GENESIS OF THE SUMERIAN AND ETRUSCAN TURKS AND THEIR LANGUAGE (BASED ON CUNEIFORM AND ETRUSCAN SCRIPT)

By Tariyel Az?rtürk

The book represents an innovation in the field of translations from ancient cuneiform tablets. It has been proven that all translations before us only demonstrate distortions and lack of substance in the texts. Due to a lack of knowledge of the original language, researchers tend to show bias towards Greek mythologies, where there is no concept of time, space of actions, or the dwelling place of beings. All of them are imaginary gods or groups of gods and goddesses residing in an unknown infinity of the Universe. 90 percent of the translated texts are related to their names. The language of the cuneiform script is ancient Turkic. The Truth can only be revealed when reading them in this language. Ancient humans engraved their thoughts and life realities into clay tablets. There is no tablet outside the reality of human life. They contain verses dedicated to the hard work of humans, fields requiring plowing, droughts, water shortages, crops, spring, garden prosperity. There is the grief of a son for the loss of his mother, astronomy, volcanic eruptions, horse disease (sapa), and methods of its treatment. There is the longing of a poetess who found herself in a foreign land and dreams of her homeland, among many others...

• Language: English
• Publisher: iUniverse
• Release date: Jun 5, 2024
• ISBN: 9781663258762

Book preview

GENESIS

OF THE SUMERIAN

AND ETRUSCAN TURKS

AND THEIR

LANGUAGE

(BASED ON CUNEIFORM AND

ETRUSCAN SCRIPT)

TARIYEL AZƏRTÜRK

GENESIS OF THE SUMERIAN AND ETRUSCAN TURKS AND THEIR LANGUAGE

(BASED ON CUNEIFORM AND ETRUSCAN SCRIPT)

Copyright © 2024 Tariyel Azərtürk.

All rights reserved. No part of this book may be used or reproduced by any means, graphic, electronic, or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, taping or by any information storage retrieval system without the written permission of the author except in the case of brief quotations embodied in critical articles and reviews.

iUniverse

1663 Liberty Drive

Bloomington, IN 47403

www.iuniverse.com

844-349-9409

Because of the dynamic nature of the Internet, any web addresses or links contained in this book may have changed since publication and may no longer be valid. The views expressed in this work are solely those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of the publisher, and the publisher hereby disclaims any responsibility for them.

Any people depicted in stock imagery provided by Getty Images are models,

and such images are being used for illustrative purposes only.

Certain stock imagery © Getty Images.

ISBN: 978-1-6632-5877-9 (sc)

ISBN: 978-1-6632-5876-2 (e)

Library of Congress Control Number: 2023923505

iUniverse rev. date:  06/12/2024

CONTENTS

Preface

1 An Ancient, Glorious Written History

2 How Did We Come To The Conclusion That Cuneiform Is A Turkic Invention?

3 Enlil Isme Dagan As A Poet. His Three Poems Or Ghazals

3.1 Enlil İsme Dagan Аnа (Mother), Part Of His Poem

3.2 Enlil Isme Dagan As A Philosopher And Mathematician

4 Enlil As A Mathematician

Multiplication Table of the Enlil

5 Enli̇l İsme As An Astronomer Of Antiquity

6 Hymn To Marduk Or Marduk’s Wrath?

6.1. Bright Light From The Volcanic Eruption At Ete Eli Illuminates The Origins Of The Etruscans And Their LANGUAGE New Findings Prove That We Are Right

6.2 Ancient Amathus Rocks Inscription At The Cyprus Is Compass Of The Etruscans

6.3. Tombston From Lemnos Island Also Cries Out In Turkic

7 The Indigenous Inhabitants Lemnos (Thyrrenians-Turanians), Eteocypruses, Eteocretes, And Etruscs Were Turks

8 Let’s Tolk In Etruscan

8.1. Etruscan Service For Raising Ecstasy

8.2. The Mother - Angel Reads Family Vows To Son Who Feels Remorse About The Marriage

8.3. Ete Elians–Italians` Turks Gave A Great Importance To Their Youth Grows

8.4. Etruscan Golden Book

8.5. Etruscan Men Are Training With Swore

8.6. Etruscan Banking System Laid The Foundation Of The World Banking System

8.7. Etruscan Bank Ad: Take Profi̇table Loan!

8.8. Mother Appeals To Fortun Reader For Her Child Who Got Fear (Horrified)

8.9. The Lady Got Shock Seeing Her Fase In The Bronze Mirror Maybe First Time

8.10. Terracotta Inscribed Alabastron (Perfume Vase)

8.11. Sometimes Child Born As A Mischief-Maker

8.12. The Scene Of Love

8.13 Singing Requires A Big Experience

8.14. Jealous Man And Not Guilty Lady

8.15. Punishment For A Crime

8.16. Historical Etruscan Events Reflected On The Coin

8.17. Etruscans Also Had The Ancient Turkic Names Turan And Altay

8.18. Ete Eli`S Rock İnscri̇pti̇on İn Northern Mugan (Northern Azerbai̇j

9 Horse Care In Cuneiform

9.1. The Treatment Of Skin Sap Or Glanders

9.2. Proper Hoof Care

9.3. Care Of The Mare And Foal The Cuineiform Inscription Of Nebuchadnezzar II?

Section A: Preparing A Mare for A Safe & Successful Foal Delivery

Section B: Caring For A Newborn Foal & Mare After Her Delivery

10 Measuring Of Speed Light In A Clay Pipe (Tube)

11 Ilandag’s (Nakhchivan) Rock’s Inscription

12 Is Urartian Language Sound As Turkish?

13 Emperor Naram Sin And His Poetry

14 Ershahunga Prayer of P. Michalowski or a Lyrical Poem Hammadan Cuckoo of the Ancient Azerbaijani Poetess Bida Hammadani?

15 Gold From Ore? Or The King’s Fictitious Daughters?

16 Deciphering Some Short Cuneiform Phrases Anew

16.1. The Nebuchadnezzar’s Dictionary

16.2. How Akkad And Her King Naram Suen Born From The Udder Of A Camel?

16.3. Again, As Akkad Herself, As Well As Its "King

16.4. One Meteorological Report: The Ancestors Did Not Without Studying Atmospheric Phenomena.

16.5. Information About River Pisan - Bible`S Pishon

16.6. Babylonian Forebears Have Been Acted As A Psychologist. The Cylinder Seal Evidences Of That

16.7. Leave A Bright Trail Behind You

17 Market Economy In The Cuneiform Inscription, Good Exchanges Of The Babylon Turks: How Had Lived Our Forefathers

18 Is Emperor Shulgi Or Monument Of Generosity?

19 Is Shikshabbum Again Or Elegy To Ete Eli’s Turk Subjected Genocide By Arab? Creation (Oeuvre) Of Shamsi Adad Abi

20 Are Indeed The Huge Text Talks About Nonsense, Like: Das Ritual Bms 12 Mit Dem Gebet Marduk 5", Or Talking About A Celebration Of Holy Shubat? New Discovered Poet Of Antiquity Bika Kahtun

20.1. Poem Of Bika Khatun*

21 Mystery Of Tarkitau (Kumykia) Inscriptions - What Does It Mean In Reality?

21.1. Restoration Of Justice

22 A Cuneiform Rock Inscription In Shikafi Gulgul. What Does It Say About?

23 Mummified Man From Khudapherin (Mugan, Southern Azerbaijan). Who Is He?

24 New Glance To One Evidence Described By The Holy Bible

25 The Antique Spring Holiday Easter Much Later Became The New Year Occasion As A Nowruz

26 Where, When, And How Was Mugham Born?

27 One Logical Nature Of The Turk

28 The Turks In Prehistoric Period In The Mediterranean Region

28.1. Traces Of Ete Eli And Caria Turks In The East And West World

Few Words About The Author

My deep gratitude to Mr. Fuad Muradov Chairman of the State Committee on Work with Diaspora of the Republic of Azerbaijan for his own initiative to prepare this book in English and to publish it in the USA and his financial aid for this mission.

