus, so were Caucasian, and this is why they used to be called alpine round heads to distinguish them from semitic or indo-european pastoralists to their north and south, both of which had longer skulls and were thus called long heads.

Because the archaeological evidence for this was clear, isolating the Sumerians from this origin had to be done linguistically, by classifying the agglutinative Sumerian language as a ‘language isolate’. This means a dead language with no relation to any other known language. To the northwest of mesopotamia, the agglutinative language spoken by the Harrians in the Taurus mountains was also classified a ‘language isolate’. To the northeast, the agglutinative language spoken by the Haltami(Elamites) in the Zagros mountains was classified as a ‘language isolate’.

In fact, according to linguistic authorities, the only copper age language spoken in all of West Asia with a modern relative is Akkadian.

The Akkadians were probably proto-assyrians who migrated east, which is why the later Assyrian dynasties venerated the dynasty of Sargon. Yet their presence in Mesopotamia is rather earliest evidenced in the far eastern city of Urik(Ur), which geographically would suggest they came from the Arabian peninsula, where another semitic speaking group can be found in Dilmun. But this would imply the Akkadians were arabs, implying Abraham was arab. Which is obviously unacceptable to western Christians and Jews. So the Akkadian language is classified as eastern-semitic, and gets traced to a western semitic relative in the Levant called Eblaite, which once again gets identified in the written Sumerian script.

The implication of all this is a barely plausible semitic origin theory for key culutral components of Sumerian civilization, specifically it’s religion and specifically the Sumerian gods at the top of its religious pantheon which were adopted by Babylon, all to restore a historic semitic hegemony over the Abrahamic religions.

You can see on the various wikipedia pages the ways in which antisumerian linguists are trying to steal the specific Sumerian deities which were the most powerful.

This all seems complicated until you understand everything is geared towards arriving at the same conclusion. They are trying to set the zero point of history in modern-day Israel. No place on earth has been put to the archeologist’s trowel more than this area between the Jordan river and Mediterranean sea. Yet no matter how much they dig and dig, they can’t find a trace of copper age civilization there. So instead they have started to bend history to steal from both Mesopotamia and Egypt.

See, the origin of every early civilisation is fresh water flooding. All the earliest civilisations in each part of the world first appear within an alluvial river valley flooded annually by a freshwater source(that comes from a mountain, more on this later).
Indie civ - Indus river (India)
Sinic civ - Yellow river (China)
Egyptian civ - Nile river (Africa)
Mesopotamian civ - Euphrates/Tigris (West Asia - Iraq/Syria)
Elamite civ - Karun river (WestIran)
Mesoamerican - Supe River (Peru)

The Levant region has its own river valley yet no trace of its own civilisation until the bronze age Canaanite in the very late 2nd millennium. This is why terms like ‘The Levant’ and ‘Fertile Crescent’ were invented to describe the ancient history of the middle east. Because these arbitrarily stitch the civilisationaless Jordan river valley to the Euphrates river valley in Mesopotamia, so both may be treated as historically contiguous via the overlap of The Levant and Mesopotamia in modern day Syria.

This geographic river valley feature is the obvious and least arbitrary way of identifying distinct ancient cultural groups, which all over the world map to the emergence of different languages, and thus, separate ethnicities. The term “Fertile Crescent”, popularised by John Henry Breasted of the University of Chicago’s Oriental Institute(Rockefeller), groups The Levant and Mesopotamia together as a monolithic geographic region.

Mesopotamia = mainly Syria and Iraq, but also South-East Turkey and South-West Iran. (Tigris + Euphrates river valleys)
Northern Levant = Syria (Euphrates river valleys)
Southern Levant = Jordan, Israel, Palestine, sometimes Lebanon (Jordan river valleys)
The Levant = Syria, Jordan, Israel, Palestine, sometimes Lebanon (Jordan river valleys + Euphrates river valleys)
Fertile Crescent = Levant + Mesopotamia (Tigris & Euphrates river valleys + Jordan river valleys)

Up until the 21st century the western convention fixed the zero point of history to around 3500bc in the far south eastern tip of the fertile crescent, which is of course the location of ancient Sumer.

