In this paper, we will try to identify the original meaning of the Sumerian cultural category ME, which is known from cuneiform texts of the third and second millennia BC and is still a big problem for both Sumerologists and specialists in the field of historical psychology.

According to the "non-identity hypothesis" that has existed since the 70s, "the psychology of ancient man should be considered as qualitatively different from the psychology of modern man, so that his worldview cannot be described in our categories" (1). The qualitative difference in psychology in history is associated with the different socio-economic way of life that prevailed in ancient times. different historical epochs. For a person of the late IV-early VI millennium BC, the main features of the way of life were a sedentary lifestyle within the boundaries of the sacred territory, an agricultural and pastoral economy, early state institutions of power (elders of the territorial community, chiefdom-kingdom, courts, forced public works, slavery), a polytheistic religion, which in Mesopotamia was closely associated with astrolatry. The main forms of mastering the world for a person of that time were material-practical (direct impact on the natural world) and spiritual - practical (intuitive-figurative speculations that reflect and express the process of influencing the natural world) [2]. This means that the main problem of consciousness at that time was the problem of perception and reproduction of impressions of the external world. Since the rational-logical principle did not yet manifest itself as an independent component of consciousness in this period, it is necessary to speak about such qualities of the consciousness of the ancients as visual-auditory sensualism, empirical perception, etc.-

1. Bolshakov A. O. Chelovek i ego dvoynik v egiptskom mirovozrenii Stary tsardva [The man and his double in the Egyptian worldview of the Old Kingdom].

2. Kagan M. S. Filosofiya kul'tury [Philosophy of culture]. St. Petersburg, 1996, p. 55.

page 150

clarity and intuitiveness. Fragments of information received through the visual and auditory channels correlated with previous collective experience, and after processing they acquired ritual-aesthetic and verbal code forms. That is why it is necessary to draw another distinction and separate the worldview and attitude.

By worldview, we will understand the logical postulation of conclusions about a phenomenon, which ends with the final definition of this phenomenon. A worldview is possible if a logical and rhetorical apparatus is developed, which allows making conclusions and generalizations on the subject. Such an apparatus appears only at the turn of the "axial time" in the works of thinkers in India, China, and Greece. Perception of the world is a set of integral sensations from a phenomenon, their recoding in speech and transmission in metaphorical form through complex images. Such activity of consciousness does not require generalizations and conclusions and can relate to the work of artistic consciousness (which arises from syncretic mytho-ritual constructions of primitive and early state antiquity). So, our historical and cultural task in approaching the problem of ME is to study the non-identical worldview that emerged in the socio-economic conditions of the early antiquity period. Let's call it the plan of external existence of a cultural category. However, there is also an internal existence, namely, the chronotope of its existence, which existed not for modern historians and cultural scientists, but for the ancient inhabitants of Mesopotamia themselves. This is the chronotope of a calendar ritual, the context of which is necessary for understanding the existence of a category in ancient culture.

The study of categories of perception of the world has its own short history, entirely connected with the success of Ancient Eastern and classical studies in the XX century. In his 1915 work "On the worldview of Aeschylus", A. F. Losev formulated the difference between the worldview and the worldview: "I distinguish between the worldview (or worldview) and the worldview... This is the difference in the degree and quality of intuitive moments in the perception of the environment. Perception of the world, like any sensation, is primarily intuitive. Just as I perceive this blue color without requiring proof that it is exactly blue, so the artist perceives the world as such and such a collection of objects, as such and such a wholeness, without requiring or giving any other than intuitive evidence that the world is exactly wholeness and that such a wholeness is the same."that's integrity. Here we do not prove, but indicate: we look and see, this is the whole proof. The world, as a subject of artistic perception, can be very complex, but the feeling of it, as a sensation, can be very simple.

But human and world life can be contrasted not only with the intuitive ability of insight, which merges our Ego and cognizable objects, i.e., the ability to synthesize primarily. It is possible to approach cognition with an instrument of a rational, analyzing, deductive, mediated nature... And this is the worldview.

If we were studying Aeschylus ' worldview, we would ... .. we would collect some of his maxims, see how they are performed by the people he portrays, summarize all this and get the desired value. But it is another matter to study the artist's worldview. The maxims here should be left just for the end; they are the fruit of generalization from those phenomena that are already given as an object of perception of the world. Therefore, it is necessary to start with the most ordinary and elementary and look at what the artist felt as a whole " (3). Losev very shrewdly defined the boundary of the worldview as a vision of integrity at the locus, and this definition is perfectly consistent with the condition of anthropolocal unity, i.e., the unity of the collective and the area on which the life of settled farmers is based early antiquity. If the collective always lives within certain boundaries, this means that its vision of the whole, without which full consciousness is impossible, will be based on the values of this place, and each time it will be the values of our space-

3. Losev A. F. Forma - stil ' - vyrazhenie [Form-style-expression], Moscow, 1995, pp. 782-784.

page 151

time that is not related to the values and conditions of the rest of the world. In addition, Losev studies the perception of the world precisely on the basis of a literary text, since in the world of myths and tragedies it manifests itself in the most complete form, without being affected by the reflections of rational consciousness (4).

In the mid-1940s, the work of G. Frankfort, G. A. Frankfort, J. Wilson and T. Jacobsen "On the threshold of Philosophy" appeared, in which it is proposed to consider the categories of worldview as the result of the work of speculative (i.e., intuitive-visionary) thought that arises in the process of human material activity: "Speculative thought goes beyond experience but only because it tries to explain, unify, and order experience" (5). According to the authors of the work, the main goal of speculative (otherwise - mythopoetic) thought was to understand the fusion of man and nature, the state and nature. The relations between the parts of this synthesis are understood as relations between an unambiguous " I "and a meaningful" You " that goes beyond any conceptual definition. Due to the ambiguity and uncertainty of the "You", ancient man had to include emotional and volitional factors in his reflections, and therefore the conclusions to which he came were not critical judgments, but complex images: "There is no doubt that mythopoetic thought is fully aware of the unity of each phenomenon conceived in ... the multiplicity of images serves to properly understand the complexity of the phenomenon" (6).

In the 60s and 70s, Egyptology began to study social categories, which, without a doubt, are also cultural categories. Special mention should be made of the works of Yu.Ya. Perepelkin on the category of property in the Old Tsardom era and O. D. Berlev on the category of "royal hemus" of the Middle Tsardom era. Both researchers paid great attention to the preliminary analysis of the semiotic space of the category and the development of the category in the history of ancient Egyptian society. Their work was based on the synthesis of an in-depth philological and linguistic approach and a broad historical and cultural approach, and the focus was always on the social relations of the era under consideration, which formed this category [7].

In the early 90's, the book by I. M. Dyakonov "Archaic Myths of the East and West" appeared, in which the formation of categories of worldview is explained from a psychophysiological perspective. Diakonov relies on the law of the "Sherrington funnel", which states that the cerebral cortex received more signals than the person managed to process, so a significant part of the information remained unintelligible and was processed into tropes (metaphorical figures), with the help of which a person tried to form knowledge about the external world [8]. After three years of studying the external world, the person was able to in the book "Ways of History", this position is formulated as follows: "It should not be... to exaggerate the power of primitive man's motivation to comprehend the world around him: with the exception of certain special circumstances, the practical nature of reactions to external impulses prevailed, and the interpretation of the phenomenon was necessary only within the limits of the needs of physical needs (...) But even in everyday life, it was necessary to have a practical understanding of the world and society, and understanding without generalization is impossible. Meanwhile, the process of language development continued

4. In the future, Losev will develop a rigorous method for studying the categories of ancient culture, the purpose of which will be a stage-historical analysis of the transition of the category of worldview to the worldview and dialectical category in the aspect of logical and aesthetic expressiveness ("History of Ancient Aesthetics"). However, the most important thing for us - the study of the properties of the actual world - perception category-is considered by him only in the socio-historical relation (for us, this is an aspect of the external existence of the category).