I`m also express my big gratitude to my beloved nephew Mr. Alizadeh Azer Ali oglu for his constant attention on my labor in the field of cuneiform inscription and his financial help and support for publication of the English version of this book.

My gratitude to my other beloved nephew, artist and film director Aliyev Emin Fakhraddin oglu (Emin Elreng), for his work in the artistic binding of both the Russian and the English versions of my books on the Genesis of the Turk and the Turkic languages...

Reviewers:

SEVİL HAJİ QIZI MEHDİYEVA

Doctor of Philosophy, Professor

Institute of Linguistics named after Nasimi

Azerbaijan National Academy of Sciences

Baku, Azerbaijan

İSMAYIL BABASH OGLU KAZIMOV

Turkologist, Doctor of Philosophy, Professor

Institute of Linguistics named after Nasimi

Azerbaijan National Academy of Sciences

Baku, Azerbaijan

ABBASQULU ISMAYIL OGLU NAJAFZADE

Doctor of Art Sciences, Professor of the Department

of History and Theory of Music at National Conservatory

of Azerbaijan, Baku, Azerbaijan

In his book Memoirs... (Denkwürdigkeiten von Asien... 1811), Heinrich Friedrich von Diez, a well-known German researcher of the epic Kitabi Dede Korkut (The Book of my Grandfather Korkut from the 7th century), wrote figuratively:

The Turks ate up their history, did not write it. Therefore, in the history written by their enemies, they are presented as invaders, aggressors, savages, and all their successes achieved by them in the cultural, scientific, political and military fields were appropriated by strangers and forgotten.

The European author is right to the full extent. The Turkic indifference to its history is widely reflected in this book. The Turks did not write their own history. Information about it indirectly and partially can be obtained from such authors as ibn Khordadbeh, ibn Al Asir, Tabari, ibn Jabir Belazuri, Mugaddasi, Kalankatuyski, Khorenatsi, Gandzasari, Arakel Tabrizli, Gasan Jalayan. Our poets for 800 years of the existence of modern poetry (unlike cuneiform) wrote only about love, about the beloved, about the tragedy of the Arab Leyla and Majnun, about flowers and nightingales, but not a word about their long and glorious history, about the people, about the homeland his. This bitter reality lies like a burden on the chest of the author of this book, like a tragedy of a large and ancient people.

However, our research shows that the own poets and writers of the cuneiform era covered their history extensively. Rather, because of the great and forced migration from Babylonia and Turan (Troas –Pelasagia and Ete Eli) of future generations of their creators, it remained unread. Cuneiform tablets were appropriated and are being appropriated by foreign researchers and are presented as a material value of other peoples.

M. E. Rasulzade wrote: Alien authors presented the heroism of the Turki as invasion, and their own aggressive actions as heroism.

Perhaps, L. Gumilyov is right, who claims that: The Turks create history, but the Turks do not write history.

The great W. Shakespeare probably did not write by chance: The Turks were not unjust; the Turks became victims of injustice.

•One day in 1975 (I was 33 years old) in the laboratory of the Institute of Physiology of the Azerbaijan Academy of Sciences in Baku, where I worked as a senior researcher, a divine foresight suddenly dawned on me: Someday, you will go to America and there you will discover the secrets of a very important ancient language . A proverb from my culture says, Niyyetin hara, menzilin ora, which means, Where you aim, you will fly there. Apparently, this revelation was the result of my inextinguishable dream: to find the roots of my language and the Exodus of the Turk. I was constantly interested in the Sumerian language. Maybe this book, created almost forty years later at the cost of incredibly thorny searches and reflecting the answers to the questions posed, is really a gift from God not only to me, but to all Turkism?

•I am pleased to have discovered the genesis of the Turk and its harmonious language through the study of pictograms, cuneiform writing, and even the Bible. I dedicate this Bible to the great Turk, who created the first written language in history, calling it Civi, which gave impetus to the creation of the very first civilization and the very term civilization. So,

GENESIS, or THE GOLDEN BOOK OF THE TURK, compiled exclusively on the basis of cuneiform texts.

The Golden Book of the Turk is my tribute to my homeland.

I believe that one day it will resonate with many and become a powerful voice.

The ancient Slavs worshipped Stribog by offering grains, bread, and ribbons. Stribog was one of the most mysterious multiple deities of the Slavic Pantheon.Worship of Stribog (G.А. Schleising’s drawing from the book La Religion Ancienne et Moderne des Moscovites, 1698).

This drawing by Schleising well demonstrates the trend of modern cuneiform decipherers, who see only theonyms in all ancient texts - that is, the proper names of gods, deities their reigns, sons and slaves.

TARİHİ YARADAN BİZ OLDUK, AMA ONU BAŞKALARI YAZDI

WE CREATED HISTORY, BUT OTHERS WROTE IT

Mustafa Kamal Pasha Ataturk

TARİXİ YARADAN DA BİZ OLDUQ, ONU GİL LÖVHƏLƏRƏ, PELASQ MEZAR DAŞLARINA, ETRUSK ABİDƏLƏRİNƏ, ORXON- YENİSEY DAŞ SALNAMƏLƏRİNƏ QAZIYAN DA BİZ, ULU ÖNDƏR, MÜDRİK MUSTAFA KAMAL PAŞA ATATÜRK ABİ

AND HISTORY WE CREATE. AND IN CLAY PLATES, PELASGIAN TOMBSTONES, ETRUSSIAN MONUMENTS, AND ORKHON-YENISEI STONE STONES WE ENGRAVED. THE GREAT LEADER. WISE MUSTAFA KEMAL PASHA ATATURK

Tariyel Azerturk

PREFACE

INSTEAD OF A REVIEW

Dedi: Yer fırlanır..., inanmadılar,

Onlar ona güldü, o da onlara.

Dedi: Həqiqətə şübhənizmi var?

Dedilər: Haqq deyən çəkilir dara.

He kept saying: The earth revolves; they didn’t believe him.

He laughed at them and they laughed at him with indignation.

He asked them: Do you doubt the Truth?

They said: One who speaks the Truth is punished by hanging.

From the poem Galilei by Bakhtiyar Vahabzade.

National Poet of Azerbaijan.

Doctor of Philosophy, Professor, Corresponding Member of the Academy of the Sciences of Azerbaijan."[1]

Almost two centuries ago, researchers and classical scholars deciphered many cuneiform inscriptions, expanding the opportunities for anyone interested in using their work and ideas to uncover the truth. They also proposed that the cuneiform language was very similar to Turkic.

This would be the shortest way to quickly achieve the goal if future generations of cuneiform specialists would follow the path of their learned ancestors. Taking that assumption would present the shortest path to success, had future researchers followed this logic. Unfortunately, some researchers lost focus and began searching for traces of the Sumerians and Akkadians in the texts, despite our belief that they did not exist. Thus, any translation made from such ancient writings must now be considered inaccurate.

