Talk:Anunnaki

message: To anyone worth their salt, the Sumerians were the clearly a civilization of the first rank and wrote painstaking account of their genesis of their origins and history. The Annunaki are constantly referenced in those writings, to such an extent that the Sumerians appear as bystanders to much of the histories. Yet this article makes them - the Annunaki - appear as guest stars in a long-running sitcom.Proof Reader (talk) 00:04, 28 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Comically weak article 

message: Dr malachi Z York has Authored many books in depth (Please examine as his history is based on western literature which is wrong many works from the middle east Far outdate what he used as a guide to his books.The fact that people dont put the time in to look at true middle eastern history is insulting. on this subject about the anunnaqi, anunnagi and done extensive research on the subject of sumerian deities and complied 100's of books back up by facts and evidence that can be check out. Dr Malachi Z york is the leading Authority on the subject of the Anunnagi.
I've removed the npov dispute from this article.  It looks to me like authors have been trying to make the article less biased and I don't see anything that is inherently one sided.  The ancient astronaut stuff is all treated fairly, explained as theories.  I think this line is a bit pejoritive
:These claims, like all ancient astronaut theories, are generally considered fantasy to some and fascinating speculation to others.
It could be should be changed to something like beliefs instead of fantasies but that one sentence doesn't really warrant a whole npov tag.  If anyone still feels that this article is one sided, leave a msg on my talk page and we can make it better :) TitaniumDreads 15:31, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  NPOV dispute 

message: So, does anyone who knows something about cuneiform script care to comment on the translations? I don't know enough to say for sure, but I suspect (based on searches in the Pennsylvania Sumerian Dictionary) that the symbols for anu, na, and ki are quite different to those used to write Anunnaki, and so the UFOlogist theory on the translation is entirely wrongheaded. —E. Underwood 19:45, 19 Mar 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: A simple report of the Pennsylvania Sumerian Dictionary entries for anu, na, and ki without drawing extensive conclusions might restore balance. --Wetman 19:55, 19 Mar 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  UFOlogy and translations 

message: I think a mention of the astronaut stuff might be fair here, but the details need to go somewhere else. An overabundance of such material makes the article a farce. --DanielCD 16:10, 1 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Mention

message: I've heard that the anunnaki were reptilian in nature, according to the sumerian tablets. Is this true?
:No. More reading, less "listening". --Wetman 19:48, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Reptilian?

message: Twice in a cursory overview of this article I see claims that the speculative theories are sumerian in origin. This is simply absurd. Trying to keep NPOV is one thing, but "Ananaki is ancient Sumerian word for Extra Terrestrials" and "According to Sumerian mythology the Anu came to earth and created a slave race, humans, by bonding their genetic material with that of homoerectus" are incorrect. According to the speculative theories this is what happened, however to say that sumerians had a concept of extraterrestrials, let alone an understanding of what homo erectus is, is absurd! Thanatosimii 04:40, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Don't forget the knowledge of "genetic material." - Cyborg Ninja 21:12, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

text: Since they don't, it shouldn't be here.Doug Weller (talk) 20:03, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: they don't?  what does your translation say?Cheesecake42 (talk) 15:55, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Tell me what you want a translation of and I'll get it for you, but you've got to be specific, not just 'the one that mentions ETs because there isn't one).Doug Weller (talk) 17:50, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: anything that mentions the anunnaki Cheesecake42 (talk) 19:42, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: That's still a big, relatively non-specific request, but here: 
and  and try to get hold of Kramer   and there is this faq .--Doug Weller (talk) 21:10, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  "According to the sumerians" 

message: Is the movie coming out any time soon, does anyone know? I have tried googling and looking around but wasn't able to find any information on how that movie project is progressing. I am talking about the movie he is making called 1Anunnaki. 62.16.188.173 12:52, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Jon Gress' movie 

message: There's a reference in the article about two gods who are related to the celestial poles. How could the Sumerians have known about their existence? Can anybody clear this up? - Cyborg Ninja 21:13, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Celestial poles 

message: It would be interesting to verify any kind of links between Enoch and the Annunaki. The song Veni Creator could very well have been sung by the Annunaki. 69.157.239.212 (talk) 12:42, 15 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Annunaki as Sons of Enoch

message: Do the annunaki corralate to the celestial, other-worldly, or avian aspects of any of or all three of the "ancient" dieties?--204.118.241.186 (talk) 21:33, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  osiris, isis, and horace 