5. On the threshold of philosophy, Moscow, 1984, p. 24.

6. Ibid., pp. 38-39, 44.

7. Perepelkin Yu. Ya. Private property in the representation of the Egyptians of the Old Kingdom. L., 1966; Berlev OD. Labor population of Egypt in the era of the Middle Kingdom, Moscow, 1972.

8. Dyakonov I. M. Archaic myths of the East and West, Moscow, 1991.

page 152

slowly; not only in humans of the first and second phases, but also in the conditions of the beginning of the third (early antiquity), the human language did not develop words for non-objective, abstract generalizations (...) In the absence of a linguistic apparatus for abstracting, the main method of generalization was tropes - objective comparisons of phenomena as a part and a whole, by similarity, by contiguity, etc., which were felt as a kind of identification. The phenomena of the world are complex, and one trope clung to another, forming semantic series " (9). This approach is extremely valuable for understanding the general mechanism of forming categories of worldview, since it is based on the principles of objective psychology and linguistics.

The question of objective psychophysiological study of the categories of perception of the world through the correlation of archaic thinking with the thinking of a child was raised in the 70-90s by Vyach.Vs. Ivanov, who refers the sphere of polysemous words to the activity of the right hemisphere of the brain: "As the experiments of L. S. Vygotsky and other psychologists have convincingly shown, the early stages of language acquisition by a child are characterized by the combination of different meanings of a word in one complex, traces of which remain much later. This phenomenon is especially pronounced in infant babble even before the phonemic system and grammar of the language are mastered. For this period, the assumption of the predominant role of the right hemisphere seems likely. Individual sound combinations in this babble serve as a family name for a whole complex of objects connected by random associations (...) The assumption that such complex bundles of meanings are typical for ancient or primitive languages could also be associated with the feature of savage thought that Levi-Strauss designated as "bricolage". This refers to the ability to connect the most diverse things, building a single structure out of them. A complex or bundle of values and could be considered as such a structure "(10).

In the 80s and 90s, the Egyptologist A. O. Bolshakov's research on the ka category, summarized in his doctoral dissertation, was systematically published. It was Bolshakov who for the first time in Ancient Eastern science managed to show the main stages of the formation of a cultural category in a socio - psychological context. The ideal material for this was the tombs of the Old Kingdom era, which provided a visual representation of the Double (ka)as an image of a person who remains alive after his death in a world of similar images. Based on the analysis of texts and art monuments, Bolshakov comes to the discovery of the fundamental regularity of archaic consciousness-the objectification of subjective sensations (11). Here we mean the process of substantiation of phenomena of the human psyche, followed by the separation of these phenomena from the material-bodily nature of man and their removal to the outside world. Bolshakov's discovery concerns not only ancient Egyptian society, but also all Middle Eastern societies of early antiquity.

One of the most remarkable studies on the problem of cultural categories appeared quite recently in Sinology-this is the collection " From magical power to the moral imperative: the category of de in Chinese culture "(Moscow, 1998; hereinafter-De). The uniqueness of the Chinese material (as well as the ancient one) is that here you can trace in detail the process of developing the category of worldview into the category of worldview, the ritual-aesthetic principle into the religious-ethical one. Unfortunately, the Sumerian material does not allow this, as Sumerian society did not survive the early antiquity phase. However, the general approach proposed in the collection (especially in the articles by A. S. Martynov and V. M. Kryukov) is undoubtedly applicable to the study of pre-philosophical cultural categories. In particular, A. S. Martynov formulates the solution to the complex problem of cultural category polysemy in the following way: "It seems to us that an attempt to overcome this polysemy by the method of imposing a certain type of polysemy on a person is not possible.-

9. He's the same. The path of history: from earliest man to the present day. M., 1994. S. 19-20.

10. Ivanov Vyach. Vs. Izbrannye trudy po semiotike i istorii kul'tury [Selected works on Semiotics and Cultural History], Vol. 1. Moscow, 1998, pp. 433-434. " Bolshakov A. O. Predstavlenie o Dvoynike v Egipte Stary tsardva

11. VDI, 1987, No. 2, pp. 3-36.

page 153

then one interpretation (for example, mana or morale), any one value, can not give positive results. Stringing together and storing a variety of concrete meanings will also not bring the desired clarity, because they do not lead to synthesis by themselves. In our opinion, the correlation of the entire polysemic field with a broad historical and cultural context promises the greatest prospects (...) However, it is necessary to choose the right general cultural context. It can be assumed that such a unity of "varieties" of de, as well as a clearer distinction between them, inevitably arises when this category is correlated with the simplest and deepest foundations of social existence - with a careful attitude to life itself... to its appearance, prolongation and reproduction, the creation of the necessary social conditions for its normal course, or the establishment of some kind of world order, the foundations and forms of which may vary greatly in different cultures "(12). V. M.'s observations are also extremely important. Kryukov on the question of comparing de and man, where the researcher characterizes the semantic level of categories of this kind as lying below the exact verbal definitions and referring not to the sphere of the transcendent and absolute, but on the contrary - to the sphere of the indefinite (13).

The author of this work also made a small contribution to the study of cultural categories, having considered the flood mythology in Sumerian literature and historiography in a monograph and several articles, and having studied in detail the ritual and aesthetic complex of the Nippur calendar in its historical dynamics. Based on the study of these subjects, it was possible to identify some common properties of the categories of worldview: 1) polysemy and contextual dependence of the category; 2) its two-hypostasis, i.e. material-subject and verbal expression; 3) its prevalence in all spheres of social life; 4) its existence in the sacred chronotope; 5) its origin from the data of direct perception of reality by the organs of vision, hearing and kinesthesis; 6) its status the epistemological minimum, the indivisible basis of sense-making, through which the principles of being and activity of the world and man are explained (14). Now let's turn to the history of studying the ME problem.

The ME category is one of the most complex and multidimensional problems in sumerology. The complexity is represented by its translation, etymology, correlation of abstract and concrete-material content in one concept, semiotic space of the category and its possible dynamics within the boundaries of Sumerian-Akkadian culture. They are associated with all the institutions of Mesopotamian civilization - state power, the court, military activities, crafts, arts, rituals, literacy, as well as some human actions and character traits. The entire appearance of the civilization that developed by the beginning of the third millennium BC in the Southern Two Rivers is inseparable from the basic laws and principles of this civilization, which the Sumerians, Babylonians and Assyrians considered THEMSELVES. Therefore, the study of the problem of ME is of great relevance for the Assyriologist and historian of antiquity.

Researchers who wrote about ME did not use the text material fully and tried to give a single definition of this complex category [15]. In the work of 1924

12. De. P. 36.

13. De. P. 96.

14. Yemelyanov V. V. The flood mythologeme and Sumerian historiography // St. Petersburg Oriental Studies. 1994. N 6. Pp. 232-289; onk. The Nippursk calendar and the early history of the Zodiac. St. Petersburg, 1999; same name. Culture of the ancient East (methodological aspects of studying). Mysl. 1998. N 2. pp. 163-175.