Some researchers disagreed with the data obtained from studying cuneiform texts and searched for answers to the question of whether it was possible for the ancestors of humanity, who created the first writing system and civilization, to have left behind a legacy that describes gods, goddesses, kings, myths, legends, demons, devils, witches, and werewolves, but nothing about themselves.

Who are the Sumerians? Did a people with that name really exist?

Who created the first cuneiform writing in the history of mankind in Babylonia?

What language do ancient texts written on clay tablets sound like?

And the history of the following questions, deeper in time, but perhaps somewhat more local in nature:

•Who were the Sumerians? Did they exist?

•Who in Babylonia created the first cuneiform writing?

•In what language were the texts engraved on ancient tablets written?

•Where was Turkish civilization born and where did the Turkish exodus begin?

•What is the Turkic relationship to ancient history?

•Who were the Etruscans, Pelasgians, and Turanians?

•Who was the initial creator of Ahura – the God of Fire?

•Who created Mugham?

•Who is the real creator of the Spring festival known as Novruz?

Today, although some answers to these questions can be found in the book Genesis of the Turks and the Turkish Language, others are still being thoroughly investigated.

For the first time in the history of cuneiform text decryption, we have undergone a revolution. Rather than researching Turkish-Turanian languages based on word or phonetic similarities, and relying on inaccurately translated cuneiform texts, we have uncovered the truth by exploring the translated texts in a new way. In our opinion, the works of many scientists and researchers in this field should now be revised with new transcriptions, modifications, phonetic and semantic modeling, and translations, as we consider their results to be incorrect.

Our attempts to uncover the real content of ancient texts, separating fact from fiction, did not stem from our own curiosity or self-interest, but rather from the opinions of numerous scholars of non-Turkic origin who maintained that cuneiform writing belongs to the Turkic Turanian language family. It is worth citing some of the existing literature sources.

Thus, Booth A. J. [2] wrote about it in 1902:

Farther investigation showed that the cuneiform inscriptions belonged to the Turanian family [of languages]; and it has received the false names of Akkadian and Sumerian. Some years later the cities of Southern Babylonian were more thoroughly explored, especially Tello, by the M. De Sarzec, and the number of inscriptions in this language largely increased. They are found written in a linear or archaic character that evidently preceded the use of cuneiform. The conclusion was soon reached that this Turanian language of Southern Babylonia, and that the cuneiform writing developed from its ancient script. But still more surprising was the discovery that not merely the writing but the religion and literature of later times descended from this ancient source.

Sayce A.H. [3] "The French Government sent out an exploring and excavating expedition to Babylonia under a young and brilliant scholar, Jules Oppert. The results of the mission, which lasted from 1851 to 1854, were embodied in two learned volumes, the first of which appeared in 1863. 2 In these Oppert showed, what Hincks and Rawlinson had already pointed out, that the peculiarities of the Assyrian syllabary were due not only to its pictorial origin but also to the fact that it had been invented by a non-Semitic people. This primitive population of Babylonia, called Akkadian by Hincks, Sumerian by Oppert, had spoken an agglutinative language similar to that of the Turks or Finns, and had been the founders of Babylonian civilization. For these views Oppert found support in the tablets of the library of Nineveh, a large part of which consists of translations from the older language into Semitic Assyrian, as well as of comparative grammars, vocabularies and reading-books in the two languages (cited by S.N. Kramer [4].

Once more the Semitic scholars protested. There was no end to the extravagant fantasies of the Assyriologists! The learned world was comfortably convinced that none but a Semitic or Aryan people could have been the originators of civilization, and to assert that the Semites had borrowed their culture from a race which seemed to have affinities with Mongols or Tatars was an outrage upon established prejudices".

Von Kutschera Hugo Freiherr. [5] wrote: "According to the brilliant results of the latest historical research and especially the decipherment of the cuneiform inscriptions, there is no longer any doubt that these Turanians were a Finnish-Tatarian people or perhaps even that original people from which the numerous different tribes of Finns, Turks and Tatars emerged.

The Turanians were an ancient people who spread across the world even before the early migrations of the Semites and Aryans, covering vast stretches of land in both Europe and Asia. Traces of their settlements are found throughout the whole country, from the headwaters of the Indus and far into India.

Even beyond the Indus, there are traces of Turanian settlements in India. When the Semites and Aryans completed their migrations and settled in their respective? regions, a wedge of Turanian population remained between the two, extending almost to the Persian Gulf. (Page 31).

Media was not exclusively inhabited by Aryans, as was often believed. On the contrary, the majority of the population consisted of Turanians. Even today, the main stratum of the population belongs to the Tataro-Finnish race, although the Aryans eventually became the dominant nation. The Median language, whose monuments are still numerous and have been thoroughly studied by Westergard, Saulcy, and Noris, is a decidedly Turkic language.

On the contrary, that of the Turanian tribes of Chaldeans, explored and unequivocally established by the works of Oppert, shows much closer relations with the Ural-Finnish group. Many words of this strange language and most of their grammatical forms show a striking resemblance to Finnish. The earliest cuneiform inscriptions of the Chaldean rulers are written in this language, and prove that it survived up to the times of Nabuchodonosor. Yes, the cuneiform inscription itself is a document from the Turanian people. The existence of an ancient Turanian civilization and the presence of peoples of this race in Chaldea is one of the most recent and unexpected discovery, (page 32).

Osman Nedim Tuna [6] suggests that the historical connection between the Sumerians and the Turks is due to the fact that the Turks settled in the eastern region of Anatolia at least 3500-4000 years ago. The first mother tongue goes back 10,000 years, he says.

Beghard Gerey, who compared Sumerian culture with Turkmen culture through archaeological finds, architecture, legends, place names and language, compared 295 Turkish-Sumerian words in terms of meaning and phonetics. Thus, he showed his 5000-year-old Sumerian and Turkmen devotion in a book. (Referred from Oljas Suleymenov [7, 8]).

If original texts tell us truths about ancient episodes or events, we consider much previous research into them to have lacked proper fundamentals and rigorousness. This previous research leaves out many descriptions of the period’s life and problems, and concentrates instead on things like non-determinism, vagueness, the absence of objects, characters, time, space, objectivity, and logic of events. In such texts, historical events are hardly ever identified by their true places of occurrence.

In such works, ancient man is often depicted as degraded and lost in his faith in gods and myths. Most previous studies have viewed these texts as full of abstract concepts, such as metaphysics, spirituality, myth, mysticism, cosmogony, eschatology (the study of the apocalypse), and fatalism. They lack an understanding of the historical context and the people who created a system of values for their time: intelligent, creative, and civilized members of society who developed the world’s first written language.

Quod est inferius est sicut id quod est superius. Et quod est superius est sicut id quod est inferius, ad perpetranda (praeparanda, penetranda) miracula rei unius.

"True, certain, and real: what is at the bottom is similar to what is at the top, and what is at the top is similar to what is at the bottom, and so are the wonders of a single thing made.

-Hermes Trismegistus (Mercury Maximus), "Emerald Tablet

We believe that our ancient spiritual ancestors contemplated the same questions that we do, but within the reality of their era. As the famous Soviet biochemist and biophysicist S. E. Shnol [9, 10] wrote, Regardless of the general theory of relativity, space, mass and time are intricately linked. We are the same people at different times and the same events happen to all of us.