message: is there any way to prove the image on this page is authentic? Where is this artifact on display. I used tineye (reverse image search)on the image and it shows up on 12 conspiracy theory type web sites, but nowhere like an anthropology dept of a university or a museum. prove it or lose it I say.72.195.136.189 (talk) 13:09, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: A very good question. Looking at the file, it says the image was uploaded to Wikipedia Commons as a free image due to expired copyright. No other information given. I'd like to ask an image expert on this one. Now I must go find one. Aunt Entropy (talk) 14:18, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree. It doesn't belong on the page and I've deleted it. I think the image itself should be renamed and a note put on the talk page, but it would be nice to firmly identify it first. I'm scouring Google images with no luck so far. Dougweller (talk) 14:06, 19 December 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Image renamed. Dougweller (talk) 11:32, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  the image on this page 

message: Hello, "Dr." In the above comment that discusses Horace, Osiris and Isis, the only portion authored by me is the word "no.". NJMauthor (talk) 08:08, 6 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dr 

message: In every source, both wacky AA theory sources and sane sources I've come across, Anunnaki is rendered an(u) "sky" - na Locative/Dative - ki "earth". I highly doubt the current rendering, could someone with more expertise than me please verify that the current version is correct/not correct?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.48.42.244 (talk) 00:55, 21 March 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: We can't remove the current rendering as it's attested by what we consider reliable sources - see WP:RS, but if you can find a reliable source with your rendering we can add it. I've searched and can't find one. We'd need a source making this specific rendering for the word. Dougweller (talk) 07:23, 23 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Syllables? 

message: I do agree witht the first comment on this talk page.  This is an unsuitably shallow description of who the historical / mythological Annunaki are from archeological evidence.  These are some of the first gods of the earliest mythology known to us, and this author makes little to mention of the Summerians, nor the original myth that they where described in, or who created them.  Sad.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Superangel4774 (talk • contribs) 23:33, 22 March 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I doubt very much anyone could pinpoint the 'original myth', how could anyone possibly know if there weren't undiscovered tablets? If you have reliable, non-fringe sources, please do add to the article. Dougweller (talk) 07:25, 23 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Light on Summarian Cosmology

message: In this feedback.  An ip gave some potentially good sources.  "All people need to do is read 'Enuma Elish - A Babylonian Epic' or go to University of Oxford Online to read the Sumerian texts themselves. For definitnitions of the Sumerian texts, I recommend The Chicago Assyrian Dictionary". Ryan Vesey 14:59, 8 October 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Good feedback advice 

message: The 21:07, 11 April 2016‎ Nihiltres version of this article is translated into Chinese Wikipedia to expand an existing article there.--Wing (talk) 19:02, 16 May 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  translation into Chinese Wikipedia 

message: I suggest to better explain in the article the identification of the Anunnaki as stars/constellations around the north celestial pole (An). Currently there is just a generic sentence which says that An, Enki and Enlil were identified as the sky itself. Actually all the gods are within An, and Enki and Enlil are two circles of constellations (out of three) around the north celestial pole. Source: http://articles.adsabs.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/nph-iarticle_query?letter=.&classic=YES&bibcode=1998JBAA..108....9R&page=&type=SCREEN_VIEW&data_type=PDF_HIGH&send=GET&filetype=.pdf  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.42.101.37 (talk) 19:11, 22 February 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you very much for the suggestion. I really appreciate it. I will try to incorporate it into the article. I probably will not have time before the end of the day, though, because I am rather busy right now, but I will try to get around to it as soon as I can. --Katolophyromai (talk) 21:06, 22 February 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Better explanation of the Anunnaki's identification as asterisms of the north pole 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion:
* 
You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 20:52, 12 January 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion 

message: under "worship and iconography" it says "very little evidence to support the existence of any cult of them has yet been unearthed" but then in the very next paragraph "cult statues were given constant care and attention"
similarly, it says "no representations of the Anunnaki as a group have yet been discovered" but directly below is an image of a cylinder seal impression depicting 3 or 4 of them together.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.249.133.224 (talk) 18:24, 17 February 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: These are not inconsistencies. The statement that "very little evidence to support the existence of any cult of them has yet been unearthed" is talking about worship of the Anunnaki together as a group of deities; whereas the statement "cult statues were given constant care and attention" is talking about the worship of Mesopotamian deities in general. The statement "no representations of the Anunnaki as a group have yet been discovered" is talking about group depictions of the Anunnaki as a defined and complete set of deities, presumably also labeled as such; that cylinder seal merely depicts a few deities who were probably considered members of the Anunnaki. –Katolophyromai (talk) 03:42, 18 February 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  confusing inconsistency 