15. First of all, it is worth listing at least some definitions of ME in dictionaries and encyclopedias in order to understand the most common ideas about this complex cultural category. So, the non-specialist reader in various publications is asked to understand ME as 'Welt-und Kulturordnung', 'Befehl, Geheiss, Gebot', 'speziell (kollektiv) von der Tempelsatzungen I. S. v. Kultus', 'Los', 'Verborgenheit, Geheimnis', 'rito', ' divine laws, rules and regulations', 'Beschworing', 'divine power', '(divine) offices', 'dominium',

page 154

Landsberger points out the syllabary connection between the Akkadian word parsu and the two Sumerian equivalents garza and te. At the same time, garza translates 'Kultbrauch, Ritus, religiose Verpflichtung', indicating, first of all, the ritual-procedural nature of the term. The researcher understands ME as 'spexifisch gottliche Gewalt (Funktion) oder' heilige Macht '("specific divine power function, or sacred power"), emphasizing the potestar-political connotation of the Sumerian concept (16). Two years later, in the second address to the subject, Landsberger formulates his position even more clearly. He sees a connection between the terms pat and te, and pat understands quite in the spirit of Kant's das Ding-an-Sich "things in themselves", translating 'Summe der Wirkungen eines Dinges auf die Aussenwelt' ('the sum of the effects of certain things on the world around them'). These influences are carried out on the basis of connections between things by means of those that are 'gottliche Ordnungen von ewiger, unveranderlicherGeltung' ('divine rules of eternal, unchangeable significance'). Both Pat and te are described by Landsberger as "numinose Ordnungsbegriffe" ("numinous categories of order"), through which only the help of the gods to the human world is possible and which teach humanity to respect divine institutions. After all, each deity has its own special function, according to these very regulations (17). We see that Landsberger emphasizes power, power, and violence, without which there can be no true order and power. A. Falkenstein, who translated me 'gottliche Krafte' ("divine powers") in his fundamental grammar of Gudea inscriptions, took a position quite similar to Landsberger's in the 60s (18).

In the 1940s, T. Jacobsen was included in the study of the problem. He makes several fundamental generalizations at once, which subsequent researchers will need to discuss. First, it determines the grammatical status of the word: me is a noun from the verb "to be", and therefore can be translated as "being". Secondly, additional meanings of the word can be " norm (in particular, norm of behavior), mode of existence, mode of action "(Latin modus operandi). Third, the word is used in relation to a set of functions in the spheres of management, professional specialization, ritual, as well as in the moral and ethical sense (19). Jacobsen justifies his interpretation of "norm" with the word me-te "close to te", which in Akkadian corresponds to (\v) asmu "most suitable for something, most peculiar to something "(i.e., close to a certain norm). He has in the foreground a shade not of power, but of quality, properties of objects as an attribute of being.

In the late 40s, Landsberger returned to this subject again. Now he discusses the problem from the height of the achievements of cultural anthropology and ethnography. The researcher sees the history of Mesopotamian religion as "a process of development from totemism to anthropomorphism." From this new and general point of view, "those are both power and order, those of a particular god are distinguished by his function."-

'gottliche Krafte', 'Fatum, Heimarmene, Roue de Loi', 'modelli' di tutti Ie cose, che sulla terra sono forze e competenze' (ссылки приведены: Oherhuher 1963). In these definitions, German researchers emphasize the power nature of ME (order, order, divine powers, dominion), and also indicate the relationship of ME to the cult sacrament. English-speaking scholars see ME primarily as laws, rules, and regulations established by the gods. Italian Catholic scholars and Father A. Daimel, who worked in Italy, understand the destinies, rituals, and" models " of everything that exists. They are joined by the Frenchman R. Gesten, who also emphasizes fate and the "circle of order"in the definition of ME. We see that in general definitions of ME, it is more likely to find information about the cultural affiliation of the defining object than to understand the basic properties of the defined object. Therefore, we will not focus on them in the future.

16. Lululsheryr В. Schwierige Akkadische Worter // Archiv flir Keilschriftforschung 1924. N 2. S. 66.

17. Idem. Die Eigenbegrifflichkeit der babylonischen Welt // Islamica. 1926. N 2. S. 369.

18. Fulkc'nxtein A. Grammatik zur Sprache Gudeas von Lagasch. Bd I. Roma, 1949- i950. S. 6.

19. lacnhscn Tli. Toward the Image ofTammuz. Cambr., 1970. P. 359-360.

page 155

they act as substances and are symbolized by emblems" (20). Landsberger's new point of view was taken as a basis by K. Oberhuber, who devoted a small pamphlet to the problem. Oberhuber, following Landsberger, argued that animals are totems that existed before the anthropomorphic worship of the gods. These totems can be associated with various objects of wildlife. With the beginning of anthropomorphism, they become differentiated functions of the gods. ME, according to Oberhuber, can not be associated with a similar Sumerian verb, and therefore there is no reason to translate ME with the word "being" (as previously translated by Jacobsen). ME, in Oberhuber's definition of 'numinose Wirkkraft, numinose Macht; Numen, Numeroses' (21).

The" totemic " hypothesis of Landsberger-Oberhuber was thoroughly criticized by a brilliant expert on Sumerian religion, Ya. van Dyck. He pointed out that in no Sumerian text are ME synonymous with a deity or any creature, and therefore they should be classified as inanimate objects. In addition, in all epochs of Mesopotamian history, beginning with the Proto-written period, zoomorphic symbols and emblems of the gods coexist with their human images. Therefore, the material does not allow us to speak about any stadiality in connection with ME. J. van Dyck also rehabilitates Jacobsen's hypothesis about the origin not from the verb "to be", and gives his original translation of the verb ' immanent sein '("to be inherent") [22]. A few years earlier, commenting on the texts of e-duba published by him, J. van Dyck gives his definition of ME: 'Me est Ie concept central de la religion sumerienne et signifie ... une immanence divine dans la matiere morte et vivante, incree, inchangeable, subsistante, mats impersonelle, dont seuls les grands dieux disposent. Le concept se rattachera a celui de 'Mana' et celui de 'Orenda' ("ME-the basic concept of Sumerian religion, denoting... the immanence of the divine in living and dead matter, uncreated, unchangeable, substantial, but not personified, which is found only in the great gods. The concept of te corresponds to the same as in the concept of mana or rent") (23). It is interesting that when criticizing the totemistic hypothesis of his colleagues, J. van Dyck himself resorts to ethnographic parallels, declaring the identity of Sumer, te and others. Mana is a supernatural force found in Polynesians and Indonesians in people, animals, objects, and spirits. There are no grounds for such identification of the Self. van Dijk does not lead.

In 1959, an article by the Italian schumerologist J. R. R. Tolkien was published. Castellino (24), in which two points are most significant - the statement of the ME problem and comparative hypotheses. In Castellino's definition, ME is 'norma divina ideale e immutabile che regola il mondo e tutti gli aspetti e le attivita della vita' ('the ideal and unchangeable divine law governing the world and all its parts, as well as the activity of life') (25). The researcher considers the simultaneous existence of both an abstract category and concrete material objects, called ME, to be the main problem. Here, an attempt is made to separate the concept of ME from the related categories garza, nam-tar, izkim, gis-hur - an analysis that was later continued in the book by G. Farber-Flugge. In the second part of the article, Castellino compares them with Platonic ideas (idea). The comparison is made on the basis that 'L'idea and per lui 1'essere soprasensibile, distinta e indipendente, assoluta che comunica agli esseri singoli la loro esistenza e la loro natura' ("The idea in its essence is a supersensible, separate and independent absolute, connecting individual beings with its own

20. Landsberger В. in: Oherhuber К. Der numinose BegriffME in Sumerischen. Innsbruck, 1963. S. 3.

21. Oberhuber. Op. cit. S. 9.

22. Dijk JJ.A. van. Einige Bemerkungen zu Sumerischen reiigionsgeschichtlichen Probiemen // Orientalische Literaturzeitung. 1967. 62. S. 243.

23. Idem. La Sagesse sumero-accadienne. Leiden, 1953. P. 19.

24. Castellino G.R. II concetto sumerico di "me" nella sua accezione concreta // Analecta Biblica. 1959. 12. P. 26-29.

25. Ibid. P. 25. 'Attivita della vita' is best translated as 'activity of life', since 'activity' in Russian means excessive activity. But stylistically, such a translation is hardly possible.

page 156

26). Castellino also sees similarities between te and the Babylonian "tables of destinies", since in both cases we are talking about the archetype of concrete and material existence, which serves as the law, the norm of all things since the creation of the world (27). The subtle and insightful observations of the Italian researcher are in line with the history of philosophy (or pre-philosophy) and can later help in analyzing te as a specific pre-philosophical category of consciousness. In fact, Castellino came closest to the phenomenology of ME (28).