Now, ever since the fertile crescent was plunged into perpetual war in the 1990s, this zero point has slowly shifted from 3500bc at its far south-eastern tip, to 10,000bc at its far south-western tip. Thus shifting the ‘cradle’ of civilisation into the Southern Levant by changing it from advent of writing in ancient Sumer to the advent of agriculture in ancient modern-day Israel, where there was no ancient civilisaton.

Civilisation has always meant citylife + writing. Nothing else. Throughout history civilised societies have been conquered by barbarians with superior technology. The term civil only refers to metaphysical sophistication, hence the need for writing as evidence of it. This is because such a combination assumes the presence of a public authority in the form of statehood, and thus some kind of important cultural principle of organization which we may learn from.

Civilization just means useful history on metaphysical human culture.

Since society is separate from the state, the origin of Sumerian religion can be traced to the economic basis behind this organizing principle of its statehood. Or in others words, from the advent of writing to the advent of agriculture. Or in other words, from the civilisation to the cradle. Or in other words, from 3500bc to 10,000bc. Or in other words, from Sumer to anywhere within Mesopotamia. Or in other words, to anywhere within the Fertile Crescent.

The ‘cradle’ of civilization means the beginning of the neolithic period, which has now been set at 10,00bc. This is when it’s theorized primitive people who hunted or gathered food begun to cultivate and store it in large amounts, leading to large sedentary populations in fixed permanent settlements, who developed the sophisticated citylike culture that eventually evolved or spread into the first civilization found 6000 years with the advent of writing in Sumer.

See how the beginning of the story now changes from the first sophisticated cultured to the first cultured people. The latter of which implies a biological evolutionary leap wink wink.

By “neolithic” is meant “cultured”, and by “first neolithic culture” is meant, first genetic type of people to make the evolutionary leap from primitive ‘hunter gatherer’ to sedentary farmer. Or in other words that go unspoken like points of ellipsis in academic journals, evolution’s chosen few. For if you are attempting to trace the origin of culture itself to before there was any, and culture is an ethnic grouping, then the only basis on which to trace is race. Which is why they use DNA sequencing to map ancient human migration, and people get their genetics tested to identify as 2% this or 15% that and eventually see if this can be correlated to IQ and possibly used to justify political action on the basis of the ancient natural laws of evolution which are fixed and unchangable and perfectly suitable for fixed unchanging society reorganized on a static basis into tiers like the hindu cast system but with abraham, which had made the indus river civilisation soooo much stronger than the flux and adaptive ones that conquered it.

Now, prime mover aside, since the first of a thing is actually the thing which came before it, the first neolithic people are rather to be found in the period prior, from where they ‘evolved’ said period into the neolithic. This prior period is themesolithic (15000-10000bc). This is so long ago that archeology conducted for this period, if you could even call it this, is mostly comprised of archaeobotany and carbon14 labwork. This means carbon dating trace elements of plantlife found in dirt samples taken mostly from Israel due to the rest of The Fertile Crescent having been a warzone for most of the period this technology has been available. Tangible artifacts of culture from the mesolithic aside from specific megolithic structures, are so lackluster that any anthropological conjecture can be easily dismissed if you disagree with it for political reasons, as it should be. But as a result the only objective evidence now comes from tightly controlled technology used by experts within highly specialized fields, who present their evidence with even less accessibility than bible passages cited to illiterate peasants in sermons by the clergy.

It has been in this way the classical Victorian race science duo of botanist and geneticist have teamed together now in the 21st century to show within the last 20 years, in peer-reviewed studies, in studies that “show”, that a mesolithic racial group called the Natufians invented agriculture in modern-day Israel, which is what sparked an agricultural revolution throughout the Middle East, perhaps even the world, leading to the very first civilisations in ancient Egypt and Sumer.