message: Heaven on Earth: Temples, Ritual and Cosmic Symbolism in the Ancient World : Papers from the Oriental Institute Seminar Heaven on Earth, Held at the Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago, 2-3 March 2012. PDF here and page 156, a paper by Gary Beckman, says  "and a file of twelve chthonic gods". Also The Sculpture and Sculptors of Yazilikaya Hardcover, 30 Nov 1986by Robert L. Alexander p.17.  will those do? Doug Weller talk 13:44, 5 November 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Beckman, p. 156, with fig. 7.7 p. 162, is adequate for sourcing that the image depicts twelve Hittite underworld gods, and while it is true (as the text points out) that the Hittites had a group of gods, the karuileš šiuneš ('former gods'), that they identified with the Anunnaki, that this image is a depiction of those gods, is still unsourced.  Paul August ☎ 14:24, 5 November 2019 (UTC)
replies: text:  That's not to say I think this is untrue, just not adequately sourced. Paul August ☎ 14:28, 5 November 2019 (UTC)

text: (Note, the Rutherford and West cites should be able to be seen via the provide links, while Archi, pp. 114–115, says: Emil Forrer, in his well-known study on "The Kingship in Heaven" myth, pointed out that "the former, primeval gods" who apprear in the proem occur also in lists of the gods called as witnesses in political treaties, where they constitute a well-defined group1. ... As Emmanual Laroche3 states in another important paper, these "former primeval gods", karuileš šiuneš, ... are also called "inferior gods", kattereš šiuneš, which means "gods of the earth", taknaš šiuneš, ... the expression kattereš šiuneš translates the Hurrian ... "inferior gods", who live in the Underworld and who belong to the first generation of gods. The Hurrians (and the Hittites), acquainted with the Akkadian deities, equated them with the DA-NUN-NA-KE4) 
* Archi, Alsonso, "The Names of the Primeval Gods", Orientalia, NOVA SERIES, Vol. 59, No. 2, Die Artikel in diesem Heft sind Einar von Schuler gewidmet (*28. 10. 1930 †15. 2. 1990) (1990), pp. 114-129. .
* Beckman, Gary, "Intrinsic and Constructed Sacred Space in Hittite Anatolia" in Heaven on Earth: Temples, Ritual and Cosmic Symbolism in the Ancient World, edited by Deena Ragavan, Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago, Number 9, 2013, pp. 153–173.
* West, M. L. (2007), Indo-European Poetry and Myth, OUP Oxford, 2007, .
 What do you think (this subject is a bit outside my normal area of expertise)?
Paul August ☎ 16:08, 5 November 2019 (UTC)

text: sorry to take so long. I'm fine with the new wording.Doug Weller talk 20:47, 7 November 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  12 gods of the underworld source 

message: I noticed that WikiEditorial101 has inserted a whole paragraph to this article about Erich von Däniken, but I do not think such coverage of von Däniken is warranted in this article. This article is specifically about the Anunnaki, the deities from ancient Mesopotamian mythology—not about the ancient astronaut hypothesis. I do not recall von Däniken using the term "Anunnaki" at all frequently, so I do not see why he should receive so much coverage here. Of all the ancient astronaut pseudohistorians out there, Zecharia Sitchin is the one who is most closely associated with the Anunnaki and the one who has done the most to influence the way they are seen in popular culture. Before WikiEditorial101's extensive edits, Erich von Däniken was mentioned only briefly one time as a precursor to Sitchin. I think that is appropriate coverage for this article, since von Däniken's theories are not nearly as relevant here. I am in favor of removing the paragraph about von Däniken and making only brief mention of him, as before, unless someone can offer a very good explanation for why they think he should be covered here in such depth. —Katolophyromai (talk) 04:07, 19 December 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  A whole paragraph about Erich von Däniken? 

message: I couldn't find "Story 1980" source in "Bibliography" section. --Hedda Gabler (talk) 10:39, 22 March 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: I checked and it wasn't added with the reference. I've added it. Thanks for spotting that. Doug Weller talk 17:47, 22 March 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cite "Story 1980" 

message: I find it interesting that there is no mention of or material cited from these three scholars: Dr. Jeremy Black, Geo Widengren, or Zecharia Sitchin. Richard Deal 14:14, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  References 

message: I have cleared up the article to the state it was in when it received Good Article status. With the exception of work on citation formatting, there have been no constructive changes since February 2018. I have made a small edit and made note of this in an edit summary as a waypoint. Abductive (reasoning) 07:21, 11 June 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Returning to GA state 

message: Does the 10 commandments originally derived from the Egyptian book of the dead? Fetgiemama34 (talk) 22:54, 5 January 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  10 commandments 

message: Conspiracy theory and Ancient astronauts and not needed and already in article respectively.  121.98.204.148 (talk) 03:11, 14 July 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Redundant links in See also 

message: Is there a point to the last sentence of the "Pseudoarchaeology and conspiracy theories" section: "In his 2001 documentary about Icke, Jon Ronson cited a cartoon, "Rothschild" (1898), by Charles Léandre, arguing that Jews have long been depicted as lizard-like creatures who are out to control the world." What does that have to do with the Anunnaki? Junkyardprince (talk) 16:36, 13 August 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Last sentence of "Pseudoarchaeology and conspiracy theories"