Or, as (Maya) Popol Vuh, [11] a representative of the Quiche-Maya Native American tribe, wrote:

Our ancestors were gifted with wisdom; they saw near and far and continued to see and know everything that happened in the world. They could easily learn about things that were hidden by distance. Their wisdom was great; their vision extended to the forests, rocks, seas, mountains and valleys....

A famous Turkish Epic Kitabi Dede Korkut, which describes events between the 6th and 8th centuries B.C., begins with the following words:

Closer to the time of the highest prophet Muhammad, one from the tribe Bayat was born. He was given the name Dede Korkut, Father Korkut. He was the wisest of the Oghuz people; whatever he predicted came true. He spokes spontaneously about the most incredible and intimate news from the future. God himself inspired his heart…. [12].

Or, as the creator and founder of Buddhism, Gautama Buddha, stated, Woe, woe to people who don’t know anything, don’t see anything; they will not see a thing. [13]

Even, as expressed recently in an online forum devoted to the Philosophy of Lies: May a lie wherever and whenever placed on the throne be overthrown without mercy, since under the burden of a lie no one can flourish! This is correct! Lies are bound to die, and the truth will triumph.

To my mind, most previous research on this subject devalued the thoughts and plain, daily lives of Turks, as well as all other human ancestors.

Knock, let it open! says ancient philosophical wisdom. Knock on the right door. Then history will reveal its deepest secrets to you. However, unfortunately, researchers are knocking on the wrong door. On the door of the cuneiform texts is their exact address: TURUKKU - TURK!!! And curious nihilists - linguists knock either on nameless doors, or on doors that are not even written: Sumer, Akkad, Urartu whose names are not mentioned in any of the ancient authors. If they existed, if they were so intelligent, that for the first time in the history of mankind they created cuneiform writing system, then why are they not mentioned anywhere and in any historical sources?

As a result of misunderstandings in the definition of the doors where events took place, the authors of the decoders in their translations go beyond the limits of the human mind. Distorting reality, they torture mankind, fill the pages of well-known scientific journals with judgments, forgive me for being harsh, whether they are worthy reptiles. For example, God Enlil raped the little girl Ninlil... - there are hundreds of such examples. Their works are overflowing with various delusional exclamations, alien to humanity, full of insincerity in relation to the philosophic thoughts of a simple farmer or a wise scientist of antiquity. Simple life statements of the same god Enlil, through the lips of today’s unfortunate scientists, have been turned into empty chatter. For example, the statement:

A Əbcu əkir ki, ağacı, şum uranda (verəndə) dərə məhsul. [14]

We believe this statement is basic information about planting and harvesting: A respected wise man plants a sapling in order to pick the fruits at the time of the plowing in the field.

Römer, in his 9th chapter, translated it to mean: He has Abzu, your beloved Ekur, built for you a pedestal, raised by fitters.

This translation is distorted and inaccurate. Such mistranslations mar the works of many previous researchers in this field. [14]

The translation of the entire text is full of distortions, open lies, and complete pointlessness of the most ancient time. The antique text, rich in life’s gift, is turned by Romer into idle talk, idle thoughts, his work consists of a chaotically taken set of words that exhausts the reader’s soul. Because he, like all other decipherers, does not know the original language of the scripts, and for the sake of his scientific career, he tries to somehow get his carpet out dry from the water.

And finally, the Truth of antiquity, historical realities have been established, and the real creator of the cradle of the first civilization of the human being has been found. Tariyel Azerturk, an American researcher, volunteer, writer and poet, Turkologist of Azerbaijani origin, author of more than 25 books, and 50 papers in this field for the first time made a revolutionary approach to cuneiform texts. Thankfully, he developed a method of translation that allows us to understand the truth of the ancient world described within these texts, and its historical reality and geography. His revolutionary approach to cuneiform inscription involves semantic and phonetic modeling of the lines while reading them.

Austrian-British philosopher Karl R. Popper [15] has agreed with our assessment, once lauding Dr. Azerturk for having made Demarcation of ancient science from metaphysics [mythology – T.A.]. By whittling down nearly two centuries of outdated research concentrating on inaccurate myths and legends supposedly derived from cuneiform inscriptions, Dr. Azerturk has revealed the scientific facts hidden within them.

In written history we can see the products of human intelligence. By analyzing textual and geographical evidence of various eras and cultures from written sources, Azerturk proved the continuity between modern society and ancient times and demonstrated many similarities between human events in time. Thus, reading his book, you can, in fact, go with him to the ancient world and learn about the lives of people of that period from primary sources that were engraved with their own hands. Readers will probably be surprised by the high level of knowledge and broad outlook of these ancient people.

The information presented in this book allows readers to trace the footsteps of Adam and his descendants. By studying the text, one can begin to comprehend the significance of the names of the Bible patriarchs, who are believed to be the creators of humankind in Babylonia. Furthermore, the book reveals that Genesis, the first book of the Bible, has deeper cuneiform roots than those previously covered in research. Azerturk’s approach has also enabled him to chart the exact route of Noah’s Ark, providing evidence that the mountain Gemigaya (Ark (Ship) Mountain), as well as Nakhchivan in Azerbaijan, served as Noah’s shelters and may contain his mausoleum, rather than Agry (Mt. Ararat) as previously thought. Azerturk’s new method of semantic and phonetic modeling, along with his many included text decryptions, will captivate even the most ardent opponents among historians and linguists.

Along with answering the questions posed above, Azerturk’s exploration of the following global issues also make this book relevant and interesting for a variety of readers:

1.These new translations, based on the transliterations of modern researchers, show that most previous translations show only distortions and flatten the texts.

2.In history, there were no people called Sumer, Akkad. These terms were artificially introduced into science by French-German Assyriologist Julius Oppert (1825-1905), and no real historical written source mentions them as the name of the peoples who created the civilization (cited by S.N. Kramer [4].

3.Numerous monuments of cuneiform writing sound in Turkic and only in this language reveal their innermost secrets. The creators of this writing were the ancient Turks, the common ancestors of the modern Turks of Turkey (80 million) and Azerbaijanis (North and South-50 million). They spoke and wrote in a single Turkic dialect, which had not yet passed the stage of differentiation.

4.These ancient texts share two key characteristics of Turkish languages: agglutination and vowel harmony. Their ancient dialects were Babylonian or Tigre-Euphrates, Hamadan-Mugan, Iribune-Nakhcivan, and Turanian (Pelasagian and Etruscan), determined by where the cuneiform inscriptions were found.

a)The birthplace of primary habitat and the genesis of the Etruscans and the name of Italy, which for many centuries occupy the minds of a competent and incompetent research army, are determined.

b)The true masters of Troy were the Pelasgs and Tevkirs (Noble Turks). They waged a fierce war against foreign Greek tribes (Kiddions), such as the Achaeans, Ionians, Dorians, and Aeolians, before the Hellenistic period. Those foreigners managed to capture Troy and Pelasagia (Hellenistic Greece and Western Anatoly) from the Turks.

5.The Turk was born in Babel (Babylonia) and the Exodus of the Turk begins from Babylonia - the low-lands of Mesopotamia. The exact time of the Great Migration of the Turk from West to East (Altai, Baikal and Siberia) has not yet been established from cuneiform.

6.The creator of ancient written history and culture, no matter how implausible it may sound to many, is the Turk. Sumer and Akkad are fictitious names.

