De civitate Caeli – The civilisation of Heaven

The essay puts Zuism in dialogue with some of the most important currents of contemporary philosophical enquiry. It shows the compatibility of the Zuist project with the Eurasianist Fourth Political Theory of Aleksandr Dugin, and the affinity of Zuism with broader Eurasian religion, especially Chinese religion; then it puts forward a criticism of Christianity and Sitchinianism, both proven as wrong and misleading forms of thought. Endly, the essay introduces the Zuist projects for new social structures.

Drawing by the Serbian artist Dragoš Kalajić, representing ⨁ one of the many variations of the symbol of Hyperborea, the God of Heaven (𒀭 An) at the ecliptic north pole, with an eagle head. In Zuism, the eagle is a symbol of heavenly wisdom (𒍪 zu), of the wisemen who know Heaven (the eagle-faced apkallu; Parpola 1993, p. 167, n. 31), and of Anzu, who is the same as the Iranic Simurgh, the bird of the north pole. The eagle, reputed to be able to gaze directly at the Sun, represents the part of the soul which strives to ascend to Heaven, opposed to the snake, the part of the soul which longs for the Earth (Parpola 1993, p. 198, n. 143)
© Courtesy of


Zuism proposes itself as a radical transformation of society, in a period when people in the West are increasingly challenging the authority of traditional institutions and feeling the need for a break with the stagnant order of the world, the collapsing Anglo-American empire, represented by Christianity and the entire construction of the Judeo-Christian civilisation, which does not represent the true roots of Europe. The Indo-Europeans are the true roots of Europe.1

Zuism inscribes itself among the attempts to change the stagnant present through the reactualisation of past structures of thought, identity and socialisation. It opens the way for the hoisting of a new axis mundi, a new configuration of the Logos, a new civilisational centre where Heaven will meet the Earth, and wherein a new mankind will gather.

As such, Zuism is particularly apt for fulfilling the Fourth Political Theory elaborated by the Russian philosopher Aleksandr Dugin, an open yard2 for a “new institutionalisation of the world”.

The architecture of the postmodern world is completely fragmented, perverse and confused. It is a labyrinth without an exit, as folded and twisted as a Moebius strip. The Logos, which was the guarantor of strictness and order, serves here instead to grant curvature and crookedness, being used to preserve the impassability of the ontological border with nothing from the eventual and inevitable trespassers seeking to escape into the beyond. (Dugin 2012, p. 209)

Let the buffoonery of postmodernism have its turn; let it erode definite paradigms, the ego, super-ego and Logos; […] let nothing carry along in itself the substance of the world — then secret doors will open, and ancient, eternal, ontological archetypes will come to the surface and, in a frightful way, will put an end to the game. (Dugin 2012, pp. 97-98)

The world around us becomes what it is by the fundamental action of presencing accomplished by the mind. When the mind sleeps, reality lacks the sense of present experience. It is fully immersed in a continuous dream. The world is created by time, and time, in its turn, is the manifestation of self-aware subjectivity, an intrasubjectivity. […] Time is that which is inside us, and what makes us who we are. Time is man’s ultimate identity. (Dugin 2012, p. 159)

The Fourth Political Theory has opened a unique perspective: if we comprehend the principle of the reversibility of time, we are not only able to compose the project of a future society, but we will also be able to compose a whole range of projects of different future societies, thus we would be able to suggest some non-linear strategies for a new institutionalisation of the world. (Dugin 2012, p. 70)

The Fourth Political Theory is so called because its purpose is to represent a fourth way overcoming the three political theories which shaped modernity—fascism, communism and liberalism—among which the latter has apparently triumphed in the contemporary, degenerating postmodern world. The number four is also “the sign of Jupiter, the planet of order and monarchy. It is an Indo-European, patriarchal symbol of the God of Heaven—Dyaus, Deus, Zeus”,3 the Zuists’ An or Dingir, the father of the fixed ecliptic north pole winded by the constellation Draco,4 of the Hyperborea.5 Another symbol used by Dugin is the eight-arrows star, which derives directly from our symbol of the “Gate of God” (𒆍𒀭𒊏 Ka.dingir.ra in Sumerian, Babilu in Akkadian), the ancient Sumerian grapheme An or Dingir itself, representing the ecliptic north pole from which everything emanates à 𒀭.6 It is “the compass, something that provides orientation, introducing order in the seemingly chaotic space, the geometric symbol of the universe”. It is a symbol of “stars”, that is to say God, the gods and men as gods.7

Dugin appeals to the shared effort of European and Asian intellectuals who perceive the “eschatological tension of the present time”, for the formulation of the Fourth Political Theory,8 which he himself characterises as a “Fourth Nomos of the Earth”, using Carl Schmitt’s terminology; a coalescence of political science, political theology, geopolitics and a “new model of the political organisation of space”.9 In Schmitt, a “nomos of the Earth” is an Ordnung, “ordering”, as well as an Ortung, a “localisation”. Unifying these in a single word, Dugin develops the concept of Dasein (“Therebeing”) inherited from Martin Heidegger:

[…] We may propose to consider Heidegger’s Dasein as the subject of the Fourth Political Theory. Dasein is described in Heidegger’s philosophy at length through its existential structure, which makes it possible to build a complex, holistic model based on it, the development of which will lead to, for instance, a new understanding of politics. […] If the subject is Dasein, then the Fourth Political Theory would constitute a fundamental ontological structure that is developed on the basis of existential anthropology. (Dugin 2012, pp. 40-41)

In Dugin, the Dasein is  “a new conception of the Logos and of humanity that works as the magnetic centre of the Fourth Political Theory”, “a fundamental ontological theory with at its core the awareness of the truth of Being: ‘there’ (da) and ‘be’ (sein) is a gesture, an indication of where the fountain of Being is located”.10

Zuism, represented by the Gate of God, by the gate of the fixed ecliptic north pole of Heaven, reproduced on Earth by the Zuist temple,11 wants to be a cradle for the new Dasein, for the new, re-ordered mankind, a pole of irradiation for a new civilisation to align the Earth with Heaven. According to Dugin, the nature of Dasein is being “intween/intwixt” (inzwischen);12 in our case it represents mankind which occupies its due position between Heaven and Earth, linking Heaven and Earth. Zuism, therefore, propose itself as a “rectification”, a new orthodoxy, a new “right”, that is to say a new alignment with the pole of Heaven, for the world and in Europe in particular.13

Zuism as a new centre, and Zuist temples as its many centres, may be compared to the Heideggerian concept of Ort, a German word originally meaning the “tip of the spear”, which is used to render the Latin word “locus”; the theurgical establishment of “an ordered space, centre of gravitation and irradiation of activity”.14 In his essay entitled Georg Trakl. Eine Erörterung seines Gedichtes (1953), Heidegger says:

All the forces of the spear converge into its tip. The Ort gathers by attracting towards itself, as it is the highest and most extreme point. By bringing together, it transfixes and permeates everything. The Ort, as that which unites, draws to itself and keeps what it has drawn to itself. It does not keep what it has drawn to itself in the manner of a casket, but in order to integrate it within its own light, thereby giving it the ability to unfold according to its own true being.15

According to Matthias Rothenmann’s reading of Dugin, “time coagulates around Dasein into different complexes, establishing topographies in which concepts combine and recombine in a nonlinear and reversible way. Concepts from the past may be reëvoked, providing the bases for the composition of projects for the future and the strategies for their institutionalisation”.16

