Talk:Gudea

message: I started taking interest in this cute figure Gudea after I started attending a course in sculpture in London. I was attracted to his picture in one of the books which our instructor displayed on her desk. Since then I have been hooked and I bought a stone and started chisling away in an ambitious attempt to replicate one of the statues which depict him.
I have a desire to read everything available about Gudea and Lagash.
Maher Othman
If Statue E really is a standing sculpture, it's impossible that this is the "Architect with the Plan"-Statue, because Gudea is there sitting. Kenwilliams 12:45, 31 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: I have added a significant amount to this article and will proceed to wikify it and make sure it is in keeping.  I also plan to split off the article on statues, as I think it is better suited as a stand-alone article.  If anyone has any objections or suggestions, please let me know (Help, of course, is always welcome).  Thanks.  Elijahmeeks 00:34, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: New Material

message: In the article you can read a lot of times exact dates (for the year). But this isn't possible exactly to say, because it's not possible with the actuel stand of the science to reconstruct the cronology so exact. So I also delete the Year-of-Death-Category. Kenwilliams 13:37, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Though I agree with you in principle, this is a problem of history in general, isn't it?  I used exact dates that I drew from respectable sources.  Traditionally, historical information includes the best date, to be replaced when a better date is acknowledged.  I don't know if this is the best system, but it is the way that this works in academia... Elijahmeeks 19:19, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

text: On review, I noticed this was a category deletion.  I think deaths of 2124BC is a pretty lame category, and senseless to boot, so my thanks for they tidying up.  My response above was motivated by a conversation I had regarding the exact dates of Assurbanipal and how could we know and how does Wikipedia know, and so I thought this was in the same vein.  Elijahmeeks 19:26, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Main problem is, that nobody knows correct dates before the third Millenium B.C. - then there are sometimes dates we can verify the years as correct. But for the sumerian time it's never possible. Sad, but true. Kenwilliams 14:14, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dates 

message: On September 22, 2007, I removed the following paragraph from the end of the article because it is unclear just which period of time it is talking about. 
:The resurgence of the importance of gods in the script of Lagaš may be more a result of the cultural character of Southern Mesopotamia reasserting itself than it is a response to the chaotic nature of a post-Akkadian world. Sargon wasn’t much of a stabilizing influence to the South so much as he was a new target for their previously local martial aggression. Instead of warring with each other constantly, Lagaš, Ur, Elam and their counterparts rebel sporadically from Akkad, the conflicts more costly and therefore less constant. As such, when they finally throw off the yoke of imperial control, they return to the old tradition of local conflict, Lagaš conquering neighboring city-states, including its old enemy Elam, and using the spoils to fund the creation of monuments to the gods.
This paragraph doesn't seem to appropriately follow the death of Gudea (2124 BCE), where it is placed, but rather the earlier death of Sargon (2279 BCE). Thus it seems to be sort of a confusing flashback of uncertain relevance to the article. Indeed, it seems like it would be more appropriate for inclusion in some other article. 
I invite its author, or anyone else, to repost it where it should best go, adding appropriate clarifications as to dates under discussion and relevance. Fredwords 22:04, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Orphan paragraph 

message: Ur-Ningirsu is stated in this article as the successor and son of Gudea, as well as a ruler whose reign pre-dates that of Gudea.  My understanding is that Ur-Ningirsu is Gudea's son.  If there was another ruler by the same name, then that needs to be clarified. 128.42.158.152 (talk) 20:01, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I looked at the article, later it does specify the predecessor as Ur-Ningursu I, and the successor / son as Ur-Ningirsu II. Til Eulenspiegel (talk) 21:24, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Would it be possible to give sources for that? As far as I was aware, Gudea succeeded Ur-Bau, since he was his son-in-law (or at the very least married into the family). I think perhaps there has been some confusion by the person writing the entry, which then later got corrected in an attempt to make sense of it. The line of succession is Ur-Bau - Gudea - Ur-Ningirsu. So if there are no sources for the claim of another Ur-Ningirsu, then this needs to be changed in the text!Srenette (talk) 16:42, 21 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ur-Ningirsu 

message: just thought his name sounded like gutii or kurdia 213.106.124.3 (talk) 22:44, 20 February 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Not that we know of... or at least, not that I've ever read. Til Eulenspiegel (talk) 04:08, 21 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  was he a kurd? 

message: Hi,
According to my documents, the statue of Gudea is exhibited at The Metropolitan of New York and not the Paris Louvre.
please see: The Metropolitan Museum of Art Guide. p. 27, ancient near eastern art. 2011. Distributed by Yale University Press, New Haven and London.
I did not edit the photo because it is possible that there are two statues. The author of the article may check, although I doubt.
Abdelouadoud El Omrani  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 37.208.136.31 (talk) 07:12, 13 September 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Gudea Statue is in the Metropolitan museum not Louvre 

message: Could someone reword this?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jahelistbro (talk • contribs) 23:30, 22 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  the "Religion" section seems to have a problem with POV 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Gudea. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081210062657/http://www-etcsl.orient.ox.ac.uk/ to http://www-etcsl.orient.ox.ac.uk/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:32, 25 October 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: In the "Later Influence" section it is claimed Gudea "was one of the first rulers to claim divinity for himself, or have it claimed for him after his death." However, in the "Inscriptions" section it emphasizes that he specifically didn't claim to be a god and gave himself a weaker title than would be expected. Other articles such as Akkadian Empire claim that the earlier Akkadian beliefs generally considered kings to be gods even when alive, making him fairly far from one of the first Mesopotamian rulers to be considered gods even only allowing posthumous claims. Can more clarifications/sources be provided? Deep Gabriel (talk) 15:33, 27 October 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Claiming divinity confusion