[LNHY] I'm confused

phippsmartin at hotmail.com phippsmartin at hotmail.com
Sun Feb 6 04:29:46 PST 2005

>Thank you for this extremely interesting >contribution to geneology.

Thank you, but... look at this.


"Ancient Egypt's lineage was traced through women and property was
passed through women. For this reason, Ancient Egypt originated as a
matriarchy. The pharoahs were trustees of the property passed down and
their reign was decided by their matrilineal status. Because of the
matrilineal structure, husbands would lose their property and status if
their wife died. The property was passed down to the daughters and
granddaughters. Many incest relations began with fathers and daughters
and granddaughters because the men wanted to stay with the property.
There were also numerous brother/sister incest marriages."

Now, I know the truth.  Gilgamesh and Inanna were husband and wife, man
and sister-in-law and... brother and sister.  Ew.


"Solidarity was achieved through "group marriage" where whole groups of
kin-related women were collectively "married" to whole groups of men.
Under these circumstances, only the mother of a child was known, so
kinship tended to be traced through the female line, creating what
Engels called a "matrilineal clan." The kinship rights of men were his
sisters and her children."

These false(?) geneologies and kings lists were designed to hide this
"ugly" truth.

The Saga of Inanna and the Epic of Gilgamesh, taken together, tell the
story of the end of matriarchy and the begining of patriarchy, not only
for Sumer but also for neighbouring Egypt.


"We see an example in Egypt where the matriarchy was overcome by a
patriarchy invading from Mesopotamia roughly 5,000 years BP, or about
3,000 B.C. Before the patriarchal invasion, writing and tool use were
unknown in Egypt."

I've been portraying Inanna ("I.sig") as evil and Gilgamesh
("Google.mesh") as good, although flawed.  I'm starting to think it was
the other way around.  Gilgamesh, obviously highly literate and
presumably very strong (so he said), was able to wrest control of Sumer
and, presumably, neighbouring Egypt.  That Gilgamesh is portrayed as
good and Inanna evil in these stories makes sense if HE WROTE THEM
HIMSELF as the Epic of Gilgamesh claims.  Gilgamesh could, in fact,
have been the bad guy.  Oh dear.

Anyway, I'm taking this topic over to sci.antropology to see what they


More information about the racc mailing list