Zuism is otherwise describable as Dugin’s Ereignis, the “event” of the return of Being, the “central axis threading everything around itself”, politics, theology and mythology; “the triumphant return of Being, at the exact moment when mankind forgets about it, once and for all”.17 When Dasein manifests in the Ereignis, it institutionalises time; time is at the same time a function of Dasein and becomes institutionalised in it. Dugin compares it to Gilbert Durand’s topographical Traiectum, the crossroads which “institutionalise time”.18

Zuism as the cradle for Dasein is therefore a new institutionalisation of space-time, or time-space. It establishes anew what Dugin calls the “original political ontological topography”, that is “the fundamental structure of any political entity and experience”.19


Dugin calls for a recourse to archaic and Eastern theologico-mystical systems to trigger a reconfiguration of the Logos and the rise of a new civilisation, since they preserve the “real form” of the original knowledge about the how to institutionalise the world.20

[…] The theology of monotheistic religions, which at one time displaced other sacred cultures, will not be the ultimate truth […]. Theoretically, nothing limits the possibilities for an in-depth readdressing of the ancient archaic values, which can take their place in the new ideological construction, upon being adequately recognised and understood. […] Not only the highest supra-mental symbols of faith can be taken on board once again as a new shield […]. If we reject the idea of progress that is inherent in modernity […], then all that is ancient gains value and credibility for us simply by virtue of the fact that it is ancient. […] “Ancient” means good, and the more ancient — the better. Of all creations, Heaven is the most ancient one. The carriers of the Fourth Political Theory must strive toward rediscovering it in the near future. (Dugin 2012, pp. 27–28)

Among Eastern cultures, and especially among the living great traditions, Zuism shares many fundamental structural ideas with Chinese religion. Both these religious cultures are characterised by a scientific outlook: Both Sumerian and Chinese religion are not blind faith in a supernatural, otherworldly reality, but rather are based on the observation of Heaven, of natural phenomena, and on techniques meant to regulate human activity in accordance with the order of Heaven. They are scientific, thisworldly religions whose aim is to create Heaven on Earth.

This similarity is due to the common origin of Sumerian and Chinese religious cultures. John C. Didier finds a common “center-plus-agency structure” that “ancient proto-Chinese and Chinese may have inherited from a transmitted Sumerian-Babylonian religion”.21 This transmission may have occurred from the 4th millennium BC onwards, via Indo-European peoples, and such spiritual knowledge is ultimately shared by a common pan-Eurasian religion,22 whose most ancient core is found in the myths of Siberia.23

The supreme God of Heaven, the ecliptic north pole, which is “the creative source of all energy and thus also the patriarch of the entire cosmos”, with the Dipper constellation revolving around it representing its offspring which “helps as an agent to produce and/or govern further evolutionary developments of the cosmos”,24 is the same An or Dingir 𒀭 (with his offspring Enlil and Marduk-Jupiter representing his active, moving emanation) of Sumerian-Mesopotamian religious culture, Dyeus (called Deus Pater by the Latins, later contracted as “Jupiter”, Zeus by the Greeks) of the Proto-Indo-Europeans, and Dīng 口, 帝 (“Deity”) or Tiān 天 (“Heaven”) of Chinese religious culture.25 Other symbols of the God of Heaven in these cultures are the cross potent and the swastika (which in Sanskrit means “well-being”, “it is the good”).26

In all these cultures, the vault of Heaven, revolving around the centre, the ecliptic north pole identified as the heart of the God of Heaven coiled by the constellation Draco, is divided into three concentric bands of constellations, associated with the God of Heaven itself and his two closest manifestations. In Sumerian religious culture the band closer to the centre is the “Path of Enlil”, the middle band is the “Path of An”, and the farther band is the “Path of Enki”, the god of humanity.27

Besides An, all the other main concepts of Sumerian-Mesopotamian religion find equivalents in Chinese and broader Eurasian religion. Ki 𒆠 (“Earth”) is the same as the Chinese 地 Dì, and the compound Anki 𒀭𒆠 (“Heaven-Earth”), signifying the “cosmos”, the ordered world when Heaven and Earth are in harmony,28 is the same as the Chinese concept of 天地 Tiāndì.

The Sumerian equivalent of the Hellenic concept of Logos, the the Latin Ratio and Oratio—the structural “order” of the universe emanated by the supreme God of Heaven and the “word” which gives such order—is the Lil29 𒆤 (translatable as “wind”, “air”, “breath” or “spirit”30), also in its personification Enlil (𒂗𒆤, the “Master of Breath”).31 Utu 𒌓, which means both “word” and “Sun”, is the Lil when understood as the divine utterance which has performative, creative power to make order out of chaos—Abzu 𒀊𒍪 (“Deep Water” or “Watery Knowledge”, or “Before Knowledge”) or Engur or Nammu 𒇉, the primordial “Mother”, which is the same as the Chinese Hùndùn 混沌.32 The Lil is what unites Heaven and Earth; its stands between them33 and all things are made of it; it is characterised by movement and expansion.34 From this perspective, the Lil is also comparable to the concept of pneuma. In Chinese religion, its equivalents are 理 (“reason”, “order”, or “pattern”) and 氣, the former defining the structural order of Heaven and the latter defining the energised matter of which all things are made.

The Chinese Li as Logos is reflected in the homophonous lǐ  禮 carrying the meaning of “rite” (also in the Eurasian tradition Ratio and ritus ultimately come from the same root35). In Chinese religious culture, rites are devices for the moralisation, the structuration, of space-time, and consist of the transmission of ancestral forms ( 祖).36 The equivalent concept in Sumerian-Mesopotamian religion is me 𒈨 (“measure”), which is likely the phonetic root of the Latin concept of mos, mores (“habits”).37



Christianity is fundamentally a religion for the slaves, deliberately created to breed and domesticate masses of slaves. In his 1992 work The End of History and the Last Man, Francis Fukuyama, in the wake of Nietzsche and Hegel, called Christianity “the most prominent ideology of slavery”, a perverse moralism which justifies and glorifies weakness and fault (“turn the other cheek”). At the same time, it postpones its plan of universal equality to an otherworldly future. This results in a rejection of the present world, of thisworldly potentialities, and thus in an alienation of individual intelligences from the present world, and in the fall of the latter in anomy.38

The Bible, in Ephesians 6:5–8, one of its passages about slavery, says:

Slaves, obey your earthly masters with respect and fear, and with sincerity of heart, just as you would obey Christ. Obey them not only to win their favour when their eye is on you, but as slaves of Christ, doing the will of God from your heart. Serve wholeheartedly, as if you were serving the Lord, not people, because you know that the Lord will reward each one for whatever good they do, whether they are slave or free.

These verses tell about a religion of social and spiritual stagnation, which paralyses the development of humanity preventing any possibility of meritocracy. According to Christianity, people must humbly accept their position in society, as there is no way for them to improve their condition. There is no possibility of perfectibility, in this world. Christianity is what cultivates the Nietzschean “last men”, bereft of any dignity, at the time of what Fukuyama calls the “end of history”, as Christianity, and its ideological spawns (far-fetched mass egalitarianism and liberalism), ultimately smother any possibility of dynamic evolution of humanity and thus mark the deadlock of history.39

Such conception is radically different from that which is found in Chinese religious culture, in which humanity may continuously develop, refine itself through ritual self-cultivation, moralisation of space-time, with the purpose of becoming one with Heaven.40 The same conception shall be recovered from the Sumerian tradition, in Zuism, through the ideas of utu an me.