7.The distribution area of the Turk in ancient times covered Babylonia and Turan (Tirrenia - according to Herodotus), including Ete Eli (modern Hatai (Iskenderun), Osmania, Gaziantep, Kilis Adana in Turkey and Latakia, Idlib, Afrin in Northern Syria), Pelasagia II (modern Chanakkale in Turkey), the island of Lemnos; Pelasagia I (Hellenistic Greece, including Athena), as well as the islands of Cyprus (Eteocypruses), Crete (Eteocreteans) and Etruria (Etruscans - Florencia modern Italy).

8.The name Italy comes from that of the country Ete Eli. Turkish speaking residents emigrated from Ete Eli to the Italian peninsula and named their new dwelling after their home country. Their ethnic group became the Etruscans.

9.Tyrrhenian (Turanian, from the word Turan) and the Adriatic Sea are named after the Turkish tribes Etre and Atic, who had moved from Ete Eli and Pelasagia.

10.Independently of the cuneiform writings created by the Turks of Babylonia, Pelasgians who lived in Pelasagia I and II created an alphabet that gave impetus to the Etruscan, Greek, and Latin alphabets, and the Turkish rune and marginally Cyrillic alphabets (Ch. 34).

11.Ancient Turks believed in worshipping fire and the Fire God Ahura. In addition, the gods and goddesses Shemesh (Sun), Rebb or Bary, Marduk (Lightning, Thunder and Volcanic Eruptions), and Eаster (Ister in Turkish – comes from the verb istemek – to wish, to want, to hope, to love), Goddess of Love, Spring and Fertility) were sacred to them.

12.Ahura, the God of Fire; the Spring Festival of Ister; Mugham, musical instruments Tar, Zil (Zurna), Oud, and Saz; and the poetic genres of Ghazal and literature theory Aruz were all created by the ancient Turk (Ch. 9, 19, 24, 27, 30, 31).

Literature

1. Bəxtiyar Vahabzade Axı Dünya fırlanır, Bakı Yazıçı, 1987, 208 s.

2. Booth A J. The Discovery and Decipherment of the Trilingual Cuneiform Inscriptions. London: Longmans, Green, and CO. (p. XİV). 1902.

3. Sayce A.H. The Archeology of the Cuneiform Inscriptions: (p.24.): New York, E.S. Gorham 1908, 187 p.

4. Kramer S.N. The Sumerian - Their History, Culture, and Characters, The University of Chicago Press, Chicago & London 1963, 355 p.

5. von Kutschera Hugo Freiherrn (1909). Die Chasaren. Historische Studie. – Wien: Adolf HolzHausen. (TURAN: p. 31, 32, 33).

6. Osman Nedim Tuna Sümer ve Türk dillerinin Tarihi İlgisi ile Türk Dilinin Yaşı Meselesi, Türk Dil Kurumu Yayınları, Ankara, 1997.

7. Oljas Süleymenov Yazının Dili, Prehistoriya`ya Bakiş. İlkel İnsanlığının Yazı ve Dilinin Menşeine Dair, çeviren Arif Acaloğlu, Türk Dünyası Araştırmaları Vakfı, İstanbul, 2001, s. 150.

8. Oljas Süleymenov Az - Ya, Rus dilindən Azərbaycan türkcəsinə tərcümə edəni Natiq Səfərov, Bakı, Şərq-Qərb, 2015, s. 320.

9. Шноль С.Э. Физико-химиические факторы биологической эволюции, М., Наука, 263 с.

10. Шноль С.Э. Космофизческие факторы в случайных процессах, Stockholm, Swenska fysilarkivat, 2009, 38.

11. Попол-Вух (in Quiché-Maya language, Popol Вuh) Книга совета или Книга народа – Книга-эпос месоамериканской культуры, (Popol Vuh Sacred Book of the Quiché Maya People, Translation and Commentary by Allen J. Christenson, University of Oklahoma Press, Norman, 2003, 285).

12. Kitabi Dədə Qorqud, Tərtib, transkriptisiya, müqəddimə Prof. F. Zejnalov və Dos. S. Əlizadənindir, Bakı, Yazıçı, 1988, 265 s.

13. Gaumata Buddha Quotes, Taken from www.azquotesGaumatha Buddha

14. Тариел Азертюрк Генезис тюрка и тюркского языка (на основе клинописи), Бишкек, Улуу Тоолор, 2017; Санкт-Петербург СуперИздательство и Нью Йорк Liberty, 2018 и Баку AFPoligrAF, 2019, Глава 9, на русском языке.

15. Popper Karl The Logic of Scientific Discovery, Routledge Classic ®, London New York 1959, 538 p.

CHAPTER 1

AN ANCIENT, GLORIOUS WRITTEN HISTORY

[Author’s Note: The late Professor Elmaddin Alibeyzadeh was Doctor of Philosophy, Professor, and Head of the Department of Turkology of the Research Institute of Literature (named after Nizami Ganjavi) at the National Academy of Sciences of Azerbaijan, Baku.

The following is a review of the Professor Alibeyzadeh`s on paper of Tariyel Veli Nuvadili (Tariyel Azerturk) The Relationship Between Historical Sumeria and Azerbaijan, published in English in the journal The Turkic World - Türk Dünyası (1995, No 1, pp. 46-66).

It has been translated from Azerbaijani by T.Azerturk

Professor of History Zia Buniyatov [1], explains,

Many older scientists who don’t know the Sumerian language but refer it to Ural-Altai or Turanian Language family groups, call it Turkish. Some current scholars from Turkey with some obscure purpose specifically called the Sumerian language Turkish. And at present, this is not being claimed by scientists, but by some Turkish doctors, engineers and journalists, writers and others who are simply playing on the strings of science. However, some serious researchers do speak about distant similarities between them and then by only typology, and not by the genetic similarities of these languages. At the same time these scholars have noted some similarities between Sumerian and Tibeto-Burman, on the one hand, with Caucasian, on the other, and even with the Indo-European languages. Indeed, several words that sound the same in both Sumerian and Ural-Altai languages have been discovered.

Zia Buniyatov, in his one-sided conclusions of course relies on his spiritual father, I.M. Diakonoff. However, one of leading Sumerologists of his time I.M. Diakonoff, in turn, believes that,

…a comparison analysis of word order shows that Sumerian words are either read or decrypted incorrectly, while other words are based on similarities that do not create a systemic sound. In addition, researchers have compared the facts regarding Ural-Altai languages without trying to define a preform. Such an attempt in such serious cases is very important.

However, I.M. Diakonoff comes to the wrong conclusion further in his explanation when he states:

...nowadays one must assume that the Sumerian language is an isolated language, as no links between of it and other languages of the world have been defined. I must emphasize that many outstanding Sumerologists of modern times do not agree with the idea of Sumerian-Turkish kinship [2].

Zia Buniyatov takes the Diakonoff’s last approach as the standard, but it is not Diakonoff alone who determines the tenets of Sumerology. Except him there are several classical researchers of ancient languages, including Sumerologists, who believe that Sumerian and Turkish languages share similarities.

After all, some of those some old scientists (Z.Buniyatov) themselves asserted the idea of the similarity of the Sumerian and Turkic languages. They, that is, those serious researchers, did not categorically deny this fact. On the contrary, as Buniyatov himself admits, they could speak of some distant similarities. Our, dear Buniyatov, it is a duty to investigate at least these distant similarities, and not to ignore all those categorically and not to prohibit the topic for our others youngest researches.