The historian of Sumerian literature and school tradition S. N. Kramer approaches the problem quite differently. For him, ME is a network of rules and regulations related to any cultural phenomenon in the aspect of its activity. ME is a speculative way of explaining the principles on which the world works, what makes each thing work in it, and how the work of this thing relates to the project of the deity who created it (29). For Kramer, the main focus of the ME problem is epistemological, and not ontological, as in the case of previous researchers (perhaps, except for Jacobsen). ME explains what cannot yet be explained, and in this explanation sensory experience co-exists with a naive belief in a single principle, knowing which you can understand the laws of all things. Kramer refrains from translating, saying that the meaning of the term is unclear.

In the late 60s, a major expert on Sumerian morphology, J. R. R. Tolkien. Gregg publishes an article on the verb-copula me- "to be", which also deals with the problem of the relationship between the name and the verb te. According to Gregg, the relationship between te verb-copula and te noun in Sumerian is the same as that between esse ("to be") and essentia ("essence") (but not existentia "existence"!) in Latin. In this case of etymology, me (N) is revealed as "what the thing should be (but what it is not necessarily), the divinely determined essence of the thing" (30).

In 1973, the only monographic study of the problem of ME, written by G. Farber-Flugge, was published. She gives it as an appendix to an edition of Inanna and Enki, the central problem of which is the abduction of ME. Unfortunately, this good German monograph contains very few original ideas, focusing entirely on theoretical questions based on the opinions of Ya. van Dyck and partly Castellino. In addition, it does not carry out the most important and necessary work-the consideration of the problem of ME in a dynamic aspect, from epoch to epoch, and the definition of the concept of ME in accordance with the data of Sumerian-Akkadian syllabaries. Farber-Flugge only gives a list of names and verbs used together with ME (mainly according to the hymns of Issin and Larsa), and associates ME with such concepts as garza and Su-luh "(cult) hand washing". It is impossible not to be grateful to the researcher for his painstaking philological work, but it is also impossible not to admit that such work helps very little to solve the problem. In the Farber-Flugge definition, ME is an attribute of the gods, but not a substitute for them or a numina. They are inherent in everything that lives in the world, being equally forces of natural life and culture. ME in the text "Inanna and Enki" is a general concept of divine power, assembled from single abstract names (pat) indicating the totality of functions of the objects they designate (31). In the translation of the text ME ' gottliche Krafte '(taken from Falkenstein).

26. Ibid. P. 30.

27. Ibid. P. 31-32.

28. We would like to express our deep gratitude to M. T. Petrov, Candidate of Historical Sciences, for his advice on translation from Italian.

29. Kramer S.N. The Sumerians. Chicago, 1963. P. 115.

30. Gragg G. The Syntax of the Copula in Sumerian // The Verb 'Be' and Its Synonyms / Hrsg. von J. Verhaar // FLSS. 1968. 8. S.102.

31. Farber-Flugge G. Der Mythos 'Inanna und Enki' unter besonderer Benicksichtingung der Liste der ME. Roma, 1973. S. 118, 197.

page 157

In 1978, an original and in-depth article by A. Cavigno appears, which makes the first attempt to analyze the Akkadian equivalents of ME in syllabaries and examines the relationship between te and niz in Early Sumerian texts. The researcher comes to the conclusion about the connection of the category te with the self-identification of a person: if initially me/ni2 means "self as vital energy", then later me is a supernatural being (etre surnaturel), a divine essence (l` essence divine) associated with the self-identification of its bearer [32].

Domestic studies of the 1980s and 1990s also contain two interesting approaches to the problem of ME. V. K. Afanasyeva understands TE as " essence ... the center of inner forces and power, they are embodied and are embodied in all things, they can turn from friendly to hostile "(33). I. S. Klochkov reconciles in his approach Jacobsen's "being, a way of existence "and the German"force contained in existence". At the same time, he is also in the position of Oberhuber: "Probably, the concept of "me" originally arose in the archaic era as an understanding of some mysterious force contained in everything, so to speak, the mystical principle of the existence of every thing. Later, this divine power, which is present in any phenomenon, began to be perceived separately from the visible phenomenon itself, as some kind of being controlling this phenomenon. But even with the rise of the religion of anthropomorphic deities who direct the life of the world, the concept of "me" did not disappear; the "me" retained a certain independence of existence from the gods. The gods have no control over the essence of things: they can have "mes", but they cannot change them, just as chess players are free to arrange pieces, but they cannot change at will the specific qualities of pieces or board fields "(34). We see that for Russian researchers, the concept of ME has a synthetic, multidimensional character, and the characteristic accents here will be the energy hidden in the object and the most general rules according to which the way of existence of each thing is established.

In 1990, G. Farber-Flugge addressed the problem of ME for the second time. Drawing on the modern cultural experience of the West, she gave a more detailed definition of the term: ME-these are "concepts or archetypes of the Sumerian civilization and spiritual culture", which "were understood not as modern abstract concepts, but quite specifically-as attributes or signs that are clearly recognizable either in light or in terrible brilliance "(35). Here we can see the eclecticism of three modern humanitarian doctrines at once: conceptualism (ME as concepts), Jungian analytical psychology (ME as archetypes), and semiotics (ME as signs and attributes). It becomes clear that there is no concrete historical content in this definition, revealing which is the only way to approach the solution of the problem.

The last reference to the problem of ME to date was made in 1997 by a major expert on New Sumerian literature, J. P. Blavatsky. Based on the material of the royal and temple hymns, Klein considered the question of ME as a concrete material cult object. The researcher came to the conclusion that in the material world, ME is "a two-dimensional symbol or image carved or drawn on a certain sign, banner or standard, representing the underlying abstract concept" (36).

Let's sum up the results. The differentiation of scientific ideas about ME can be carried out according to both ethnopsychological and methodological criteria. For the German Assyriological school, the problem of power and control mechanisms in history is central - therefore, only the ordering force through which the gods help unintelligent humanity is considered here. Ameri-

32. Cavigneaux A. L'essence divine//JCS. 1978. 30. S. 177-186.

33. Afanasyeva V. K. From the beginning I started. An anthology of Sumerian poetry. St. Petersburg, 1997, p. 479.

34. Klochkov I. S. Dukhovnaya kul'tura Vavilonii: chelovek, sudba, vremya [Spiritual culture of Babylonia: man, fate, time]. Moscow, 1983, p.40.

35. Farher G. ME // Reallexikon der Assyriologie. 1990. VII. 7/8. S. 610.

36. Klein J. The Sumerian ME as a Concrete Object // Altorientalische Forschungen. 1997. 2. S. 212.

page 158

Kansk sumerologists are primarily interested in the technologies of life of ancient people, and for them in ME the primary way of functioning of objects,i.e. the key to the technology of operations with objects. Jacobsen transfers the same technicism to psychology, identifying the way of functioning and the manner of behavior. Kramer sees ME not only as a way of functioning, but also as a reason for the existence of objects, which gives infinite associative and causal connections to other objects and operations with them. Theologian Austrians and Dutch first of all find in ME a numinous force that first merged with the deity/being or even replaced it (Oberhuber), and then became an attribute of the function of this deity/being (van Dyck). The projection of the numen on the personality of a living being comes to the fore here, and we have to prove our positions with the help of ethnographic parallels. For a researcher of the French school, traditionally interested in the problem of personality in history, ME is associated with the self and self-identification of a living being (Cavigno). Finally, the Russian Assyriological tradition, which seeks to synthesize concrete historical material with theoretical and cultural ones, does not provide any ethnographic analogies, but tries to consider the problem in a multidimensional way. The rules of its structure and functioning, which are essentially energetic and immanent to the object, are defined here. Separately, there are three opinions that stand outside the framework of national schools: the Italian Castellino, for whom the first principle of concrete and material existence is important in ME, which manifests itself in two guises - concretely in the process of life activity and abstractly in the connection of the individual with the One; the American Gregg, for whom ME is not just immanent, but imperative to the subject, since it shows that what the object should be according to the divine plan (ME as an ideal prototype of the material form); the Israeli Klein, who saw in ME a concrete material image that expresses the ideal concept hidden behind it.