According to Rothenmann, Christianity is also deemed responsible for the concealment of the original meaning of the Logos and for the consequent sclerotisation of thought occurring in Western civilisation.41 Dugin says:

The architecture of the postmodern world is completely fragmented, perverse and confused. It is a labyrinth without an exit, as folded and twisted as a Moebius strip. Logos, which was the guarantor of strictness and order, serves here instead to grant curvature and crookedness, being used to preserve the impassability of the ontological border with nothing from the eventual and inevitable trespassers seeking to escape into the beyond. (Dugin 2009, p. 209)

The sclerotisation of the Logos goes back to “the Christian conception of God as an abstract, otherworldly entity, that is to say, as a transcendent cause that is separated from its creation”, thus external to the universe and to the Logos which informs the universe.42 A further step is Christianity’s reification or objectification of the Logos as one single entity, spatiotemporally confined in the person of Jesus of Nazareth, so that the Logos is ultimately separated from the world and from humanity, which in turn are bereft of any spiritual value.43 Comparing the Logos with Jacques Lacan’s concept of the web of the “Symbolic Order”, Christianity’s reduction of symbols to one historicised entity results in what Lacanians call “obduracy” or “network sclerosis”: “The network of symbols ceases to be dynamic […] and it protractedly reproduces itself as a machine-like empty shell”.44 The separation of God from the Logos and of the two from lower human reason, results in the explosion of the system into all types of “nonsensicality and madness”.45


Sitchinianism46 or the ancient astronaut theory, which is sadly a popular thought paradigm among contemporary masses, is just the latest spawn of the Christian abstraction of God and objectification of the Logos. The late scholar D. M. Murdock, historian of religion and astrotheology, writes that:

[…] The ancients themselves were quite clear about what it was exactly they were worshipping and fancifully describing in epic poetry. […] For example, the Sumero-Babylonians themselves said that the gods were the planets, not people, and that their stories were myths representing personifications of these bodies. […] They developed over a period of many thousands of years a complex astronomical/astrological system that incorporated the movements and qualities of numerous celestial bodies, which could be called the celestial mythos. (Murdock 2014, passim)

This astral religion served to regulate life on Earth according to the patterning of Heaven. Murdock proposes that Sitchinianism may have been deliberately spread “by the same type of motivation that produced the Bible, a chronicle largely consisting of the plagiarized myths of other cultures that were reconstituted as humans of a particular ethnicity”.47

According to Murdock:

[…] The Anunnaki […] are not “people”, human or otherwise. The Anunnaki, in general, represent the seven nether spheres and guardians of the seven gates through which the sun of God passes into the netherworld or darkness. They are also the tutelary spirits of the earth. […] The ancients were not so dumb that they mistook planets for people, even though they personified those planets and, where the knowledge or gnosis of the mythos was lost, they hoped for the incarnation, or the carnalization or appearance of a god. (Murdock 2014, passim)

Quoting Barbara G. Walker, Murdock says:

A generally accepted view of the universe in antiquity was the doctrine of the planetary spheres, conceived as great crystal domes or inverted bowls nested inside one another over the earth, turning independently of one another at various rates, and emitting the “music of the spheres” with their motions. The theory was evolved to explain the apparently erratic movement of planets against the background of the fixed stars. Reading from the innermost sphere outward, arranging them according to the days of the week, they were the spheres of the moon, Mars, Mercury, Jupiter, Venus, Saturn, and the sun. Outermost was the eight sphere, the Empyrean, the home of fixed spheres and the ultimate God: the highest heaven. As a corollary to this theory, it was also assumed that there were seven nether spheres descending under the earth: the seven hells to which Dumuzi and Inanna (or Tammuz and Ishtar) journeyed; whose seven gates were guarded by the seven Anunnaki or Maskim, the nether counterparts of the planetary spirits. According to an Akkadian magic tablet, “They proceed from the ocean depths, from the hidden retreat”. From the ancient idea of the seven nether spheres, Dante took his vision of the descending circles of hell. (Murdock 2014 quoting Walker 201348)

Dragoš Kalajić’s artwork representing the seven stars of the Big Dipper, or Great Chariot, the constellation which revolves around the north pole of Heaven. In the traditions of all Eurasia, including Mesopotamia, the Big Dipper is associated with the utmost God of Heaven, specifically as its operative power. Each of its seven stars represents one of the seven planets near the earth: The Sun, Moon, Mercury, Venus, Mars, Jupiter, and Saturn. The symbolism of the number seven in many Eurasian traditions originates from the Big Dipper. (Didier 2009, vol. I, p. 113)
© Courtesy of


Poster by the Chaldean artist Amer Hanna Fatuhi. The Mesopotamian temple (in the poster the Etemenanki, “Temple of the Foundations of Heaven and Earth”), functions as the centre of an ordered world.
© Courtesy of

Zuism’s aim is to establish a new social structure. Temples (é 𒂍) in Sumer and broader Mesopotamia were economic powerhouses, centres of business and industry. As written by Leslie A. White, relying largely upon the studies of V. Gordon Childe, Mesopotamian temples had waged workers including bakers, brewers, spinners, smiths and farmers, and obviously the clergy who supervised them. The temples also functioned as banks: “The early temple archives record the god’s loan of seed or plow animals to cultivators, the fields he has let to tenants, wages paid to […] employees […]. The god is the richest member of the community”.49

The Igibi Bank, active around 575 BCE, “acted as a buying agent for clients, loaned on crops, attaching them in advance; loaned on signatures and on objects deposited, and received deposits on which it paid interest”. White writes that the contract as a legal device for business transaction was invented by the Mesopotamian temple system; it was used in the rental of fields, houses, working animals and vehicles.50 As in this testimony:

Warad-Ilisch […] has received from the sun-priestess Iltani, one shekel of silver by the Sun God’s balance. This sum is to be used to buy sesame. At the time of the sesame-harvest, he will repay in sesame, at the current price, to the bearer of this document. (White 1959, pp. 326–327, quoting the Encyclopædia Britannica51)

Zuist temples shall recover the functions that temples had in ancient Mesopotamia. In a 2016 article, Izabella Kaminska writes about how “the emergence of civilised states such as Sumer was closely connected to the role temples played in standardising, clearing and redistributing value in society. Temple authorities, the theory states, kept account of the assets and liabilities of each individual in a centralised manner, meaning citizens could claim as many goods from the temple store as the temple records permitted. This was often based on the amount of provable work they had done. Tangible coins were thus unnecessary. The accounting system was ubiquitous in society and trusted”.52

Sumer was an “industrial-religious accounting complex” in which land was considered property of the gods and not of individuals or families, so that this spurred “non-rivalrous collaboration” for cultivation and settlement. At the same time, church, bank and state were separated, as it was the king (lugal) who authorised and oversaw the bala (“exchange”), the taxation system by which the temples collected goods and surplus and conveyed them into welfare and development projects. Through this temple-state system, people “gave up their nomadic/predatory/hunter-gatherer existence” as they “were provided with a neutral territory and common religious purpose, something which in turn gave them an excuse to opt into a mutually beneficial subsidisation platform of their own accord”.53

Amagi 𒂼𒄄 or amargi 𒂼𒅈𒄄, literally “return to the mother”, which became a figure of speech for “freedom”, implies the restoration of persons and properties to their original status, implying the cancellation of debts and obligations. This practice shall be restored by Zuism, starting from the redistribution of collected taxes and the use of the surplus for the projects of the community.