And this is now the zero point in history. We start in ancient Israel 10,000bc, the cradle of civilization, where evolution’s chosen few invent agriculture and evolve every other river valley in the region into an advanced civilization, except of course their own.

To compliment this, another 21st century theory in the field of linguistics has attributed a new type of language to these Natufians as well, called the proto-afroasiatic language. Can you guess what type of language it is?

If you guessed semitic you were close.

It’s the progenitor language of all other semitic languages, including african ones. The mother tongue.

Now you may be thinking, no way would there be an agenda to trace a genetic linage from modern dna, back 12,000 years to identify the racial groups descended from evolution’s chosen few. Just as you may think, no way there could be an agenda to trace a genetic lineage from modern dna back 4000 years to the abrahamic bloodline detailed in an extensive genealogy of the bible for future generations to use as a genetic guide for determining who was owed what by the covenant of god. That would be insane.

Genomic insights into the origin of farming in the ancient Near East

Look familiar?

As you can see, the proposed geographical region for the Natufian race literally reaches, with its arm outstretched, from modern day Israel into northern Syria, to dunk itself into the euphrates river.

This is precisely where it’s claimed the earliest evidence of agriculture can be found in the lab results of dirt samples taken from an archaeological site called Tell Abu Hureyra, just prior to when it was flooded by the construction of a dam back in 1974

New evidence of Lateglacial cereal cultivation at Abu Hureyra on the Euphrates - First published May 2001

In 2001 the periodisation(ASPRO Chronology) of the mesolithic period was changed to overlap the neolithic for a few hundred years.

This was done to move the mesolithic Natufians into the earliest stages of permanent settlement found at Jericho. Jericho is an archaeological site of a cluster of dwellings, perhaps twenty, surrounded by a wall, its earliest structures carbon-14 dated to around 9000bc, which has earnt it a UNESCO classification as the “oldest fortified city in the world.” City means citylife, the other half of civilisation.

Remember, civilisation = citylife + writing. The advent of writing was fixed to Sumerian statehood around 3500bc, but the citylife of its society is still up for grabs. And an attempt to claim it has been made out of these the following theories introduced rapidly over the past 20 years:

1) The natufians originate in Israel and built the first permanent settlements of what became Jericho.
2) Jericho has been classified by UNESCO as a city.
3) The natufians spoke the primordial semitic language.
4) The natufians started an agricultural revolution in the Jordan valley, which then spread to mesopotamia and later egypt.

What follows is composite meta-theory, shifting the advent of history back to 10,000bc, to begin the story of humanity with an evolutionary leap made in modern-day Israel, where semitic hunter gathers evolved into cultured farmers living within permanent settlements at Jericho, from where they started an agricultural revolution which evolved into the sophisticated Mesopotamian society that became the first civilisation when the Sumerians introduced writing, like icing on a cake.

The natufian theory replaces a prevailing one from the 20th century, which attributed the origins of agriculture to highland gardeners from the Zagros and Taurus mountains, who moved down into the foothills and established the earliest large permanent settlements along the north perimeter of Mesopotamia. This is called the hilly flanks theory and was basically proven using archaeological and anthropological evidence.

The theory struggled to remain relevant as political instability across Syria, Iraq, and Iran has prevented continued efforts to develop the archaeological evidence since around 1990, with one exception.

Gobekli Tepe

Because Turkey is a NATO country, it was immune to geopolitical interference, allowing archaeological work to continue into the 21st century at sites along its southern border, which is where Gobekli Tepe is located. This site is controversial because it’s hard archaeological evidence of an advanced neolithic settlement that predates Jericho in Israel. Because of this there is currently an on-going agenda to prevent Gobekli Tepe from being classified as a permanent settlement by classifying it as purely as religious center. It’s all about the implication.
If the site was settled permanently with year round housing, this would imply a sedentary lifestyle of its builders, which would imply a sedentary population sustaining itself through some early form of agriculture and/or animal husbandry, which would imply an ethnic group evolved well beyond the hunter-gatherer stage. By ensuring no structures at the site are classified as permanent residences, whoever built it can be kept from progressing past the hunter-gatherer stage.