In the methodological aspect, several additional differentiations should be made: a) the ontological / epistemological approach; b) the intertextual/comparative approach. Contemplative ontologists see IT as an external, but hidden force of an energetic nature, emanating from the gods (or even from itself, as in Klochkov) and actively influencing the manifested forms of the material world. They have a fatal dependence on all these gods and forces. Constructivist epistemologists think of ME as the sum of technologies or their cause, which can transform the world. It is characteristic that in their concept the main character is a person who knows, and little space is given to the deity here. Those coming from the text, despite the apparent invulnerability of the position, often do not dare to look into the neighboring text, and their understanding of ME is often limited to the meaning captured from several monuments published by them. Comparators always run the risk of making a mistake in the criterion and object of comparison, generalizers follow the fashion of popular theories to one degree or another and are also capable of being deceived.

So, for a century of the existence of the problem of ME, sumerology first moved away from working with a set of texts in considerations about one particular text, then began to compare some understandable contexts with ethnographic data, and finally tried to fit quite vague and private ideas, along with comparisons, into the context of modern cultural and psychological theories. It becomes necessary to return to several starting points that science has passed over in this matter. First, there are ideas about the content of the Sumerian term te through synchronous Akkadian equivalents given in many syllabaries. Secondly, it is working with a set of texts that is consistent with the chronological principle (texts by epoch). Third, it is a general method of studying ME as a category of perception of the world related to the specific historical conditions of the space and time of its origin. Fourth, it is an attempt to show the history of ME in a dynamic aspect: emergence-development - transformation.

page 159

III

The study of Sumerian-Akkadian syllabaries (syllabaries) still forms the basis of scientific ideas about Sumerian vocabulary and semantics. All existing dictionaries of the Akkadian and Sumerian languages are compiled according to a single principle: first there is information from cuneiform syllabaries, then a contextual dictionary. Therefore, the study of any term found in the cuneiform text should begin not with a detailed analysis of contexts, but with an analysis of data stored in syllabaries.

Sumero-Akkadian syllabaries began to be created at the end of the third and beginning of the second millennia BC. e. at schools and as the main had an educational purpose. These were commented lists of signs, consisting of three sections: 1) reading the word in Sumerian; 2) ideogram of the word; 3) its reading in Akkadian. Each character in cuneiform could have up to ten syllabic and up to five conceptual readings. At the same time, the following pattern is observed. If the Sumerian word that was the basis of the sign meant a simple object, one or two Akkadian equivalents were placed opposite it. If the Sumerian word was a complex concept that did not have an adequate expression in Akkadian, then many Akkadian words were given as its equivalents, each of which described only one property of this object. This is exactly what happened with the Sumerian word te.

Below we will look at the data of syllabaries compiled in the period from the beginning of the second millennium to the beginning of the first millennium BC.:

MSL (37) II (Proto-Ea III = MSL XIV 91, 71:1-10)

13 Me par-rum

14 lu-u-tu

15 a-lu-sch-it

16 qa--bu-u-um

17 ka-ra-U-it

18 ni-i-n

19 sa-mu-u

20 ejr-se-tum

21 qu--u-i-lum

22 pu-uJz-rum

The most common and frequently mentioned equivalent is me - parsu, and we will not rush to translate it. I. S. Klochkov lists the most frequent translations of this Akkadian word: "law", "ritual", "order", "office" (38). Indeed, in various contexts, the word is translated this way, but what brings all these contexts together and what is the deep connection here, for example, between a ritual and a position - this is not clarified by any of the researchers of ME.

In a 1924 article, G. B. Landsberger points out a possible connection between parsu and the Arabic verb farada (39). The verb has many meanings: "mark by cutting, notching", "prescribe, decree", "determine". The verbal name of the action fard means "the place where the fire is kindled", fird " the fruits of the plant when they turn red "(40). The passive participle of the first kind of the same verb mafrud occurs in the Qur'an with the meaning " predetermined, limited (in time)" (Qur'an, Sura IV, verse 118). In the Ethiopian language, we find the verb brs "to shine, to shine brightly "(41). Finally, in Akkadian itself, the verb parasu, from which

37. Materialen zum Surnerischen Lexikon. Roma.

38. Klochkov. Uk. soch. p. 40-41.

39. Landsberger. Op. cit. S. 64-68.

40. Lane E.W. The Arabic-English Lexicon. L., 1863-1871. V. I. Pt 6. P. 2372-2375.

41 Leslau E. Comparative Dictionary ofGe'ez. Wiesbaden, 1987. P. 107-108.

page 160

the word parsu originates, meaning " to break through, to break through, to blossom (about flowers), to manifest, to become visible "(42).

So, now we can summarize the data on the common Semitic root prj in all its phonetic modifications (Arabic. p > f, s > d; ethiopian, p > b). The main meaning of the root is "to break through, cut through, make notches, notes", from which then "to be bright, fiery", "to be visible"," to make noticeable","to determine, to predestine". Therefore, the most adequate translation of parsu, which reconciles all the differences of contexts, will be "phenomenon", i.e. that which is noticeable, has a certain shape (or contour) and is formed by the transition from the invisible to the visible (by the act of cutting space). In fact, law and ritual determine the life of society, the position distinguishes the subject from many others like him, and the order places the phenomena of the external world in certain places intended only for them. It should be noted here that, along with te, Akkad. parsu also served as the equivalent for garza. In all cases, garza can be translated by the word "rite", understood as a "phenomenon of order". So, the translation of the first and most common equivalent of me is "phenomenon".

The word lutu means a disease associated in various texts with weakness of the forehead and knees, and is used in the sense of " weakness, decline "(43). It is possible that this is a homonym, and it has nothing to do with our te. But it is possible that this is an antonym for the next word, lalum - a multi-valued word. It is derived from the verb "to be full, abundant", and can mean "fullness, luxury, splendor, voluptuousness, lustfulness, savagery, primitiveness". Here the association of wildness with voluptuousness and abundance is interesting as an indication of the time of it, when everything was plentiful, including male potency. Further, the equivalents of te are the verbs of speech qabu and karahu. The first verb expresses the function of speaking, pronouncing words. The second signifies the utterance of a certain request, a plea. The next equivalent is not a verb, not a name, but the pronoun nimu "we". Probably, it should emphasize something plural, group, related to me - after all, in Sumerian te can be used in the function of the possessive pronoun 1 l. pl. h. Then there are "Heaven" and" Earth " - with a hint of te belonging to both spheres of the world. Completing the list are two words meaning "silence" and "mystery, mystery".

If we keep in mind that each Akkadian equivalent of a complex Sumerian word is intended to denote one of its properties, we can assume that for Proto-Ea, me is: a) a phenomenon, b) associated with the fullness of life forces that occurred only in the time of savagery, c) with the utterance of the word and prayer, d) with a certain group, set, e) with all parts of the world, f) with silence and mystery.

MSL IX 126 (Proto az=A)

VII 48 [ME] [pa-ajr-sum

49 [luj-[u]-tum

50 [dJu-u-tum

51 [pJu-uh-rum

52 [nji-nu

53 qa-i-hu-um

54 a-lu-u

55 at-wu-ich

Here, several new words are added to the already known ones, which also specify them. ddtu means "male potency" and is consistent with lalu, puhru means "assembly" and confirms the group connotation of te in tpi, atwu" word, order " correlates with qabu.