Sumerian religious ministers were called en 𒂗, ensi 𒑐𒋼𒋛, or lugal 𒈗, with the latter occupying the highest position in the hierarchy. They were at the same time the political leaders: The ensi (“priests”) were the leaders of individual city-states while the lugal led confederations of many cities, or maybe the whole Sumer. The lugal, which literally means “great man”, likely also had military functions, while the ensi dealt with internal affairs.54

Below the en there were various male and female assisting figures in the temple hierarchy. The upper rank  included the lagar, the eresh-digir or nin (“priestess”, which had an important role and is sometimes considered as the female equivalent of the en), the lu-mah and the egi-zi.55 The second rank included cultic officiants and specialists in charge of the purification of the holy spaces and of the care of the statues and liturgical objects, namely the gudu, the shita, the nu-esh, the a-tu, the sanga, the susbu and the ishib.56 The fourth rank included liturgical cantors and musicians, nar and gala.57 The fourth and lower rank of the temple functionaries were the female voters, nu-gig or lukur.58

In Zuism it would be possible either to reinstitute this system in its entirety, or to establish a new enhood adapted to the context of contemporary Europe, to meet the need of a reformation and resacralisation of Europe. What is proposed by the present essay is a threefold enhood that would reflect the three forms of the supreme God of Heaven in Sumerian theology (An itself, Enlil and Enki), their associated three concentric bands of the starry sky spinning umbe the ecliptic north pole,59 and the three functional classes of traditional Indo-European societies as studies by Georges Dumézil.60 It is indeed possible to draw a parallel between the utmost trinity of Heaven of Sumerian theology, its equivalents in other Eurasian cultures (for instance the Germanic trinity: Odin, his active emanation Thor, and Frey), and the three functions studied by Dumézil.

Representation of the fixed north ecliptic pole (NEP) and the moving north celestial pole (NCP), which is centred in α Ursae Minoris (Polaris) in our epoch. Note that the two Little and Big Chariot (or Little and Big Dipper) are represented in the four phases of their rotation around it, imagining the blue ones as the current phase. The red Draco, otherwise, is not represented in its rotation.

This configuration of the northern culmen of the sky is known in many Eurasian religious cultures as representing the physical manifestation of the supreme God of Heaven, in its quiescent (NEP) and active (NCP) form. The seven stars of the Chariots are also regarded as the operative power of the God of Heaven, and they are reflected in the seven planets. In the Mesopotamian tradition the Dippers are also represented as the Bull of Heaven (Didier 2009, Vol. I, pp. 113–119).

The three orders of enhood would articulate as follows:

The lugal of An-Enlil — Associated with the inner band of the sky closer to the ecliptic north pole in Draco, the “Path of Enlil”, he would represent the transcendently active power of Heaven. That is to say, he would represent both the fixed, “transcendental”, ecliptic north pole in Draco (NEP in the image), thus An in potentiality, and the moving, “active”, celestial north pole (NCP), that is to say Enlil, the Logos, both Ratio and Oratio.61 In many Eurasian traditions, indeed, the sacerdotal class, which has the leading function in society, is associated with the power of the Dragon.62

Le Dragon ou ses hypostases sont détenteurs d’un savoir sacré, d’un savoir surnaturel, d’un don de prophétie ou de talents de magiciens. Ce sont autant de qualités qui relèvent de la première fonction. Y aurait-il donc un rapport entre le Dragon et les prêtres? Aussi étonnant que cela puisse paraître, c’est le cas. (Papillon 2005, p. 50)

The Zuist lugal would be the highest sacerdotal rank like the Vedic brāhmaṇa associated with Varuna or the jarl of the Norse Rigsthula, associated with Odin—divine equivalents of An. He would embody divine sovereignty, intimate knowledge of Heaven, and judicial power.63 His role would be to “architect”, to create and arrange ideas, tools of knowledge, to devise how to bring the laws of Heaven down to Earth. He would be the supreme leader of the Zuist Church, embodiment of the entire religious network. Otherwise, the Zuist Church might be organised in a synodal rather than monocratic structure, with many lugal, one for each nation.

The Zuist lugal would represent, at the same time, military qualities like the ancient Sumerian lugal, thus reconciling the Eurasian military function (the Vedic kṣatriya associated with Mitra or the Norse karl associated with Thor, the “Thunder”—divine equivalents of Enlil)64 with the sacerdotal one. However, his military function would be normally limited to the ideal plane. His attire would be of the colours associated with the inner sky in the Mesopotamian tradition: Luludanitu, that is to say the ensemble of red, white and black, representing the “threefoldness withheld in potence in the transcendent supreme God”.65

The en(s) of An-Inanna — They would be many, assigned to different territorial jurisdictions, and would be associated with the middle band of the sky, the “Path of An” which has its starting point in Venus, which is Inanna 𒈹, the “Lady of Heaven”.66 They would represent the twoth function of Indo-European trifunctionalism, the military one, fully put into practice; the descent of the divine power of Heaven into matter. From this vision comes the importance of the female component, Inanna, representing matter which provides the foundation for the establishment of the heavenly laws; the ens of An-Inanna might have an actual female counterpart, a wife, the “nin of An-Inanna”. Their power would thus be executive,67 their role being to “engineer”, to actualise the laws uttered by the lugal in given different contexts and to act as vicars of the lugal in different contexts. Their attire would be blue, the colour associated with the middle sky and with Inanna.68

The en of An-Enki — They would be associated with the outer band of the sky farther from the ecliptic north pole in Draco, the “Path of Enki”.69 Enki 𒂗𒆠 means the “Master of the Earth”,70 and his ens would act as those who deals directly with the local affairs of the Zuist Church. They would be the leaders of local Zuist communities, elected by them, and would represent their community in front of the higher ranks of the ecclesiastical hierarchy. They would represent the productive class of craftsmen, herders and farmers of Indo-European trifunctionalism, the Vedic vaiśya or the Norse thræll associated with Ingfrey, the “Lord of Generation/Production”—divine equivalent of Enki.71 Their attire would be green, the colour associated with the outer sky in the Mesopotamian tradition.72

Left to right: The en of An-Enki clad in green; the en of An-Inanna clad in blue; and the lugal of An-Enlil, clad in white with red and black elements.

Ansbrandt of Reykjavík, July 2018

The article is also availabe in PDF and on Academia

CC BY-SA 3.0, except for Dragoš Kalajić’s and Amer Fatuhi’s artworks


1. Dugin (2016b).

2. Dugin (2012), p. 13: “[…] This is not dogma, nor a complete system, nor a finished project. This is an invitation to political creativity, a statement of intuitions and conjectures, an analysis of new conditions, and an attempt to reconsider the past. The Fourth Political Theory is not the work of a single author, but is rather a trend comprising a wide spectrum of ideas, researches, analyses, prognoses, and projects. Anyone thinking in this vein can contribute his own ideas. As such, more and more intellectuals, philosophers, historians, scientists, scholars, and thinkers will respond to this call”.

3. Dugin (2017).

4. Ansbrandt (2018b), p. 1.

5. Dugin (2016a).

6. Rothenmann (2017), p. 11.

7. Nad (2014).

8. Dugin (2012), p. 31.

9. Dugin (2012), pp. 35 & 43.

10. Rothenmann (2017), p. 110; Dugin (2012), p. 54.

11. Ansbrandt (2018a).

12. Dugin (2012), pp. 189–190.

13. About the original meaning of “orthodoxy”, and orthotes (ὀρθότης), as the “right” way of doing things, that is to say “rightly” in alignment with the God of Heaven (Dyeus, An), see: Rothenmann (2017), p. 38 ff about the “ar root”; pp. 81–93 about the original, pristine conception of God/Heaven.