Sumerology has been a course of research and study since at least the last century. The main issues amongst modern Sumerologists are still the questions who were the Sumerians, and who among modern people are their direct descendants? A variety of views have been expressed on these issues and continue to emerge. Here we will also enter the discussion.

We believe that the Sumerians were the ancestors of modern Turkish people. Though we are not specialists in the field of cuneiform decryption, we believe that the cuneiforms are a reliable primary source for this conclusion. The analysis and synthesis of available literary data on them is the basis of our confidence.

Let us turn to the ideas of several famous scientists in this field. For instance, the English archaeologists Seton Lloyd and V. Gordon Childe [3, 4] have written the following:

About 12,000 years ago, the Turanians, settling on the fertile land of the Tigris and Euphrates delta, saddled the world civilization against the backdrop of the amazing views of numerous wild peoples. The torch of one of the world’s greatest cultures has lit up. The need for this light arose from within.

Soon after, such lights began to burn across many corners of the fertile land of Ancient East, including Egypt, Babylon, Assyria, Phoenicia, etc.

The origins of the culture of ancient Jews and Greeks can be traced back to the histories of the Sumerians, as noted by Woolley C. Leonard (Вулли Леонард) [5].

In addition, Russian researcher Л.Редер[6] wrote:

The Sumerian language is unique and belongs to the agglutinative language family, with its structure being mostly comparable to Turkish. Furthermore, the Turkish scholar Javat Ahmet [7] emphasizes:

The fact that Sumerian is similar to Turanian is generally accepted. Woolly, who published the newest and most dignified book on the Sumerians, says that he accepts the idea that the Sumerians spoke a language similar to Old Turkish. There is much evidence that the Sumerians were Turks. Two main pieces of this evidence include: 1) language, and 2) geological and archaeological facts.

Similarly, the French geographer Jean Jacques Elise Reclus (Реклю, Жан Жак Элизе) cited from book in Russian) wrote:

"According to ancient inscriptions, the people who developed Babylonian civilization did not speak Indo-European languages, and were not from those people who identified themselves as European-Aryans. Even the Assyriologists who were completely under the dominating influence of the Aryans were greatly surprised by their own discoveries of this kind. They found that there were no signs or traces of Semitic or Iranian language groups in the cuneiform writings. On the contrary, there was affinity between Turanian and Ural-Altaic language groups.

The language that was expressed with these early signs refers to agglutinative types of languages, and, by its nature as well as by its peculiar internal flexion, it is a completely different language. It has nothing to do with the languages spoken by other peoples of Babylonia … Despite the fact that science denies several hasty conclusions of Rawlinson and Hinks, we must admit that their opinions were basically just". [7].

Additionally, as the Polish researcher M.Belitskiy (Мариан Белицкий) has explained [8]:

These people, with their roots, language and culture, are alien to the peoples of the Semitic family who lived in the north of Babylonia. This is undeniable and should not be forgotten when it comes to the culture of Sumerians. Even though science has disproved the idea expressed by Hinks and Rawlinson that Sumerians are Scythians, we must admit that the thought of them was correct. S. N. Kramer [9].

There are quite a lot of scientific results that guide us in the same direction and shed light on the mysteries of these ancient times. Very recently, however, bold, confident, and promising steps towards the truth of these matters have been taken in a glorious but very difficult way. A whole new era has begun in Sumerology where truthful decryption, modeling, reading and analysis is taking place for the first time.¹

This era of confident first steps give us the opportunity to see who created humanity’s first writing system, and who first bore and proliferated high civilization and culture. This is the discovery of historical truth about issues which, for almost two hundred years, have been bones of scholarly contention.

With these words I direct the reader to the work of my countryman Tariyel Veli Nuvadili [now Tariyel Azerturk¹ - T.A.] [10], who lives and works in the United States of America and conducts intensive research in the field of Sumerology. For many years he has been engaged in labor-intensive, important, scientific research, discovering the truth in ancient written texts.

T. Nuvadili has published an extensive article in his own magazine The Turkish World - Türk Dünyası, which himself is the founder and chief-in-editor deeply explores the Sumerian-Turkish relationship, and introduces new historical analysis about five topics: 1) general assumptions in Sumerology; 2) names of gods and goddesses; 3) names of localities in Aratta and Sumeria; 4) Sumerian-Turkish modern dictionary entries; and finally, 5) re-analysis of already translated Sumerian texts using the Turkish language.

Tariyel’s approach is innovative, a new key to the secrets of the cuneiform inscriptions. He offers a new approach to Sumerian texts that elucidate the actual truths from texts that had previously been mis-translated. His focus is on reconstructing and modeling the lines in these texts rather than trying to build from the syllables which compose them. His work is thus about shedding light on the secrets of the texts.

The results of Nuvadili’s research on the Sumerian-Azerbaijani author and poet Enlil Isme Dagan (his past remove language sounds like Azerbaijani dialect of the Turkish), who probably lived four thousand years BC, about 6000 years ago, for instance, are of great scientific interest in this context. Dagan’s texts were first decrypted by the German scientist W.H. Ph. Römer [11], who published his findings in the Italian journal Orientalia, and determined that the ancient author had been Enlil who considers God. T.V. Nuvadili took on a new modeling of the text and delivered an entirely new verdict on the ancient script, setting aside Römer’s characterization.

Nuvadili has proposed a new idea that is fundamentally different from Römer’s. After having translated these cuneiform texts using the Azerbaijani- and Turkey Turkish language, Nuvadili has concluded that the author of the ancient text, Enlil Isme Dagan, was a poet, and that all three of Dagan’s poems were written in the form of ghazals. Furthermore, Nuvadili has concluded that these ghazals were written according to the needs of the ancient author, who used them in the performance of mughams under the accompaniment of ancient instruments such as the tar and oud (ancestor of the lute).

According to Nuvadili, in one of the ghazals, Enlil Isme Dagan even compares his own cheerful mood to the beautiful performance of an inlaid pearl oud:

Sen su, ud ara kash e, gel lez uni, gina shuxam,

Du ga, du ga, du ga e, [men] azuni nükur Udam!

Seek peace between fire and water, then notice how happy I am,

Come, come, come ones, and look at it at least; I am look like as an oud decorated with pearls.

T.V. Nuvadili’s translations are quite appealing and convincing. He has concluded that these cuneiforms are poems, not, as Römer claims, hymns dedicated to the first Sumerian king. Nuvadili’s research suggests that the poetry of Enlil Isme Dagan was dedicated to the working man, his quotidian lifestyle, and his efforts to get food from nature and the land. All three poems were written by one poet and they are priceless for their ability to show us verses of antiquity in our native language and our native poetic form, the ghazal.

Unfortunately, it must be emphasized that no Turkish-speaking researcher with knowledge of the Turkish language was among the earliest researchers of cuneiform script.. As a result, according to Nuvadili, the cuneiform texts were deciphered by foreigners who lacked access to their ancient morpheme values. Nuvadili claims that during non-Turkish-speaking translations of these ancient inscriptions, the lexemes were grossly divided into their own roots, their endings were torn out, and false semantic meanings were given to them. Suffixes of different roots were often joined, resulting in nonsense arising from these improper connections. During such a process they acquired new qualities and meanings which were flatly wrong.