Between 1995-2014 excavations by an archaeologist named Klaus Schmidt progressed at a snails pace, unearthing no more than 5% of the site’s total estimated structures. Based on the available lack of evidence its reputation became a religious center. Schmidt’s successor Lee Clare then found clear evidence of permanent dwellings between 2015-2017 which he reported. It then became a UNESCO site in 2018 and received an official classification which downplayed this.

“Göbekli Tepe is located in Upper Mesopotamia, a region which saw the emergence of the most ancient farming communities in the world. Monumental structures, interpreted as monumental communal buildings (enclosures), were erected by groups of hunter-gatherers in the Pre-Pottery Neolithic period (10th-9th millennia BC). The monuments were probably used in connection with social events and rituals and feature distinctive limestone T-shaped pillars, some of which are up to 5.50 meters tall. Some of the pillars, which are abstract depictions of the human form, also feature low reliefs of items of clothing, e.g. belts and loincloths, as well as high and low reliefs of wild animals. Recent excavation works have also identified the remains of non-monumental structures which appear to stem from domestic buildings.”
-https://whc.unesco.org/en/list/1572/

Compare that with UNESCO’s dick sucking(classification) of Jericho:

“Located northwest of present-day Jericho in the Jordan Valley in Palestine, Ancient Jericho/Tell es-Sultan consists of an oval-shaped tell, or mound, that contains archaeological deposits of human activity dating back to about 10,500 BC, and the adjacent perennial spring of ‘Ain es-Sultan, which for millennia has been an important source of water for the inhabitants of this area.
The stratigraphy of this archaeological site shows twenty-nine phases of occupation and testifies to two historical-cultural contexts, namely the Neolithisation of the Fertile Crescent and the phenomenon of urbanism in southern Levant during the Bronze Age. By the 9th to 8th millennium BC, Neolithic Ancient Jericho/Tell es-Sultan was already a sizeable permanent settlement, as expressed by surviving monumental architectural features such as a wall with a ditch and a tower. It reflects the developments of the period, which include the shifting of humanity to a sedentary communal lifestyle and the related transition to new subsistence economies, as well as changes in social organisation and the development of religious practices. The Early Bronze Age archaeological material on the site provides insights into urban planning, while vestiges from the Middle Bronze Age reveal the presence of a large Canaanite city-state, equipped with an urban centre and technologically innovative rampart fortifications, occupied by a socially complex population.”
- https://whc.unesco.org/en/list/1687/

Notice how they skip right from the beginning of the Neolithic(9000bc) to the Bronze age(1500bc). This is because there is no copper age civilisation in the Levant. Which we'll get to.

Since the agenda here is to trace early agriculture to Israel, which is south of Mesopotamia, any evidence of it to the north during the early neolithic has to be dismissed in some way. This is why, after permanent dwellings at Gobekli Tepe had to be acknowledged, its builders were then characterised as neolithic luddites, a group of primitive reactionaries opposed to the new progressive innovations being introduced into meospotamia by the natufians.

“If Clare and Zimmermann are correct, Göbekli Tepe isn’t the beginning of cities and farming, but the final fight of Ice Age hunters unwilling to accept the changes they saw all around them. “It’s not the beginning of the Neolithic, it’s the end of hunter-gatherers,” Zimmermann says. “The idea of a zero point, or beginning of something—the beginning of agriculture, the beginning of sedentary life, the beginning of religion—we have to abandon it.” - https://archaeology.org/issues/may-june-2021/features/turkey-gobekli-tepe-hunter-gatherers/

This idea was popularized by a 2021 book called “The Dawn of Everything”, written by an anarchist behind the Occupy Wallstreet movement named David Graeber. And there’s a good reason for this.