14. Rothenmann (2017), p. 111.

15. Rothenmann (2017), p. 111.

16. Rothenmann (2017), p. 45.

17. Rothenmann (2017), p. 117; Dugin (2012), p. 29.

18. Dugin (2012), p. 70.

19. Rothenmann (2017), p. 118.

20. Dugin (2012), p. 210.

21. Didier (2009), vol. I, p. ix.

22. Didier (2009), vol. III, p. 257 ff.

23. Didier (2009), vol. III, p. 264.

24. Didier (2009), vol. III, p. 264.

25. Didier (2009), vol. III, pp. 260–263.

26. Didier (2009), vol. III, p. 268.

27. Didier (2009), vol. III, p. 266.

28. Kramer (1956), pp. 46–47.

29. Murdock (2014), passim.

30. Kramer (1956), p. 47.

31. Hillar (2012), p. 274.

32. Ansbrandt (2018b), p. 6, note 33; Rothenmann (2017), p. 63: Hundun is “the inchoate state of things and yet a receptacle for any possibility”.

33. Hillar (2012), p. 274.

34. Kramer (1956), p. 47.

35. Rothenmann (2017), p. 38 ff.

36. Rothenmann (2017), pp. 43 ff & 59 ff.

37. Rothenmann (2017), p. 51.

38. Rothenmann (2017), p. 34.

39. Rothenmann (2017), pp. 18 ff & 26 ff.

40. Rothenmann (2017), pp. 53 ff & 66 ff.

41. Rothenmann (2017), p. 23 ff.

42. Rothenmann (2017), p. 21.

43. Rothenmann (2017), pp. 24–25.

44. Rothenmann (2017), p. 25.

45. Rothenmann (2017), p. 93.

46. “Sitchinianism” comes from the name of the most known proponent of the misleading theory, the Azerbaijani economist Zecharia Sitchin.

47. Murdock (2014), passim.

48. The quote is entirely from Walker, Barbara G. (2013). The Woman’s Dictionary of Symbols and Sacred Objects. Harper Collins. p. 13.

49. White (1959), pp. 326–327.

50. White (1959), pp. 326–327.

51. “History of Banking”. Encyclopædia Britannica, 14th ed., vol. 3. 1929. p. 67.

52. Kaminska (2016), passim.

53. Kaminska (2016), passim.

54. Crawford (2013), p. 283.

55. Crawford (2013), p. 248.

56. Crawford (2013), pp. 262–263.

57. Crawford (2013), pp. 264–265.

58. Crawford (2013), p. 266.

59. Ansbrandt (2018b), pp. 1–5.

60. The theory of a tripartite ideology among the early Indo-Europeans, which was established in all the civilisations they founded, was first put forward by Georges Dumézil in Flamen-Brahman (1929) and Mitra-Varuna (1940), and later formalised in Jupiter, Mars, Quirinus (1941–1948) and L’Idéologie tripartite des Indo-Européens (1958).

61. Ansbrandt (2018b), pp. 1–5. Note the important distinction between “ecliptic north pole” and “celestial north pole”. Also see page 5 of the present essay for the association of the Lil with the Logos and its equivalents in other Eurasian cultures.

62. Papillon (2005), p. 50.

63. Rothenmann (2017), pp. 126–127.

64. Rothenmann (2017), pp. 126–127.

65. Ansbrandt (2018b), p. 4.

66. Ansbrandt (2018b), pp. 4–5.

67. Rothenmann (2017), pp. 126–127.

68. Ansbrandt (2018b), p. 4.

69. Ansbrandt (2018b), pp. 4–5.

70. Ansbrandt (2018b), p. 3.

71. Rothenmann (2017), p. 127.

72. Ansbrandt (2018b), p. 4.


Newsletter, 10 June 2018: 1. The project of the first Zuist temple in Reykjavík; 2. Zuist tax system and charity; 3. Sterile polemics in internet groups

—1. Project for the Ekur of Enlil in Reykjavík to meet the strong growth of Zuism in Iceland

On 29 May 2018 the Zuist Church of Iceland published on their main website the project for the first Zuist temple to be built in Reykjavík. It will be the Ekur of Enlil, literally the “Mount-Court of Enlil” or “Temple-Mount of Enlil”, the place where Heaven meets the Earth. On the same day, the community submitted to the city council the request for the allotment of a plot of land on which the temple will be built.1 Back in January 2018, the Zuists also asked the allotment of a plot of land for the burial of their dead.2

Zuism, that is Sumerian-Mesopotamian Neopaganism, is a scientific religion, based upon the harmonisation of earthly activities with the Heaven (An) and its laws (the gods).3 It is the most ancient religion of humanity, from which most of the modern world religions derive. The Zuist Church of Iceland has gathered around two thousand members in a few years, little less than 1% of the population of Iceland, so that the need for a location where to hold cultual activities and community rites, including baptisms and weddings, has become urgent.4 Between 2013 and 2017, 25 couples were married in the Zuist Church.5

The Mount-Court of Enlil will be structured on three levels: a ground floor and a first floor with spaces for the community, and the temple proper, with the shrine to the deity, on the third level. The temple will host, among other rites, the “beer and prayer” ceremony, which will entail hymns to the god Ninkasi accompanied by ritual drinking of beer.6 Another occasion for celebrations will be Christmas (or, better, Natal), that is to say winter solstice, the Death and resurrection of the shepherd-god Dumuzi/Tammuz, lover of Inanna, who dies in summer and resurrects in winter witnessing that chthonic forces may be defeated. Traditionally, Dumuzi was represented by the tree, which is asleep during winter and reawakens after the solstice demonstrating the victory of life over death. Natal is also the victory of Marduk, the victory of Zeus over Cronus among the Greeks, the Saturnalia and Mithraism among the Romans.7

—2. Zuist tax system and charity

Zuism is the only religion to allow its adherents to decide how to use the taxes which, according to Icelandic law, all Icelanders have to yield to the religious organisation they choose to belong to, or to the state if they do not choose any organisation or choose unregistered organisations. The Zuist principle is implied in the concept of amagi or amargi (literally “return to the mother”), which is itself inscribed in the Sumerian tax system called bala, which among other things acknowledges the risk posed to economies by an unlimited accumulation of debt, so that the latter has to be periodically cancelled.8 Starting in 2018, Zuist members in Iceland will be able to opt to devolve their taxes to the “Ziggurat fund” (Zigguratsjóð), created to finance the works for the temple.9

In 2017, the Zuist Church devolved funds to a number of social welfare organisations: 1.1 million Icelandic crowns were donated to the Circle Children’s Hospital (Barnaspítala Hringsins), 1 million to the Women’s Shelter (Kvennaathvarfsins), and 300 thousand Icelandic crowns to the emergency fund of the UNICEF.10 With the help of its members, according to the leader Ágúst Arnar Ágústsson, the Zuist Church may become a long-term sponsor of such organisations.11

—3. Sterile polemics in internet groups

Recently, the representatives of some Anglo-American internet groups promoting Sumerian-Mesopotamian and Semitic-Canaanite religions have been engaged in spreading misleading informations about Zuism and attacks on Zuists.

The basic mistake they make is to fully identify Zuism with the Zuist Church of Iceland and some of its members (among about 2000 registered members). Zuism, an officially recognised religion under Icelandic law, is a generic term synonymous of Sumerian-Mesopotamian Neopaganism; it is an international religious movement represented by many different people who believe in Sumerian-Mesopotamian religion. It has not to be confused with any institutional formation and with the past history of some members of the Zuist Church.