42. Soden W. vnn. Akkadisches Handworterbuch. Wiesbaden, 1956-1981.

43. Further, the meanings of Akkadian words are given according to the dictionary of contexts: Chicago Assyrian Dictionary. 1958-...

page 161

MSL ХVII (Erim-hus II)

15 me du-u-tu Erim-hus V 224 ti du-u-tu

16 tes2 baJ-as-tu-i 225 bar ba-as-tum 17dKALxBAD Se-e-du lKAL la-mas-[su]

The Erim-hus syllabary contains equivalents to Sumerian words grouped thematically. We compare two fragments of it. In one of them, akkad. dutu is equivalent to noise. those in the other word ti "life". Therefore, by the same logic, te can be synonymous with ti and mean "life". Words listed in the same group with ME refer to the forces that support human existence: 15) male potency (which here is equivalent to life itself), 16) attractive appearance, 17-18) - guardian spirits of physical health. PiziII136sqq. (MSLXIII45) Me pa-ar-sum lu-uytu pu-uh-rum la-lu-u'i ik-ri-bu "prayer" IziEIIsqq. (MSLXIII185) Me samu ersetum belum "lord, Lord" uzzu "rage, anger" quiu qalum hastum " attractive appearance"qahu karabu

saru "jump", "dance" itti "mother" puhru puzru atmu lisanu "language" I u'turn

In the syllabaries and bilinguals of the New Assyrian era, te is interpreted in a similar way, but with the use of other Akkadian words:

ME = zi-ka-rum IIR 7, 10c "male"

ME = asu Reisner Hymns, 39, 28; 82, 33; 83, 1 "shout"

ME = tertum IIR 62, 16a "order", "revelation"

Summarizing now the syllabary data for ME, we can point out the main shades of meaning noticed by Babylonian lexicographers. First, ME is associated with the activity of the inner masculine principle, with male potency. Secondly, with the active and creative activity of the word and prayer. Third, with the selection of the explicit from the implicit, which is definitely associated with a creative act of world creation. Fourthly, with such a state of peace, when the fullness of vital forces was combined with the fullness of material abundance. Fifth, with the hidden and inner forces of being. Sixth, with the attractiveness of the appearance. Seventh, with a set, a group of things-letters. "with their congregation." Eighth, with life itself and its guardians. Ninth, with the fullness of the universe, which included the Sumerians ' Heaven and Earth. Tenth, with jumps in the dance, personifying the process of growth. Here are indications of the substantial-ontological nature of ME, and the space-time of their existence, and

page 162

to connect with parts of the universe. Finally, the syllabaries clearly indicate the understanding of ME in the plural.

The only attempt to analyze ME based on syllabary data was made by the French assyriologist A. Cavignot (44). He tries to explain some of the" strange " Akkadian equivalents with a false etymology. Here are the most typical examples of his approach::

1. Akkadian equivalents such as belum, uzzu, saru, atmu, itti, Iapi are not related to Sumer, te, because they correspond to Sumerian words close to te in sound: umun, mer, nigin, im-me, a/ema/e, erne.

2. Akkad, puhru is most likely a corruption of Akkad. pulhu "fear", also similar in sound.

It is quite possible that in some cases syllabaries may put two homonyms in a row and give equivalents to them, counting these homonyms as one word. But we can't assume that this is the rule for compilers of syllabaries. It has long been known that when classifying objects and words, ancient man used the means that gave him associative-analogous thinking, which dominated at that time over logical and inference. Therefore, when analyzing Akkadian equivalents in syllabaries, it is necessary to understand the relationship between terms not only as between equivalent units (A = A), but also as between a unit and a metaphorical way of indicating it (a unit and a path to it). In this case, we get: belum "lord, lord" - the one who receives ME and possesses them (compare Sumer, the name of the deity ep-te-sar2-ha "lord of the multitude of ME"); uzzu "anger, rage" - the property of the ME themselves (me-hus "furious ME"); itti "mother" - the image of the original, with which ME is connected by another word lalu; lisanu "language" - the connection of ME with the word and prayer (in another way - qabu, karabu)', saru "jump, dance" - a verb indicating the connection of ME with the same image of the original (growth, pull up). As for puhru, the presence of the equivalent tpi "we", as already mentioned above, indicates the shade of the group, set, associated with ME. Here we see a very interesting and complex type of association: in Sumerian, te means the index of the possessive pronoun 1 l. pl. "our". Hence the association with any group or multitude, conveyed by puhru " assembly, gathering (of the people)". So there's no connection to pulhu at all.

The explanation of ME in syllabaries is based on the principle of" bricolage " - combining heterogeneous meanings into a complex bundle, which is characteristic of childish and archaic thinking. In his book on functional asymmetry of the cerebral hemispheres, Vyach.Vs. Ivanov gives two examples of "bricolage" semantics: "One-year-old Kostya Polivanov used to call a hot pot, a hot lamp, a hot water bottle (even if it was empty) and a central heating battery (even in summer, when it was cold) xh (...) Many words of Aranta (an archaic Australian language) can be considered as family names related to heterogeneous objects. The same word ngu denotes water lily roots hidden under water, sleeping people and sleep; human bones (invisible like underwater roots) and an interrogative pronoun referring to a person not visible to the speaker "(45). In both cases, there is a semantic core around which word associations are built - this core is the property of the object (in the first case - "hot", in the second - "invisible"). Exactly the same principle is used to explain ME in syllabaries. Here we can highlight the following regulatory issues.

1. The category of perception of the world is intended to express the complexity of the observed phenomenon or process, and therefore arises at the intersection of several semantic fields (you can also call them associative series). Each such field is formed by a metaphorical row.

44. Cavigneaux. Op. cit. P. 180-181.

45. Ivanov. Uk. soch. p. 43334.

page 163

2. Metaphorical series - a group of words denoting objects that are carriers of a certain property that a cultural category has. For example: gahu, karabu, tertu, sasu - words meaning the process of speaking; tpi, puhru-words expressing a set or group. It is characteristic that words that perform different grammatical functions - names, verbs, and even pronouns-can be placed in the same row.

3. Metaphorical series are grouped into associative series that create a verbal portrait of a cultural category from a set of properties. The verbal portrait of ME in syllabaries is created from associative series with the semantic core "phenomenon", "potency", "word", "primitiveness", "mystery", "world", "set", "life". The combination of associative series allows you to view the portrait in all its details, but it does not allow you to characterize the category in one definition. The history of semiotics shows that the tendency to accurately define the subject arises only in the process of developing alphabetic writing and the logical-rhetorical apparatus of thinking, i.e., the "left-hemisphere" areas of consciousness [46].

Without taking into account all these general points, it is possible, following Cavigno's example, to reduce all syllabary equivalents that are incomprehensible to modern researchers to false etymologies based on consonances of words that are far from each other.

IV

However important the explanations of the syllabaries may be, we must remember that they were written after the demise of Sumerian civilization, at a time when Sumerian was no longer a spoken language. Therefore, the evidence of Sumerian texts written down in the third millennium BC, even during the widespread use of Sumerian as a living language, is of particular importance. It is quite possible that they will contain such shades of the meaning of ME that were later forgotten and Babylonian lexicographers are not known. To do this, let's refer to the data of the Gudea inscriptions.

In the Sumerological tradition, the inscriptions of the Lagash ruler Gudea (XXII c.) are considered the main text of science. It can be said that in this artificially developed tradition, they occupy the position of the sacred text of natural traditions, not differing in any way, for example, from the status of the Koran for Arab-Muslim culture. There is no publication where the published text is not lexically and grammatically comparable to the inscriptions on statues and cylinders of Gudea. This exceptional position of the Gudea texts is due to only two circumstances: (i) they were written during the period when Sumerian was still spoken, and (2) they were written in a monumental script that followed all grammatical rules. Earlier texts are difficult to read because of slurred writing, and later texts are equally difficult to read because of bad grammar. The philological approach to Gudea inscriptions is greatly facilitated by the lack of text options, but this is where the ease of text processing ends. Despite good writing, clear grammar, and a one-hundred-percent scientific citation rate, Gudea's inscriptions (especially on clay cylinders) are difficult to translate and understand.

In the corpus of inscriptions on statues of the Sumerian ruler Gudea, the word ME occurs only once-at the beginning of statue B (47). Here is the full context.