See, anarchist politics was introduced into the fields of archeology and anthropology to provide an underlying political motivation for dismissing the existence of public authority and agriculture outside of the Levant during in the early neolithic period. Anarchists hate the state, which means they hate ancient city state cultures being credited for innovations. Since there is no copper age civilization in the Jordan river valley it means there is no evidence of a public authority. Thus, anarchists are politically motivated to attribute neolithic cultural innovations to the lower Levant due to the absence of early statehood.

So grain became associated with modern-day capitalism, which in turn associated agriculture with the modern neoliberal state. This resulted in the perception of agricultural societies as capitalist, and non-agricultural societies as anarchist. Which meant the notion of advanced neolithic settlements without agriculture would lend historical legitimacy to modern ideological beliefs that society can function without capitalism and the state. Thus, the idea of an advanced neolithic settlement like Gobekli Tepe being non-agriculturists could be perceived as a good thing by useful idiots.

But perception changes. If you want people to accept that natufians were the first agriculturalists, you simply say they were first agriculturalists, but this is actually bad and it’s the non-agriculturalists that are good. Which is exactly what Yuval Harari argued in probably the worst best selling book ever written on human history.

“Rather than heralding a new era of easy living, the Agricultural Revolution left farmers with lives generally more difficult and less satisfying than those of foragers. Hunter-gatherers spent their time in more stimulating and varied ways, and were less in danger of starvation and disease. The Agricultural Revolution certainly enlarged the sum of total food at the disposal of humankind, but the extra food did not translate into a better diet or more leisure. Rather, it translated into population explosions and pampered elites. The average farmer worked harder than the average forager, and got a worse diet in return. The Agricultural Revolution was history’s biggest fraud.”
- Sapians, Yuval Harari 2011

So in 2011 the best-seller on the history of humanity states agriculture was bad. And following this you will find most of the evidence attributing the advent of agriculture to natufians published roughly between 2010-2020. Then, once this was accepted, a new best-seller on human history, ‘The Dawn of Everything’(2021), put forward the arguement that, ahhh actually it was the agricultural societies who were good:

“Seen this way, the ‘origins of farming’ start to look less like an economic transition and more like a media revolution, which was also a social revolution, encompassing everything from horticulture to architecture, mathematics to thermodynamics, and from religion to the remodeling of gender roles. And while we can’t know exactly who was doing what in this brave new world, it’s abundantly clear that women’s work and knowledge were central to its creation; that the whole process was a fairly leisurely, even playful one, not forced by any environmental catastrophe or demographic tipping point and unmarked by major violent conflict. What’s more, it was all carried out in ways that made radical inequality an extremely unlikely outcome. . .All this applies most clearly to the development of Early Neolithic societies in lowland parts of the Fertile Crescent, and especially along the valleys of the Jordan and Euphrates Rivers. ”
- The Dawn of Everything.

This bullshittery hasn’t been lost on earnest academics, and there is no actual consensus on the natufian theory. The theory is just the one you’ll find in the best selling books on pop-history and edited into every wikipedia page on related topics. And it only matters because it will end up being the one taught in schools.

The following paper presents all the clear evidence for agriculture and permanent residents at Gobekli Tepe. The author is just as critical of ‘The Dawn of Everything’ as I am, just doesn’t understand what they are up against, is a conspiracy to control history.

“In their popular book, The Dawn of Everything, Graeber and Wengrow (2021) make several references to Göbekli Tepe. At the risk of oversimplifying, a main thread of this book is that the traditional “evolutionary” story of “complex societies” emerging from egalitarian ones is fundamentally flawed. Consequently, they not only contradict the economic-ecological paradigms but also some of the psychological ones, like those mentioned above, that call for a cognitive revolution quite late in human history.

Considering how critical they are – and rightly so – of many anthropological and archaeological assumptions in other contexts, it is curious how uncritically they accept Schmidt’s interpretation of Göbekli Tepe and ignore any literature that revises or raises concerns about that view.” - Paradise Found or Common Sense Lost? Göbekli Tepe’s Last Decade as a Pre-Farming Cult Centre

The word 'Curious' means 'conspiratorial' in academic.