One, at first glance minor but actually very important, detail taken from the Nuvadili’s translation suggests an interchangeability of s and ş, c and ç, which occurs even today in spoken Azerbaijani. Such a process is seen, for instance, in the following words translated from the cuneiform texts: İşme instead of İsme (author’s name), and agaş, instead of agac (wood). This means that the history of this genetic-phonetic conversion of sounds (seen even today in the native language), goes far back in time.

T.V. Nuvadili has successfully dealt with these difficulties. He first collected the words of the text from syllabic writing, which in itself represented a great challenge and required him to work very diligently and patiently. The words required not only identification, but also proof they were engraved on the cuneiform tablets in the form in which they were read. It was then necessary to identify their presence in ancient and modern dictionaries of the Turkish foundation because many of them are archaic. After all this it was necessary to ascertain their significance in this text and to present their wide interpretation.

All this has been done successfully by the author. In addition, T.V. Nuvadili has translated them into English to convey them to every Sumerologist who is interested, because the issue is very controversial. Such an approach to understanding the structure and meaning of individual words at both the line level and throughout the text as a whole is a great success, a revelation.

At the same time, attention should be paid to the sounds of individual texts in our language, to the individual lexemes that comprise them, their conjugations and grammatical rules, their designs and content, the transfer of thoughts within them, the relationships between their words, their lines, and, above all, the general context arising from these rules and the level of implementation. My interpretation and my grammatical analysis are based only on the three ghazals of Enlil Isme Dagan that Nuvadili kindly presented to me.

These include:

Nouns:

1st poem (ghazal): gaam - qəm - grief; cütcü – plowman, plowman; nam - high name, fame, notoriety; bal(e) - bal - fırfıra - whirligig toy, figuratively, a time; Enlil - name; Isme - surname; Dagan – the pseudonym of the poet; sıpa - dumb, inconspicuous, fool; munes - trust; heak - he[l]ak - death; gish - xış - plow; gishci-xışçı – plower, plowman; biy – ox, buffalo; qul - slave; kim - who; gan - qan - blood, meant in the text as family, offspring, dynasty; su - içməli su - water, drinking water; ud - od - fire; ud – oud – an ancient stringed instrument (a lute in Europe); sha - sa - sən - you; murabam - mürəbbə - jam; abgur - juice of green, unripe, sour grapes; nihal - sprouting; maraab - marabou - marabet - murabut - murab - goose - zoo. African Marabou – bird.

2nd poem (ghazal): mesha-meşə - forest; ma-mən- I, I am; agaz-ağac - wood; gish – qış - winter; dagal-dağal – idler, loafer; adam – a man, a human; kalaga – кalaça (in Azerbaijani, qalaça) - stronghold, fortress; duus, dust - dost – a friend;

3rd poem (ghazal): kur – kür - treatment, healing, medicine; shag - şax – tree branch; pad – flower-like diamond; or astra flower (aster), diamond stone shaped like an astra flower; flat, smooth, soft; еbcu – əbcu – older brother, respectful approach to the elder; şum – plowed field; mahzu – mahcu – səadət - happiness; shum uri – large pieces of ground after plowing; gaye – qayə - goal; qalam-qələm – seedling; adam – a man, a human; nuzu-nücul – progeny, family, dynasty; tum – toxum - seeds; ana - mother; bala – a baby, child; suud – süd - milk; gishgi – xışçı - plower; gidda – cütdə - on plow, from - cüt - plow;

Verbs:

1st ghazal: Hulla – push (from hölləmək – to push); uzub –üzmək – to take off; esh-eşmək – picking, digging around; urash-uraşmaq – to dare, fight; gurra – gurramaq – to have fun; cush –cuşmaq – coşmaq - to have fun, make noise; itam – yemek – to eat; sa-say - saymaq – to count; gal – qalmaq – to stay; umma – don’t expect or wait, don’t hope, ulsan – from ul(mak)- olmaq – to be; enme - en(mək) – to descend, to step down; gal – gəl – come; ul – ol - olmaq – to be; suragin – let’s ask (from surmaq – sormaq – to ask); shuti – şutmaq- to beat, in the text – to curse; ara – aramaq – to seek; laz – lezmek – izlemek – keep an eye on, to follow, ge- gəlmek – to come, kılıb – qılmaq – to do;

2nd ghazal: dur – stand up, but here, let’s; давай, an – remember, think back, (from an(mak) – to memorize, to remember); aza – açа (from аçmaq) – to open, to reveal; ekur - əkir – one is planting; uranda – urmaq – dərmək – to disrupt; bara – barmaq – çatmaq – to achieve; eshza – eşcə - eşmək – to pick; al – almaq – to take; garza – gərcək - göyərcək – göyərmək – to grow, to grow up; gedib – getmək – to go away; sa – say - count; galsa – gəlsə - if one comes;

3rd ghazal: sigan- the one who took refuge (from siğmaq - take shelter); eda – from eтмəк – to do; ul – ol - be; asha – aşmaq – to turn over, to fall off; gal – from qalmaq – to stay, remain; nimshi – fırlanmaq – to spin.

The mood of the verb: gedib – ge-dib – went, has gone; gurrayıb - gurra-yib – brightening up; qılıb - qıl-ıb – to do (in the text – to grow, to enlarge);

Numerals: bir, ara-bir – one, once, one day, beşü – beş – five; - azuni – neither more nor less, (indefinite numeral).

Pronoun: u, uni - him; maa – mənə - me, to me, me – mən – I, me; sa – saa - sənə - you, to you; ki-a – ki[m]ə - whom, to whom.

Conjunctive: ur dur an ki - hörmətin tut, an ki – respect and remember that; Enlillə - Enlil+lə, Enlil + ilə - with Enlil.

Word-building formants: а) çu - ud (a tool) - ud+çu, ud çalan - one who plays Uda; Şuluhçi - Şuluh+çu or Şulux salan – one, who makes noise; gişçi - xış+çı or cütçü – one who holds plow, who cultivates the ground with plow, plower; as known, cı, ci, cu, cü, or çı, çi, çu, çü are the formants or affixes of Turkish language, for example, dəmir - iron, dəmirçi - hammerman; yalan - falseness, yalançı – a liar; baliq – a fish, baliqçı – fisherman; diş – a tooth, diş+çi – a dentist.

Formants of personal pronouns: am, em, üm, im – udam, I am; Ud (musical instrument); alam – at least I could get; cütcüm – my plower; biim – I am axle in plow; qanumuzu – our blood, our progeny, or offspring; mürəbbəəm – I am sweet, jam, sugar şuxam – I am glad or joyful, nihalam – I am a sprout, maham; I am the moon; nüculam – how noble or generous I am;

-Casе formants: – ağac – wood, ağac+a – from wood or of wood (genitive case.); kim – who, kim+a (ə) - whom; udçum - my exponent of oud, udçum+u – my exponent of oud;

-Conventional formants: sa, sə - qal-sa - gəl-sə - if comes, if it is brought; xarab-sa – if it is spoiled, if it is decayed or rotten (about fruit); ul-sa – olsa – if it happens, if there is, or if it is; ekur-sa - əkür-sə - ‘if plants, if plows."

-Question formants: mu - ne itammu- what will we eat or what’s to eat? Umdumu?– did one expect? endümü – did it/he/she come down? meskenmü – is [it] an accommodation? Dagandumu – is it Dagan (personal name)?

-Negative formants: ма - um - expect – umma – don’t expect, don’t dream.