Statue of B Gudea

11 esNin-g-su - At the Ningirsu Temple,

2 lu2-gal-na - (ta) - its host,

3 alam Gi-dey-a-to the statue of Gudea,

4 ensiz - - ensi

5 Lagasa-Lagasha,

46. Ibid., pp. 452 et seq.

47. All texts of Gudea are quoted from the latest edition: EdzardD. O. Gudea and His Dynasty. Toronto, 1997.

page 164

6 lu2 E2-ninnu-which is anyinnu

7 in-du3-a-ke4-built,

8 1 sila3 kas-1 beer power,

9 1 sila3 ninda - 1 the power of bread,

10 1/2 sila3 Zl3. DUB. DUB - 1/2 strength of sifted flour,

11 1/2 sila Shz-agz-ra udra2-1/2 power of spelt groats

12 sa-dUjJ-ba gal-la-a-ann-established as permanent offerings.

13 ensiz - (If any) ensi

14 ka bi2-ib2-gi4-gi4-a-will cancel (them),

15 me-Nin-gir-su-ka-ME Ningirsu

16 ba-ni-itb-la-a-will reduce,-

17 sa2-dui rpa - its permanent offerings

18 ez-shpi-ka-from the temple of Ningirsu

19 ka he2-eb2-gi4-let them be distant,

20 ka-ka-ni he2-ke?da-let his mouth be "bound"!

The main problem here is the connotation of the meaning of ME. D. O. Edzard, in a new translation of the Gudea texts, suggests a link between the abolition of the constant offerings and the decrease in the number of ME, which he translates 'innate rights' ("natural regulations") (48). However, it doesn't say anything about where these 'innate rights'come from in the text. The answer to this question is provided by the contexts of two fragments from other Gudea statues.

St. E IX 6-12: alan / lu2-e2-dBa-U2/ mu-dii3-a-kam / ki-gub-ba-bi / lu2 nu-zi-zi / sa-du-bi / / lu2 la-ba-ni-la-e "Statue of the one who built the Bau temple. Let no one destroy its pedestal, and let no one diminish its continual offerings."

St. К III 7-20: [1 sil]a3 zi3-dub-dub / 1 sila3 Шз-агз-ra udra/ sagdu- bi / ba-ni-ib-la-a / / in-g-su / lugal-g'-tukul-ke4/ a / dumu-an-na-ke4 / g-alim / dSul- ? az-ga-na / dumu-ki-ah2 - / (jNin-hi2-su-ka-ke4-ne / suhus-a-ni he2-bu-ru-ne / numun-a-ni Le2-i1z-pe " l strength of sifted flour, 1 strength of spelt groats. (If anyone) these constant offerings will be reduced, Ningirsu, the master of arms, Bau, the daughter of Ana, Igalim, Shulipagana, the beloved children of Ningirsu, let his root be plucked out, let his seed be taken out."

We see that in both cases the verb 1a "reduce" is used in relation to sa2-dun "permanent offerings". A in the inscription on statue B, the same verb follows after sa2-dun and is applied to ME. The situation of using the formula is identical in all three texts - it is a curse sent to an unholy ruler who reduces the number of offerings to the statue of Gudea. Therefore, there is every reason to believe that an equal sign should be placed between sa2-dui i and ME in this case: the reduction (or cancellation) of permanent offerings is at the same time a reduction in "ME Ningirsu". What are these offerings for?

Created from diorite, the statue of Gudea is named by him as follows: lugal-guic / e2-a-ni / mu-na-du3 / nam-ti Shz-ba-suio "To my king I built his temple. (For) life is my gift!" (VII. 14-17). In the standard initiatory formula nam-ti-se-i, the allative index is released here. From other inscriptions with the same formula, we know that "for life" means not for the life of the god who built the temple, but for the life of the ruler who built it. For example: [pat] - i-Ep-?az-ki?2-ap-pa-ka' -?ez n[a]m-ti-la-ni -? e3 pat-NatitEi-paez] ez-ni m[u] - du3 "For the sake of Enshakushanna's life, for the sake of his life, for the sake of the lives of his wife and children, he built his (God's) temple "(Ensak. v. Uruk 4: 4-9). In the statue With Gudea, the statue is named as follows:

Gu3-de2-a / lu2-e2-du3-a-ka / nam-ti-la-ni he2-su3 " The life of Gudea, who built the temple, let

48. Edzard. Op. cit. P. 31.

page 165

it will be long! "(III. 18-IV.1). We see that the ruler builds a temple to God in order to immortalize his name, and in order to perpetuate his person brings his statue to the temple. Now back to the statue of B Gudea. Gudea puts it in a special place in the temple: ki-a-nag-e ha-ba-gub / ni3-a2-zi3-ga-ka / lu2 nam-mi-gul-e" At the "place of drinking water" let it stand. Let no one destroy it by raising his hand! " (VII. 55-57). "Place of drinking water" - a place of afterlife feeding of deceased relatives, rulers and heroes. The installation of a statue in this place also implies the establishment of permanent sacrifices for feeding the person depicted on it. This is exactly the context in which the word te falls here.

Thus, the REQUIREMENTS of the Ningirsu temple include a set of permanent offerings that ensure the afterlife feeding of the temple builder through offerings to his statue. Before us is a shade of meaning that was not taken into account by the compilers of syllabaries. ME is best translated here by the word "powers", since the statue is nourished and as a result, the ruler of Gudea in the afterlife does not lose strength, maintaining his existence at a tolerable level. The combination of ME with the name Ningirsu suggests that these "powers" are also regulations that are mandatory for permanent implementation. Hence, ME is here to be understood as the "(quantified) powers " established by the god Ningirsu for the constant nourishment of Gudea in the afterlife. Cylinder A I

1 U4 a[n] - k[i]-a nam tar-tar-[re-d] a When the destinies of Heaven and Earth were decided,

2 Lagas (SIR.BUR.LA 1 " me-gal-la [sa]g ap -? ez mi-ni-ibz-ilaz Lagash in the great ME head to the Sky raised,

3 p-Yz-e ep-shpiez igi-zi (d) mu-si-bar Enlil cast a benevolent glance at Lord Ningirsa

4 iri-me-a ni3-du7 pa nam-ez And in our city everything is back to normal:

5? az gu2-be2 nam-gLt The heart has returned to its shore,

6? az-dEn-Sh2-la guz-bez nam-gi4 Enlil's heart has returned to its shore,

7 ?az gU2-be2 nam-gi4 The heart has returned to its shore,

8 a-mi-uruie nam-mul ni2-gur3-guru3 Mighty waves terrible shine emitted,

9? az-dEn-lil2-la2-ke4 ' pidigna-an a-dug3-ga nam-de, Enlil's heart-Tiger-brought fresh water!

10 е2-е lugal-bi gU3 ba-de2

Its owner (then) turned to the temple:

11 E2-ninnu me-bi an-ki-a ра-ез mu-ak-ke4

"TO Anyinnu in the Heavens and on Earth, he will manifest,

12 ensi2(PA.TE.SI) lu2-ge?tU3(GIA. PI. KU) - dahal-kam ge?tu3 i3 - ga2-ga2 Ensi shirokouhiy will instruct his ear,

13 Shz-gal-gal-la? u mi-i3-mu2-mu2 Great things will expand,

14 gu4-du7 [ma?2]-du7-re6 si im-sa2-sa2-e

Worthy bulls, worthy goats will prepare,

15 sig4-nam-tar-ra sag mu-?i-ib2-il2

It will raise its head to the brick of fate,

16 е2-киз du3-de3 gU2-bi mu-si-ib2-zi(g3)

page 166

To build a light temple, he will raise his neck!"

17 lugal-ni-ir ud-de3 ma?2-ge6-ka Then look at your master in a dream

18 Gu3-de2-a enNin-g-su-ra igi mu-ni-dug-atz Gudea-on Lord Ningirsu-raised his eyes,

19 ez-a-t du3-ba' mu-na-duu

He ordered him to build his temple.