The entire point of the book is to attribute agriculture to the natufians.

“The creation of these remarkable buildings implies strictly coordinated activity on a really large scale, even more so if multiple enclosures were constructed simultaneously, according to an overall plan. But the larger question remains: who made them? While groups of humans not too far away had already begun cultivating crops at the time, to the best of our knowledge those who built Gobekli Tepe had not. Yes, they harvested and processed wild cereals and other plants in season, but there is no compelling reason to see them as ‘proto’-farmers, or to suggest they had any interest in orienting their livelihoods around the domestication of crops. Indeed, there was no particular reason why they should, given the availability of fruits, berries, nuts, and edible wild fauna in their vicinity.”
- Dawn of Everything.

The advent of agriculture is about laying claims to the religious origins of the earth mother goddess archetype, worshiped by the peasants of the first Mesopotamian farming societies, right through the earliest Sumerian city states. If agriculture was introduced into mesopotamia by natufians, and natufians were proto-semites, then the origins of Sumerian religion and can be traced to modern day Israel.

An early depiction of this goddess was discovered in a neolithic farming settlement in Turkey called catalhoyuk(approx 7000bc) during the 1960s.

This figurine is flanked by two lions, or felines, or possibly dogs ;), and was found in a grain container. Similar female figurines, referred to as venus figures, can be found everywhere and from much earlier periods. One called ‘Venus of Willendorf’ can be found in Europe dated to about 20,000bc. But the characteristics of a goddess flanked by two lions was maintained in the anatolian region(Turkey) right through until the Roman era, in the form of a Phrygian earth mother goddess called Cybele. Who will come to feature heavily in this series because of her connection to the blackstone.

Because of this there is yet another agenda to reclassify this and other goddess figurines as children’s toys, as to annul the feminine religious association with early agriculture.

Catalhoyuk was taken over by an archaeologist named Ian Hodder in the 1990s, who between then and 2018 excavated under 10% of the total estimated site. In 2012 Catalhoyuk was designated a UNESCO heritage site and Hodder bizarrely replaced the entire team responsible for doing lab work on artifacts coming out of it.

“Researchers finishing the dig season at Turkey's Çatalhöyük—a 9500-year-old site famed for its art and symbolism at the dawn of agriculture—got a big shock last week. Stanford University archaeologist Ian Hodder, who has directed excavations since 1993, told the heads of the dig's specialty labs that they would be asked to step down beginning in 2012, when publication of current work will be completed. It's "the night of the long knives," says one long-time team member, who asked not to be identified. Such a mass dismissal is highly unusual at long-running archaeological excavations. But in a 29 August e-mail to the team explaining his decision, Hodder stressed that he was not dissatisfied with anyone's work. Rather, the e-mail said, the project "needs new energy—that is, new questions, new theoretical perspectives, ... new methods."
- https://www.science.org/content/article/hodder-cleans-house-famed-atalh-y-k-dig

In 2016 a team of Polish archaeologists working under Hodder discovered a new figurine. This new discovery led to a new theory.

“While of exceptional quality, this figurine was not of exceptional purpose. Goddess figurines were common in the Neolithic period, crafted throughout southeastern Europe, the Middle East and Anatolia, the region in central Turkey where Çatalhöyük once flourished. While they have long symbolized fertility, a more recent theory suggests otherwise. Meskell is among a handful of scholars who posit that the Neolithic figures at Çatalhöyük may “represent older women who have achieved status.” Whether they rose to the level of goddesses, though, is unclear.”
- https://news.stanford.edu/stories/2016/09/archaeologists-find-8000-year-old-goddess-figurine-central-turkey

On Catalhoyuk, the anarchist has this to say:

“Since the 1990s, new methods of fieldwork at Catalhoyuk produced a string of surprises, which oblige us to revise both the history of the world’s oldest town and also how we think about the origins of farming in general. The cattle, it turns out, were not domestic: those impressive skulls belonged to fierce, wild aurochs. The shrines were not shrines, but houses in which people engaged in such everyday tasks as cooking, eating and crafts - just like anywhere else, except they happened to contain a larger density of ritual paraphernalia. Even the Mother Goddess has been cast into shadow. It is not so much that corpulent female figurines stopped turning up entirely in the excavations, but that the new finds tended to appear, not in shrines or on thrones, but in trash dumps outside houses with the heads broken off and didn’t really seem to have been treated as objects of religious veneration. . .Nowadays, archaeologists are more likely to point out that many figurines could just as easily have been the local equivalents of Barbie dolls.”
- The Dawn of Everything

This book even goes so far as to characterize neolithic culture north of mesopotamia as violently patriarchal and barbaric, and neolithic culture south of it peacefully matriarchal, all to attribute the feministic characteristics of early gardening culture to natufians.

“Originally, as we’ve seen, much of the Neolithic lifestyle developed alongside an alternative cultural pattern in the steppe and upland zones of the fertile crescent, most clearly distinguished by the building of grand monuments in stone, and by a symbolism of male virility and predation that largely excluded female concern. By contrast, the art and ritual of lowland settlements in the Euphrates and Jordan valleys presents women as co-creators of a distinct form of society - learned through the productive routines of cultivation, herding, and village life. - and celebrated by modeling and binding soft materials, such as clay or fibers, into symbolic forms”
- ‘The Dawn of Everything’

This is all pophistory bullshit to cover up the real history of organized religion in Mesopotamian farming societies, which was derived from the natural elements of the flood cycle.

The origin of civilisation is fresh water flooding. All the earliest civilisations in different parts of the world appear within alluvial river valleys flooded annually by a freshwater source.
Indie civ - Indus river (India)
Sinic civ - Yellow river (China)
Egyptian civ - Nile river (Africa)
Mesopotamian civ - Euphrates/Tigris (West Asia - Iraq/Syria)
Haltami(Elamite) civ - Karun river (West Iran)
Mesoamerican - Supe River (Peru)

This is the great mystery behind the commonalities of ancient religion. All of these regions begin with a mountain and end with a sea, near where you’ll find their first copper age(approx 4000-2000bc) civilization.

Taurus Mountains - Euphrates/Tigris rivers - Persian Gulf: Sumerian civ near the persian gulf.
Zagros Mountains - Karun river - Persian Gulf: Haltami civ near the persian gulf.
Ethiopian Mountains - Nile river - Mediterranean Sea: Egyptian civ near the Mediterranean.

You can even use this knowledge to figure out where the first proto-indo-european civilisation would’ve been. Southern Ukraine, right near where the Dnipier river drains into the Black sea. You know, exactly the area Russia annexed in 2014 after they lost control of Ukraine’s government.

Mountain - River - Sea.

This is for three reasons.

1) Snowfall in the mountains over winter, or the winter solstice, melted with the return of the sun’s strength in spring, or the summer solstice, causing fresh water to flood down the mountains into valleys, where the earth was tossed like salad and replenished until the excess water drained into a salt water sea or a basin.

2)The cyclical nature of this fresh water flood came and went with enough time to spare for planting, growing, and harvesting crops along this area where the soil was naturally replenished, which allowed for fixed farming in the same location over and over.

3) The only permanent settlements which could survive alongside fixed farming in these regions, prior to the development of flood control technology, were downstream where the force of the flood was weakest. This is why permanent settlements prior to the Sumerian citystates were located in foothills north of the Tigris.

Thus, the origin of organized religion, which is what we are interested in, was an elemental one derived from the flood cycle. As this was the force of nature that dominated the lives of people who first farmed these regions.

From the mountain, comes the flood, to fertilize the earth. Very simple. And a vague trinity of three archetypal deities were derived from this:
Mountain deity.
Flood deity.
Fertility deity.

