Wow! This was big news! Shocking! Gilgamesh turns out to be more than fiction or myth, contrary to what academia has been pushing for a century. Gilgamesh was a real person and they found his tomb, just as it was said in the epic, built under the course of the Euphrates River! It only got a little mention in the BBC (in One Minute World News) where Uruk – the origin of eponymous Iraq!
NOTE how the BBC says “believed found!” If it was “Lucy’s” bones found over a couple square kilometers, they’d say, “definite proof of humanoid primate!” See, it all depends on what they want you to believe.
In this case the find of Gilgamesh tomb ought to be called the find of the decade or of the 21st century, as yet another ancient literary source (2300 BC) turns out to be historical and less “mythological” than widely assumed. Uruk was the first city? Responsible for most first inventions, like writing, law, education, taxes, love songs, ethics, justice, agriculture, medicine, love and family? Wow, that early?
But inspite of all these proven first inventions, mainstream historians don’t trust Sumer’s own historical writings and denounce them as fictitious mythology without any core of truth. After all they were the immdiate descendents of stupid cavemen and hunter gatherers! And Euhemerism is ‘a bad bad method of doing history!’ For sure!!
For example Wikipedia would smear any historicity of the Epic of Gilgamesh as misplaced “euhemerism”, that traditional, time-tested method of historical research first proposed by the ancient Greek historian Evhemerus, but now used as a pejorative by WP and others who don’t like these pesky ancient manuscripts.
Why is academia so dead-set against Euhemerism? Because these literary sources all contradict their preferred paradigm of long debunked Darwinism. Yet this brainclamp still continues to stalk every student in all halls of official academia like an evil ghost who just refuses to admit that he has died.
Google Assists In The Demonisation
See some first page opinions forced upon us by Google:
Listen to some more first page Google results headlines; what they say about Euhemerism: Note how they have issues with it, in light of concepts like atheism, materialism, naturalism, and uniformitarianism.
- https://faculty.unlv.edu/jmstitt/Eng480/euhemerism.html states that… “Myths are belief narratives, so from the viewpoint of those who tell them, they are history. The issue is whether or not myth is rooted in history in some objective …”
- http://www.academia.edu/6858533/What_is_Euhemerism_A_Brief_HEuhemerism is often associated with or right from the outset, when one deals with the his- mentioned in connection with the notion of atheism of the study of history...
Listen to Wikipedia – that unscientific encyclopedia every internet browser dutifully stuffs down our throats as Gospel – what it says about Euhemerism:
- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EuhemerismEuhemerism is an approach to the interpretation of mythology in which mythological accounts are presumed to have originated from real historical events or …
And hear Wicked Pedia use words as “rationalizing method of interpretation” and “rationalizing mythology”, because this pedia simply does not want mythology to have a core of true history, and therefore takes the patronising position that the ancients did not know what the hell they were writing about when they wrote about their own history!
How would you feel if you wrote your history and Wicked Pedia says it is mythological? Well, actually, many people of today have had this very unpleasant experience with WP, where they were demonised by WP because WP didn’t like them for ideological reasons, and no matter how many times they tried to correct their VERY OWN biography, it was almost immediately rejected and switched to the WP fiction.
You can just imagine if that happens today with WP, what have they done to the ancients they don’t like for ideological reasons, who are not around anymore to protest that they damn well knew what they were writing about. [Click on graphics to see bigger copy:]
Wikipedia rejects Euhemerism, because Euhemerism treats the ancient gods as deified human leaders of the ancient world, instead of what WP prefers as fictional mythological creatures that never existed. And why? Because those euhemerised ancient leaders spoke about the Global Flood, Atlantis, Giants, the ten pre-Flood kings, the eight flood survivors, the early Sea Kings that traveled and measured the entire world and built these huge megaliths everywhere, and astronomical stones, etc., as historical fact!
And those kind of things the Materialist, Darwinist, Naturalists, like official academia, and WP, and Dawkins et al, sorely despise! Why? Because it gives credence to religious truths that they do not subscribe to, nor want you to subscribe to, either! It stumps their propaganda and cripples their brainwashing of you!
So, if Uruk, Gilgamesh, and the Sumerian Kings List are not mythological, then perhaps what they wrote about their history has a solid core of true historical events! Like Creation? The Global Flood? The 10 Pre-Flood Kings? The Eight flood Survivors? The uniqueness of their historical presence without many other nations around them?
And much fewer in number than Darwinian historians assume, because if cavemen and hunter gatherers were mosying around for thousands of years already, the area must have been teeming with many millions of human beings with many little towns, villages, and at least hundreds of kingdoms like Uruk, all around and fighting each other.
Well, they say, there were other kingdoms eventually and fighting each other. Yes, eventually, after the early Flood survivors multiplied like rabbits and decentralised in more kingdoms and the Lugans began indeed fighting each other. But that happened much later. In case Darwinist presumptions were true then it would have been as frequent as global wars today.
That just shows you, that the Flood was a real historic event, and that we have been lied to, and propagandised Big Time, by the academic authorities that-shouldn’t-be! Are you going to continue to believe them? Or are you wise enough to realise that we’ve been had, and that the early Flood survivors of the first 5-10 generations of Uruk since the Flood struggled with the longevity of Noah, or Utnapishtim, as they called him?
That’s why Uruk’s king Gligamesh, mourning Enkidu’s death, went up the mountains of Ararat where the Ark landed and Noah obviously still lived then, to find out why he lived so long and outlived younger generations! Gilgamesh wanted to know his secret of ïmmortality, but Noah wasn’t immortal, although he was over 600 years since the Flood, and lived another 350 years after that, while he even still traveled the earth and visited many countries, according to Noah’s Travels.
And so, dear readers, be assured that true history is a total different kettle of fish than what we have been told, and that the ancients knew damn well that there had been a recent creation, a recent flood, and eight Flood survivors who were their very own primo-patriarchs, and that we have been lied to. So read our other articles here on AncientPatriarchs, and educate yourself back to our true beginnings, so you may be wise to Quackademia and its awful shenanigans., and SHUN that awful lying Wicked Pedia outfit!
Yeah right! How about this paradigm! I think it fits the facts much better! Don’t you think?