Zuist websites will not attack these groups, as Zuists are not interested in sterile polemics. Zuism is not antagonistic towards these groups, which include “Garden of Eden”, “Gateways to Babylon”, “Gnostic Temple of Inanna”, “House of Inanna”, “Purified with Cedar”, “Tablet of Destiny”, “Temple of Inanna”, “Temple of Inanna and Dumuzid”, and that which appears to be the largest one, called “Temple of Sumer”, from which the polemic started. Instead, Zuists are interested in harmonious cooperation, especially with spiritually mature and academically prepared people.

Uligang Ansbrandt, the curator of this website ( is an independent Zuist, is not from Iceland, and does not know in person neither the Icelandic leaders of the Zuist Church nor the members of the aforementioned internet groups. His interest is just to publish well-written and academically sourced articles about the Zuist/Sumerian-Mesopotamian Neopagan movement through this website.12


1. Zuism sækir um lóð í Reykjavík., 29 May 2018; Embættisafgreiðslur skrifstofu borgarstjórnar 31. maí 2018 – R18040226. Fundargerðarsíða, Reykjavíkurborg.

2. Fundargerð framkvæmdastjórnar KGRP., 16 January 2018.

3. Ansbrandt, Uligang. Zuist theology – The trinity of An, the seven deities, the word and the measures., April 2018.

4. Zuism sækir um lóð í Reykjavík., 29 May 2018; Populations by religious and life stance organizations 1998–2018. Statistics Iceland.

5. 148. löggjafarþing 2017–2018, Þingskjal 349 — 147, mál. Svar dómsmálaráðherra við fyrirspurn frá Helga Hrafni Gunnarssyni um fjölda hjónavígslna. Skrifstofa Alþingis.

6. Zuism sækir um lóð í Reykjavík., 29 May 2018; Bjór og Bæn., 9 February 2018.

7. Zúistar og jólin., 25 December 2017.

8. Amargi (Endurgreiðsla Sóknargjalda).

9. Zuism sækir um lóð í Reykjavík., 29 May 2018.

10. Zuism styrkir Kvennaathvarfið um eina milljón króna., 8 December 2017.

11. Yfirlýsing frá Ágústi Arnari Ágústsssyni, forstöðumanni trúfélagsins Zuism., 24 October 2017.

12. About Uligang Ansbrandt., 1 January 2018.

Zuist theology – The trinity of An, the seven deities, the word and the measures

Helical model of the Solar System, put forward by DjSadhu and reviewed by the astrophysicist Rhys Taylor. The image is taken from a set made by DjSadhu.


An or Dingir1 𒀭 (Akkadian: Anu or Anum, or Ilu,2 West Semitic: El), literally meaning “Heaven” or “Sky”, is the supreme God of the universe, the supreme Being, the utmost power3 and “prime mover” of creation, and therefore the utmost ancestor of all beings.4 It is “the one who contains the entire universe”.5 He is the father of all star-gods and contains them all. His most visible manifestation from the Earth’s perspective is the north ecliptic pole winded by the constellation Draco (the Dragon, symbol of primordial protean undeterminacy and therefore infinite potentiality).6

Together with Enlil 𒀭𒂗𒆤 (“Wind Lord”; also Nunamnir,7 in Akkadian also simply Bel, “Lord”8) and Enki 𒀭𒂗𒆠 (“Squared Earth Lord”; Akkadian: Ea), An forms a trinity, a threefold conception of the supreme God. In this trinity, An in itself represents the supreme in its state of “transcendental obscurity”,9 while Enlil is its “transcendent” aspect, and Enki is its “immanent” aspect.10 In our theology, “transcendental” may mean, in the wake of the meanings that this term has acquired through German idealism, something that is both transcendent and immanent, that is transcendently active as the energy begetting any immanent being. In this sense, An manifests as the dynamism of Enlil and Enki. They are An’s twofold face.

According to the eminent scholar Simo Parpola, at least in Assyrian theology it is rather Ashur 𒀭𒀸𒋩 or Anshar 𒀭𒊹 (which may mean “Whole Heaven”, “God as Many”, “Flowing One” or “One Flash”) to be the wholly transcendent God, while Anu is the first stage of its process of manifestation in the flesh.11 According to the theology of the Enuma Elish, Ashur, the infinite Heaven, “reflects” itself as Anu in the material universe.12

Scene from an Assyrian cylinder seal representing Enlil and Enki (gods of kingship, as the “mirrored king”) surrounding the tree of life, which has the guise of a pomegranate tree and is the structuration of the supreme God in the flesh, and also in the “perfected man” as the “image of God” (Parpola 1993, pp. 167–168). The winged disk hovering over it is An, or Ashur, the transcendental aspect of God (Parpola 1993, pp. 184–185). The two gods hold a rope which symbolises the keeping of the balance between Heaven and Earth, and the link between them (Gabrieli 2017, p. 77), or the stream of energy, with lightning ends, emanated by the supreme God, source of all wisdom (Parpola 1993, p. 185, n. 93). The winged disk and the rope also represent the north pole in Draco (Didier 2009, Vol. I, p. 259). The eagle-faced and winged figures are the men of wisdom (𒍪 zu), the apkallu or ummanu (court scholars) (Parpola 1993, p. 167, n. 31), in the act of sprinkling holy water (Parpola 1993, p. 165, n. 24). Like eagles (Parpola 1993, p. 198, n. 143), they are able to gaze directly at the Sun of God.

As the transcendently active aspect of An, Enlil is identified with the north celestial pole, that is to say the culmen of the Earth’s axis of rotation, and the culmen of the sky from the Earth’s perspective, which moves in circle through the constellations around the north ecliptic pole. As the transcendently active aspect of An, Enlil is also identified as pure breath or spirit, lil13 𒆤 being the Sumerian concept for the pneuma, the substance of all things, especially in its shifting and moving state prior to coalesce into any shape.14 Lil, and thus Enlil, is also comparable to the Greek concept (later adopted by the Christians) of the logos, the “word” and “order” (also discussed in the next chapter as utu).15

Enki is the supreme power manifest in the Earth, in earthly beings, and in mankind as well through the struggle to emulate Heaven by learning its craft. He rises out of the AbzuNammu 𒀊𒍪/𒇉 (the primordial “Abysmal Matrix”, his mother,16 discussed in the next chapter), mastering its waters to establish the civil world,17 the “squared” Earth (𒆠 Ki). He therefore represents the incarnation of the supreme God in matter (the concrete action of the north pole[s] in shaping matter), and in mankind’s ancestors, founders of blood kinships, of lineages of power-craft. He is associated with semen (and the phallus), the life-giving male power coming from the “channelled” waters of the Abzu.18

In Zuist theology, therefore, Earth is necessary for the manifestation of Heaven. The idea of “cosmos”, of ordered world, is indeed expressed by the compound Anki 𒀭𒆠, “Heaven–Earth”.19 This is also highlighted in mythologising, by the fact that An’s vehicle (of manifestation) is Damkianna, the “Lady of Earth and Heaven”, another name of Ninhursag 𒀭𒊩𒌆𒉺𒂅 (the “Lady of Mountains and Valleys”), who is identified as the constellation closest to the north pole, the Little Dipper (or Small Chariot, or Little Bear), in Sumerian called, the “Chariot of Heaven”.20

The three aspects of Heaven are also identified with three concentric rings of the physically visible sky from the Earth’s perspective, and with the star-gods (constellations) moving within these rings, drawing the scheme of time (the calendar).21 The three aspects of Heaven, and their three skies, are also associated to a colour symbolism. The inner sky of An as Enlil is conceived as red, white and black,22 representing the threefoldness withheld in potence in the transcendent supreme God. These three colours are together known as luludanitu. The middle sky is lapislazuli-blue, the colour of Inanna, and the outer sky of An as Enki is jasper-green.23

Mapping of the three sky bands associated with the three faces of the supreme God. The names just below the Roman numbers are the months, according to the nomenclature of Nippur (acknowledgedly the best Mesopotamian calendar); the mul are the associated “stars”.