The fertility deity actually predates these other two, having been worshiped by neolithic highlanders from the mountainous regions north of mesopotamia. These people lived in villages or towns, and cultivated gardens on a rotational basis using stone hoes and techniques like slash and burn to get around their inability to replenish the soil in static locations. As a result, they developed religious beliefs associated with the fertility of soil, which eventually led to ritual worship of a female archetype called the earth mother.

These highlanders spoke an agglutinative language, like the ones later spoken by Harrians in the Taurus mountains, or Haltami in the Zagros mountains, or Sumerians in the Mesopotamian river valleys below. This culture was in contrast to neolithic hunters, who spoke different languages and lived in tribes across the flatlands either side of this West Asian mountain terrain. To the north these were Indo-europeans from the Ukrainian region, and to the south these were Semites from the Syrian desert.

Indo-European - Northern lowlanders. Tribal Hunters. Had long skulls. From Southern Ukraine/Russia.

Caucasian - Mountain highlanders. Villagers. Gardened. Had round skulls. From the Caucasus.

Semites - Southern lowlanders. Tribal Hunters. Had long skulls. From Syria.

These distinctions have been obscured by grouping highlanders and lowlanders together as hunter-gatherers.

At some point during the neolithic, the highlanders realized the periodic flooding from the mountains replenished the fertility of the valleys below, allowing for cultivation in a fixed location. However, the floods were also prone to wipe out any settlements built within the region between cycles, meaning permanent settlement required two things.

1) Seasonal understanding of time through specialized knowledge of the zodiac or seasonal calendar.
2) Construction of public works like flood walls, channeling, or dams; which in turn required some principle of organization for the collection of surplus wealth to put towards organized labor.

For these reasons neolithic farming in mesopotamia began remotely from the foothills of the Taurus and Zagros mountains, where villagers started to tentatively cultivate the flood zones remotely, bringing their harvest back to the foothills for food processing into cereals, where permanent settlements started sustain growing sedentary populations. This is why evidence of permanent settlements plus large scale grain processing has been found at early neolithic sites such as Gobekli Tepe, Boncuklu Tepe, and Karahan Tepe, along the foothills of the Taurus mountains in South-Eastern Turkey. Excavations of similar sites like Tepe Sialk or Jarmo in the Zagros of Iran have been hampered by unstable governance of the country.

These large scale grain processing sites seems to be where the earliest forms of taxation was legitimized as offerings made to some religious authority associated with the earth mother archetype. And this religious archetype carried over into the earliest stages of Sumerian civilisation.

Large city states on the mesopotamian floodplain are first found in Sumer because this is where the flooding weakest, meaning water control could be acheived by simple flood walls. There’s a religious theme in meso myth of early upstream cities being wiped away by the flood. These myths also mention the earliest Sumerian cities like Unug(Uruk) constructing flood walls to protect their temple districts. Within these districts the Sumerians built their most vital structures, which were the temples where the grain offerings were stored, on artificially elevated mounds called ziggurats.

As flood control technology improved the downstream advantage of the earliest city states became a liability, as new cities could be safely built upstream closer to the source of flooding, which meant with the development of dams and channeling they could hold back water from downstream rivals. This seems to have led to a period of perpetual wars between upstream and downstream cities, the earliest of which are evidences in those fought between the upstream Umma and downstream Lagash.

This geopolitical reality lead to the need for some kind of governing authority to mediate water control between city states, which seems to be the necessity behind the early rise of empires. As the administrative region of new imperial governing authorities grew westward upstream, the administrative center of empire had to shift westward with it for logistical reasons, where it eventually became fixed in the centrally located Babylon. For this reason there was also a general lagging shift of the religious center from east to west as well. First from Uruk to Nippur, then from Nippur to Babylon, where the administrative and religious authority reunited, before being finally rivaled by Harran in the far West.

And this is the political context for understanding ancient sumerian history, or the history of humanity, which actually begins as a coherent narrative around 2500bc in ancient Sumer. Which is what this article was meant to be about but then I got side tracked by the metahistory because much of Sumerian history is antisumerian.