Talk:Etana

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ancient Near East, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Ancient Near East related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Ancient Near EastWikipedia:WikiProject Ancient Near EastTemplate:WikiProject Ancient Near EastAncient Near East articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Biography: Royalty and Nobility

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
	This article is supported by WikiProject Royalty and Nobility.

Etana in reasonable years[edit]

texts read 1560 years, other texts read 1500 years. The planet Jupiter measures 12 years, the moon measures 12 months. a man ruling 12 years of Jupiter could be mistranslated as ruling 12 months of the moon or if he rules for 12 months of the moon, it could be mistranslated as 12 years of Jupiter. Divide by 12 and we have 130 years as 1560 months, or 125 years as 1500 months. The rise to heaven is particular to Mars whose every 13 years of 360 days is a morning star as 6 risings of 780 days. Thus 130 years or 60 risings. 130 years of 360 days span 128 years. This rise of Mars marking the new year is emphasized by the Damuzi being called the Leader of The New Year. Or the shepherd who leads. It would mean the 130 years is affiliated with the tradition of Cainan or Chaldea having 130 years to birth or foundation. If the other text of 635 were 636 it too would be divisible by 12 as 53 years, otheriwse it sets as 52 years 11 months. But it must also be recognized that ancient scribes when doing their own deciphering would alter to fit their own chronologies. On a biblical Genesis level (if no one attackes and deletes this concept now presented), if Etana is 130 year Mars marking 128 years from Arpaxad to the year before Reu's birth (2368-2240 BC) and we presume the 635 years to be NeoBabylon reconstruction from Arpaxad (2345 BC Thoth 1, Aug 29) we obtain 2310 BC Thoth 1, March 24. Of which the 300 years of Babylon (1894-1594 BC) have been known to cause ancient scholars to say there was also a 300-year Babel (2309-2009 BC). So this 635-636 years could indeed be years and not months if its a revision of saying from the creation of the world (Arpaxad's birth) to the building of Babel, contrasting short Genesis 2368-2240 BC with NeoBabylon's claim of 2945-2309 BC as first year of Babel. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.76.46.169 (talk) 18:56, 5 February 2007 (UTC).[reply]

While your theory is interesting, it appears to be Original Research, so we cannot use it. ፈቃደ (ውይይት) 19:26, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WTF???[edit]

??? From who you known that about: ( On a biblical Genesis level (if no one attackes and deletes this concept now presented), if Etana is 130 year Mars marking 128 years from Arpaxad to the year before Reu's birth (2368-2240 BC) and we presume the 635 years to be NeoBabylon reconstruction from Arpaxad (2345 BC Thoth 1, Aug 29) we obtain 2310 BC Thoth 1, March 24. Of which the 300 years of Babylon (1894-1594 BC) have been known to cause ancient scholars to say there was also a 300-year Babel (2309-2009 BC).) That perfect but not much sense. Fall of Babylon its dated to 1547 BC and not to a 1594 or 1531 :D The Sumerian use it system 6-12, 6×6=36, etc for mathematic and chronology. When Alulim reigned 8 sars (28,800 years) its in reality 28800/1200 (or 600)= 24 (or 48) years of kingdom. --Bynk33 (talk) 10:25, 26 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sir, this is simply not the platform for your Original research, nor is it a WP:SOAP Box. If you want to conduct your own novel research, there are a million blogs and other places where you can do that on the web. If you do it here, it can be deleted. Here, we can only consider theories that have been published in some external source, for purposes of adding information to the article. If I see any more of this gibberish, I am just going to delete it next time, which is what should be done anyway according to WP:TALK. Til Eulenspiegel (talk) 12:03, 26 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Lol - it's on the Japanese Wikipedia also[1]. It's got something to do with the Sumerian King List. Dougweller (talk) 16:04, 26 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Your link seems to be merely a Japanese mirror of this very page on the English wikipedia. But this is all a waste of time, unless perchance someone has some actual sources relevant to the subject of Etana. Til Eulenspiegel (talk) 18:08, 26 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]