① The inner or northern sky, nearer to the north pole, is the “Path of Enlil”, with Enlil himself identified as MULApin (“STARPlough”, that is Triangulum in modern astronomy, whence the god’s association with the invention of agricultural tools24) and his female consort Ninlil 𒀭𒊩𒌆𒆤 (“Wind Lady”; in Akkadian also simply Belit, “Lady”25) as MULMar.gid.da (“STARChariot”, that is the Big Chariot or Big Dipper in the Great Bear);26

② The outer or southern sky, farther from the north pole, is the “Path of Enki”, with Enki himself identified as MULIku (“STARField”, that is the Square of Pegasus);27

③ The middle sky, in-between the two paths of Enlil and Enki, is the “Path of An” itself, with its starting point in MULDili.bat (which may mean “STARForbearing”28, but scholarly sources also suggest “STARDaisy”29), which is Venus–Inanna (or better spelled Ninana, the form without the initial N being an Akkadian alteration of the Sumerian name) of the seven planetary gods (discussed later in our essay).30

It is worthwhile to heed, given the recent resurgence in Iceland and Europe (and among European-ilk people in America) of Germanic Heathenism, that Germanic theology (and the Indo-European tradition in general), has an equivalent vision of the triune supreme God, conceptualised as Odin (the “Force”, “Spirit”, or “Sight”) in its transcendental aspect, Thor (the “Thunder”) in its ordering activity, and Ing-Frey (the “Lord of Begetting”) in its generativity as the male spermatic power. Furthermore, as already explained, An (and its two faces, especially Enlil) is identified as the north ecliptic and (as Enlil) celestial pole, the heart of the skies and source of all gods and beings, like Varuna and Indra in Vedic Sanskrit culture, and the Chinese supreme God (口 Dīng, 帝 or 天 Tiān), amongst other theological traditions.31

Zuist cosmology of the forces of Earth, showing the ecliptic axle associated with An, centred in the constellation Draco, and the Earth’s axis of rotation, centred in the precessional celestial pole, currently α of the Little Bear or Small Dipper, drawing the sky band of Enlil. The two spinning Chariot constellations draw a swastika in the four phases of time, a symbol associated with the polar supreme God in many cultures (Didier 2009, Vol. I, p. 259).


In Zuist theology, the supreme God of Heaven is also the power of the performative word (utu 𒌓, which is also the name of the Sun in Sumerian). The word-power of An, Anutu (also rendered “Anship”), is the “foundation of the cosmos, around which the hierarchy of all divine powers unfolds”. It is the creative word which begets things and events, not necessarily ex nihilo, but in an ordering process which configures reality,32 making order out of still undeterminacy (Abzu–Nammu, the “Abyss” of the primordial “Matrix” or “Noise”,33 called Tiamat 𒀭𒋾𒊩𒆳 or Tamtum 𒀭𒌓𒌈 in the Akkadian tradition).

The word-power of An, reflecting its twofold face, may also take the form of a destructive power or a preservative power, reabsorbing or maintaining creation, respectively  the Enlilutu (“Enlilship”, the word-power of Enlil) and the Enkiutu or Eautu (“Enkiship” or “Eaship”). The word-power of Enki is particularly associated with magic/witchcraft and technique in tangible reality, that is to say the power to alter the forces at play in an already given configuration of reality.34

It is worthwhile to stress that Enlil is not conceived as a malevolent force, but as the necessary destructivity which prepares the way for a new beginning, the force to make plans for it, as well as a punisher of evil-doers.35 Enki is instead the resourceful, skilful, hardy and wise force which puts into practice the ideas of Enlil.36


The term Anunnaki literally means the “offspring of Heaven–Earth”, and in Sumerian religion it was a general term comprising all the gods.37 A later, Babylonian term for the gods was Igigi. In the Babylonian sources the two categories are often distinguished, with the former being the netherworld (earthly) gods and the latter the upperworld (heavenly) gods, or viceversa.38

The most important amongst the Anunnaki are the seven gods of the stars nearest to the earth: Marduk 𒀭𒀫𒌓 (“Sun Calf”; Jupiter, the white deity of air and authority, lieutenant of Enlil), Ninurta 𒀭𒊩𒌆𒅁 (“Barley Lord”; Saturn, the black deity of war and hunting), Nergal 𒀭𒄊𒀕𒃲 (“Underworld Lord”; Mars, the red deity of woe and dearth), Inanna 𒀭𒈹 (“Lady of Heaven”; Venus, the blue deity of love and war), Nabu 𒀭𒀝 (“Announcer” or “Glowing”; Mercury, the orange deity of wisdom and writing), Nanna 𒀭𒋀𒆠 (the Moon, the green deity of fertility and fruitfulness) and Utu 𒀭𒌓 (the Sun, the yellow deity of justice).39 In a sheen description, the seven Anunnaki “represent the seven nether spheres, [are the] guardians of the seven gates through which the sun [i.e. word] of God passes into the netherworld”,40 perfusing light and order into the netherworld’s darkness. The star-gods are also poetically described as the “heavenly writing”, the writing of An.41 In other words, they influence, energetically shape, the life of beings on Earth. They are stages in the “tree of life”, the process of God’s manifestation in the flesh, structuring all beings, as reconstructed by Parpola based on Assyrian sources.42 The seven planets are also the near-Earth reflection of the seven stars of the Chariot constellations which spin around the north celestial pole, regarded as the active power of the utmost God of Heaven in the traditions of Eurasia. The seven-day week, with each day associated with a star-god, is a heritage going back to Mesopotamian religion.

Cylinder seal representing the scene of the Epic of Gilgamesh in which the hero and his companion Enkidu kill the monster Humbaba while entering the Cedars’ Forest. Over the figures there are seven spheres, likely the seven planets, but also the seven stars of the Chariot constellations.43 The larger eighth star is unmistakeably an emphasised Ishtar, Utu or rather the ecliptic north pole itself, thus An.

Utu–Sun is the “judge of the Anunnaki”, while Marduk–Jupiter is the “commander of the Anunnaki”. The “king” (i.e. begetter) of them all is Enlil, the transcendently active face of An.44 The eldest amongst them is, however, Nanna–Moon, better spelled Nannar and in Sumerian also called Enzu or Zuen 𒂗𒍪 (“Lord of Wisdom”), pronounced as Suen and later Sin in Akkadian. Regarded as gentle and reliable,45 Enzu is, in some Akkadian esoteric literature, the symbol of the pleroma (the sum of the powers of all the gods),46 thus of An,47 and is the third stage in the Assyrian “tree of life”.48 The crescent of Enzu, for these reasons, often surmounted Mesopotamian temples’ cusps.49

Inanna–Venus (goddess of love and war) and Nabu–Mercury (god of healing, literacy and communication, as it moves swiftly through the sky) are conceived as both male and female, though the former is predominantly female and the latter is predominantly male. They are female as the morning star in the east and male as the evening star in the west.50 Ninurta–Saturn, moving slowly through the sky, is the god of stability, but also war and hunt, called MULGenna (“STARLaw and Justice”) as an astral body and as a representative of the Sun during the night.51 Nergal–Mars is the god of plague, war, death and of the underworld. Identified as Gibil, the fire god, he also the patron of craft and smithing. Nergal even has a connection with the constellations Square and Plough, and therefore with the supreme trinity.52