In these verses, numerous modulations typical of our language were used. They are additional proof that these ghazals were written in Azerbaijani-Turkish. For example, su-ud – water and fire; nükur udam – "I am an encrusted oud"; appak murabbe – white jam; kal-kal – not mature or ripe; uru adam – the human son; uğmini dağal – the laziest one; şum uri – round pieces of soil after plow; qış xürmesi – winter persimmon; kükü qayem – the sprout or seed of a dream; bir qelem – one sapling; ulu nüculam – what a noble or generous lineage or race, noble offspring; biçar duus – helpless friend; sağkeşdi baminiku – one who separates or divides even the morning dew; ana-bala – mother and child.

Several leading Sumerologists, including H.Rawlinson and J. Oppert suggested that Sumerian was an agglutinative language and therefore close to Turkish both in sound and structure [cited by 9]. Indeed, even the shortest and most superficial analysis of these three gazelles shows that this analysis was correct. The words that dominate in these poems are purely Turkish in design, meaning and meaning. The existence of numerous grammatical units and formations is an additional proof. The inclusion of personal pronoun formants, case formats, conditional formats, interrogative formants and negative formants also reflects this theory.

These poems or ghazals, in their grammar, meaning, sound, and structure, leave no doubt that the cuneiform texts were written in ancient Turkish. Those who claim that the true history of the language is in the [Turkish] dictionary are right. T.A. Nuvadili’s work, in particular, establishes prehistoric forms of grammatical, accentuation and morphological patterns from these texts that are still present today in modern Turkish.

Six thousand years have passed since the Dark Ages of human history. No matter how much has been forgotten, our subconscious connection with our past has not been broken. Nuvadili’s work shows us that the modern internal laws of our language are rooted in the depths of previous centuries; indeed, one of the appeals of the poet Enlil to himself (quoted below) speaks of these connections between our Turkish language and our Sumerian roots. These links may have been forgotten, but were never completely cut off.: "Aa Enlil İsme Dagan, ne nam, sıpa qal…" (Line 5)

You, Enlil Isme Dagan, it is honor to be a foal, but…

Aa Enlil, ur dur, an ki... (Line 13)

You, Enlil, be careful, think about and remember…

Enlil İsme Dagan, tum u ki… (Line 20)

Enlil Isme Dagan, quality seed is the one that…

This appeal reminds us of another detail: the philosophy of life and the laws of nature set forth in the book Avesta, where the Earth, as a mother, gives birth to living nature as her child, rising from the earth as a symbol of life. We find a similar description in one of the gazelles of a painting that symbolizes the same concept: a tree sucking living moisture from the ground with its roots. This idea that the earth was a symbol of motherhood, and the tree or seed was a child, was consistent with the sacred ideals of these ancient fire worshipers.

T.V. Nuvadili correctly set aside Römer’s original translation and took a completely new and original approach to these texts. His work has sought to shed the stereotypes that have led to mistranslations in Römer’s work and the works of other translators. In particular, he clears up the idea, popular in many earlier translations of modern Sumerologists, that the images from cuneiform scripts suggest heavenly events. Nuvadili instead tries to shed light on the historical truth by bringing the Sumerians back to Earth. He arranges them in the contexts of their daily lives and places them among us mortals on our stony but living planet Earth. The main revelation of these new translations is that a person born on earth is not able to live in heaven, as modern cuneiform scholars believed from these ancient people.

The sun rises from the east. This cannot be denied. In fact, the truths that Nuvadili set out are also clear. We are confident that we will soon see a time when these 200-year-old discussions about whether the Sumerians were our direct ancestors will end in our favor. The memory of the Azerbaijani people will work again in the old way, and our glorious past will be confirmed for us, the true descendants, the true masters.

Literature

1. Буниятов З.М. Избранные сочинения в трех томах. -Баку: Элм, 1999, 470 с.

2. Дьяконов И.М. О работе с шумерскими историческими источниками. Вестник Древней Истории (ВДИ), том 64, No 2, 1958, сс 48-70.

3. Seton Lloyd and V. Gordon Childe (Леонард Вулли Ур Халдеев, Издание Восточнoй литературы, М.: 1961) cited by Woolley C. Leonard), Ur of the Chaldees: More Royal Tombs. Smithsonian Institution, Washington D.C., 1930. In Russian translation by Woolley C. Leonard. Ur of the Chaldees, translation from English. Moscow, 1961, p. 8.

4. Сетон Ллойд. Археология Месопотамии. От Древнекаменного века до Персидского Завоевания. – М.: Наука, Главная редакция Восточной литературы, 1984. (Lloyd Seton The Archaeology of Mesopotamia. From the Old Stone Age to the Persian Conquest. Thames & Hudson Ltd., 1978).

5. Вулли Леонард. Ур Халдеев, М.: Изд-во восточной литературы, 1961, 161 с.

6. Редер Д.Г. Мифы и легенды Древнего Двуречья М., Наука, ГРВЛ, 1965. 114 с.

7. Ahmet Javat Emre. Alifabenin menşei: en eski Türk yazısıdır. Istanbul, Maarifet Matbaası, 1933, 72 s.

8. Реклю, Жан Жак Элизе, Земля и люди. Всеобщая география, С-Пб., Издание Картографичаского заведения А. Ильина. 1884. в 12-ти книгах, Том. V. Вып. 2.

9. Мариан Белицкий. Шумеры. Забытый мир. М., Вече 1980, с. 17- 47.

10. Samuel Noah Kramer. The Sumerians, Their History, Culture, and Character, The University of Chicago Press, Chicago & London, 1963, 355 pp.

11. Tariyel Veli Nuvadili I. The Relationship Between Historical Sumer and Azerbaijan, Journal of The Turkic World - Türk Dünyası, Vol. 1, No. 1, 1995, pp 46-66.

12. Römer, W.H. Ph. Die Hymnen des Ishme-Dagan won, Isin, Orientalia, 1993, Vol. 62, FASC 2, p. 91-106.

---

¹  ¹ My article also published in 1995 in the newspaper Oghuz eli (Country of Oghuz people), Baku, Azerbaijan was dedicated to this topic.

CHAPTER 2

HOW DID WE COME TO THE CONCLUSION THAT CUNEIFORM IS A TURKIC INVENTION?

Since, the 1970s, besides of my city Baku, where I always looked for a material by cuneiform inscription, I always was in searching when traveling to any city of the former Soviet Union (Moscow, Leningrad, Kiev, Kharkov, Minsk, Tallinn, Riga, Vilnius), European countries (socialist and capitalist German - western and eastern Berlin, Hamburg, Poland - Warsaw, Hungary-Budapest), be sure to go to scientific libraries and read the works of specialists in cuneiform deciphering. In them, basically, I was looking for logograms, ideograms, individual words, phrases, etc., not translated from cuneiform. Due to the fact that the decipherers simply could not understand their essence, many of them were transmitted in their native versions in the form of names and / or gods or goddesses. Often, they were given broken, deformed, and even in their warped form. Such lexemes, or whole phrases, being in an ugly wounded format, all sounded exactly like their native Turkic. It seemed to me that if I would have a whole version of them and if I put the lines together, then they will talk to me in my native language. But, due to the lack of sufficient domestic and foreign literature, it was not possible to create a model of Turkic sentences from cuneiform scripts. In our country, in the former USSR, this branch of science was not developed. And random articles did not give a general picture of the lack