Like Enlil, Marduk is associated to the north celestial pole.53 Thus, Marduk as Jupiter may be considered as a representative of the supreme north pole among the stars closest to the Earth. A frequently-used Sumerian term for Jupiter intended as an astral body, amongst the many epithets denoting its positions in the sky and qualities, is, Nibiru, or Neberu, especially when in culmination and when associated to the north pole. Another frequent name, from Akkadian times, is, literally “STARLord of the Bright Dawn”, denoting Jupiter in the east.54

Marduk is an important figure, since in the Enuma Elish he is the slayer of Tiamat, the Akkadian name of Abzu–Nammu, the primordial unlimited matrix, symbolised by the sea.55 Marduk, being of the same ilk of An, is endowed with the power of the performative word, the Anutu, in its three possibilities: Creative, destructive and preservative.56 Tiamat has the infinite potential to generate monstrous beings, that is to say beings without limit, order and measure, and without ancestry, whom she unleashes against the ordered world. Her word-power is cacophony, senseless noise, while the power of Marduk is that of the intelligent word which governs matter making ingenious and useful things out of it.57

Marduk slays Tiamat, who threatens to destroy all gods and all boundaries dissolving again the ordered world into chaos. Marduk represents the order of the world, which may be dissolved but always re-founded. After having killed Tiamat, he uses the substance of her body to re-mould Heaven (the stars and their cyclical movements) and Earth (the rivers, seas and lands) within a web, this last being a symbol of the laws and the finitude of the re-established cosmos.58

Scene from a cylinder seal depicting Marduk who fights Tiamat, here represented as a horned dragon. Marduk holds his weapon, the abubu, the thunderbolt of discernment, discrimination, or “deluge” (Gabrieli 2017, p. 167).


Mankind’s role in creation is to cultivate the manifestation of the gods.59 Entities and behavioural phenomena are generated and kept in harmony among themselves by internal laws which in Sumerian are called me 𒈨, “measures”, “manners” and “morals”. They are the plans laid down by the gods.60 Yet, within this structure, mankind enjoys a degree of detachment from its own internal laws, and therefore a degree of free will, a gift which is necessary for mankind’s spiritual ability to co-work with the gods in creation by emulating Heaven. The gods favour those who act in conformity with the laws of morality, which means upkeeping goodness and truth, righteousness and straightforwardness, justice and freedom, mercy and kindness. Disgrace falls upon those who act evilly and falsely, unjustly and oppressively, sinfully and perversely, cruelly and pitilessly.61

The eagle represents the bright aspect of the human soul, capable of ascension to Heaven by following the gods, whereas the snake represents the dark force of descension towards the Earth. The eagle’s wings are a symbol of spiritual heightening, and its eyes a symbol of spiritual sight (wisdom), as it is traditionally considered the only animal able to gaze directly at the Sun (God), training its youth to do likewise and rejecting those who fail.62

The divine laws, when practised, become habitual and are transmitted genealogically. Progenitors who grasped these laws and established them in kinships and cultural lineages are worthy of veneration. In this way the divine reveals itself in mankind, so that “the centre itself [i.e. the supreme God] forever remains absolutely central to the human world but simultaneously infinitely transforming in the particular, to be reborn in each generation, in each human birth”.63 It is, therefore, a vision which may be described as a synthesis of principled structuralism and behaviourism.

Ansbrandt of Reykjavík, April 2018

The article is also availabe in PDF and on Academia

CC BY-SA 3.0, except for DjSadhu’s image on top


1. Gabrieli (2017), p. 99.

2. Didier (2009), Vol. I, p. 84.

3. James (1963), p. 23 ff.

4. Black & Green (1992), p. 30.

5. Parpola (1993), p. 180, n. 77.

6. Vv.Aa. (1951), pp. 300–301.

7. Didier (2009), Vol. I, p. 116.

8. Murdock (2014), passim. Also see the entry “Enlil” of the Encyclopaedia Britannica (2018).

9. James (1963), p. 140.

10. Saggs (1987), p. 191.

11. Parpola (1993), passim, and pp. 206–207 for the etymology.

12. Ibid., p. 191, n. 113.

13. Kramer (1956), p. 47.

14. The lil is analogous to the Chinese concept of 氣  and 理 .

15. Murdock (2014), passim.

16. Black & Green (1992), p. 134.

17. Ibid., p. 75.

18. Horry (2016), passim.

19. Kramer (1956), pp. 46–47. Anki is equivalent to the Chinese concept of 天地 Tiāndì (“Heaven–Earth”), it itself meaning the “cosmos”, Heaven’s manifestation.

20. Rogers (1998), p. 18.

21. Didier (2009), Vol. I, p. 95.

22. Ataç (2018), p. 78.

23. Ibid., p. 78; Wright (2002), pp. 34–35.

24. Kramer (1956), p. 52.

25. Entry “Ninlil” of the Encyclopaedia Britannica (2018).

26. Rogers (1998), p. 18.

27. Ibid., p. 21.

28. “Enduring Star” is the accepted meaning of the Semitic name of Inanna, that is Ishtar (Hellenised: Astarte).

29. Kasak & Veede (2001), p. 23.

30. Rogers (1998), p. 17.

31. Didier (2009), passim, but for the direct comparison see Vol. III, pp. 265–266; Vol. II, p. 228.

32. Gabrieli (2017), p. 128.

33. Abzu 𒀊𒍪 literally means “Before Knowledge” or “Watery Knowledge”, “Dissolved Knowledge”, and was also named Engur 𒇉. Nammu, also better rendered as Mummu, is the primordial “Mother”, is written with the same grapheme as that for Engur, and is the personified Abzu. See Black & Green (1992), p. 134. Mummu has also been rendered as “Matrix”, “Chaos”, “Noise”, “Confusion”, “Scream” amongst other translations. It is the primordial, unshaped potentiality. See Gabrieli (2017), p. 88 ff. It is analogous to the Chinese concept of 混沌 Hùndùn.

34. Ibid., p. 129. Also see Stephens (2013), Stone (2016) and Horry (2016).

35. Kramer (1956), pp. 52–53.

36. Ibid., pp. 55.

37. Murdock (2014), passim.

38. Gabrieli (2017), p. 119, n. 617; Bertman (2005), p. 119.

39. Kasak & Veede (2001), passim. For the colour associations see James & Van der Sluijs (2008), passim.

40. Murdock (2014), passim.

41. Kasak & Veede (2001), p. 14.

42. Parpola (1993), passim.

43. Didier (2009), Vol. I, p. 113.

44. Murdock (2014), passim.

45. Kasak & Veede (2001), pp. 17–18.

46. Parpola (1993), p. 185, n. 93.

47. Ibid., pp. 176, 184, nn. 66, 89.

48. Ibid., p. 179.

49. James & Van der Sluijs (2008), p. 69.

50. Kasak & Veede (2001), pp. 22, 24.

51. Ibid., p. 26.

52. Ibid., pp. 27–28.

53. Didier (2009), Vol. I, p. 118.

54. Ibid., Vol. I, p. 88; Kasak & Veede (2001), p. 21.

55. Gabrieli (2017), p. 89.

56. Ibid., p. 130.

57. Ibid., pp. 103, 159.

58. Ibid., p. 139.

59. Kramer (1956), p. 56.

60. Ibid., p. 50. The concept of me corresponds to the Chinese concept of 禮 .

61. Ibid., p. 56.

62. Parpola (1993), pp. 197–198, n. 143.

63. Didier (2009), Vol. III, p. 268. The author speaks of the humanisation of the divine in the Axial Age.