20 E2-ninnu me-bi gal-gal-la-атз

On Anyinna, whose POWERS are great,

21 igi mu-na-ni-har

He turned his eyes to him.

Here, the noun ME is used in three situations. First, it is the creation of Lagash after the cosmogonic act of separating Heaven from Earth. Lagash raises his head up me-gal-la "in the great ME", which means simply "in the great forces". The phenomenon of appearance is shown here through the vertical extension of the object, through its growing upward shape, expressing the self-declaration of the object. A similar situation with the god Ningirsu is described in Cylinder B VI

1 tin bur-gal-la im-ma-de2 Wine poured into a large vessel,

2 Ez-shppi UL. GAL UL.DU gU2 im-ma-gur-re In Anyinnu?? they were stabbed to death,

3 e? z-dNin-uruda-ke4 sig4 mu-gi4-gi4 Ninuruda Sanctuary cry raised,

4 ninda-U4-da ga-ma? 2-lulim-ma With daily bread and fallow deer milk,

5 U4-gee-e tun-b-a Day and night offerings,

6 nir-gal2 dumu-kiEn-li-ur-sagNin-g-su Husband, beloved son of Enlil, hero of Ningirsu

7 iz-a mi-ni-zi-zi From sleep was awakened.

8 me-gal-gal-la sag mi-ni-i-e In the great ME he raised his head.

When Ningirsu smelled bread and milk, and heard the noise in the sanctuary, he woke up and stretched out to his full height.

The growth of the city is rewarded with the attentive gaze of the Nippur god Enlil, who gives Lagash the first foundation of life and reproduction - the flood of the Tigris River. Secondly, Ningirsu's hope that Gudea will make the WALLS of his temple visible everywhere means not only that the temple will be built (i.e., will take shape and appearance), but also that the conditions of such construction will be met (sacrifices, making the bricks of fate). Third, the turning of Gudea's gaze (which was previously called broad-eared, i.e., all-embracingly intelligent) to the great ME's of the temple means that these ME's already exist as an ideal prototype, but without giving an external form they cannot manifest themselves. For their manifestation, you need to build a temple.

9 Gu3-de2-a e2-guio du3-da izkim-bi ga-ra-ab-sum Гудеа! For the construction of my temple, I want to give you this oracle!

10 garza(PA.AN)-ga2 mul-an-ku3-ba gU3 ga-mu-ra-a-de2

Preset mine through the bright sky star I'll shout out!

11 e2-gU]o E2-ninnu an-ne2 ki-gar-га

My Temple-Eninnu, founded in the Sky,

12 me-bi me-gal-gal me me-a dirig-ga

page 167

Whose ME-ME great-all other ME superior!

13 e2 lugal-bi igi-sud (r) From-From

The temple master raised a sharp eye,

14 An-zu "" - gim sig2-gi4-a-bi-?e3 Like Anzud, with its cry

15 an im -? i-dub2-dub2 The sky is split!

16 me-lam2-hu? - bi ap-pez im-usz

The fierce brilliance of his Sky reaches!

17 e2-ge26 ni2-gal-bi kur-kur-ra mu-ri

The great terror of my temple has seized all the lands,

18 mu-bi-e an-za3-ta kur-kur-re gU2 im-ma-si-si

To his name from the edge of heaven, foreign countries gather!

Here the superiority of ME Eninnu over all other temples of the inhabited world is expressed in the form of a piercing cry and a penetrating look. Ningirsu splits the sky with a cry like an Anzud bird, and looks shrilly into the distance. These two expressive actions result in the appearance of me-lam2, "increasing ME", embodied in a bright brilliance reaching to the heavens, and ni2-gal, "great power", emanating from the body of the temple and terrifying the surrounding countries. Under the influence of these phenomena, the temple becomes widely known for its strength and power and unites the lands around it.

H

1. Ryu g-eo nam-gal-ki-aga2-da Father, my creator, in great love

2 lugal-a-ma-mEn-li - " King, flood of Enlil,

3 igi-huS-a-ni kur-da nu-il2 Whose fierce gaze the mountains can't stand,

4 in-gi-si ur-sagEn-li-Ningirsu, the hero of Enlil"

5 ti -? ez mu-sa4 called me,

6 me-ninnu-a gas mi-ni-ke?2 50 ME for the ends tied up.

7 sbanSur mu-il2 The sacrificial table I have erected,

8? u-lu si bi2-sa2 Performed the rite of hand washing,

9? u-si-sa2-a-guio ap-kiz-ge iz-a ba-zi-ge My right hand bright ana from sleep (?) raised,

10 ninda ?u-ge26 duio-ga-atz Good food from my hand

11 ja, o gu5-guio duio-ga-Y mu-ku2 The father, my creator, has tasted.

12 an lugal-dingir-re-ne-ke4 an, king of the gods,

13 m-tgirz-slu lugal i?ib (ME)-an-na

"Ningirsu, King of ME Ana (var. king, priest-consecrator of Ana)"

14 ti -? ez mu-sa4

He named me.

In the first case, the situation clearly states that the 50 ME that Father Enlil binds for Ningirsu by the ends (like a sheaf) requires sacrifices that Nin-

page 168

girsu must feed his father, as well as the rites accompanying the meal. This is confirmed in other texts: [uni-kin-sig ki-sbanSur-lll-ij-za [mie-bi 50-atz "At the evening meal at the place where your sacrificial table is raised, 50 ME must be" (Ninurta in Eredu, IV 6-7); sagi-zabar - ku3 zalag2-ga en-me-banSur-ra "the chalice-maker who makes bright bronze (vessels) shining, the lord of the great sacrificial table" (Ninurta's epithet in SGL II 108: 21). Enlil endows his son with ENERGY, losing part of his property, for which he is entitled to feed as an energy compensation. Another indication of this unique understanding of the text is given in Ninurta's similar epithet: en-Bbanurl-raEn-li-me-en "Lord of Enlil's sacrificial table-I!" (49).

In the second case, the ME sign can be read in two ways: a) as i?ib "priest of the purification rite", b) in the main reading of te. Consider both versions. Reading ME as i? ib, we rely on the data of the text itself, in which the god Ningirsu reports on the arrangement of a sacrificial meal for his father Enlil. Before the beginning of the sacrificial meal, Ningirsu performed the rite of washing hands, and this rite was only part of the duties of the i?ib priest, cf. the parallelism in NBC 11108 VIII 5-6: isib-mahEn-li-nu-U3-gal2 / ?u-luh-ku3-ge ?u nu-U3-ma-du7 "The high priest-purifier of Enlil did not exist - the sacred rite of hand washing was not performed at all" (50). Therefore, after performing the rite and arranging the sacrificial meal, Ningirsu could be considered a priest-purifier under the person of the god Ana - the king of the gods. Then we translate "Ningirsu-king, priest-purifier of An".

Reading in the first value (i.e. those), we also won't be too wrong. A few lines above, Enlil gives Ningirsu 50 me, after which Ningirsu can be called the lord of the heavenly ME (they are called"heavenly" because they were received from the god An at the beginning of time). Then we translate "Ningirsu is the master of the heavenly MOUNTAINS". And Kreher suggests understanding lugal me-an-na "the king (under whom) ME Ana" (oral communication). It turns out just as convincing as in the first case. Moreover, if we consider the entire name-epithet Ningirsu, we get a wonderful parallelism: "an is the king of the gods, Ningirsu is the king of the WORLD of Ana". It can be understood that Ningirsu now possesses the main treasures of the Sky, and this greatly expands his rights in the world of the gods.

So, in the above passages from the inscriptions in statues and cylinders, Gudea's WORDS are associated with constant sacrifices and rituals that support the life of the temple, with the construction of the city and the temple, with sacrifices intended for the afterlife feeding of the builder of the temple, with a piercing cry and a penetrating look, through which the space breaks, as well as with the All these meanings, so different at first glance, exist around a single semantic core, which is revealed by a careful study of the verbal-nominal basis te in the Sumerian language.

V

In Sumerian, both independent finite verb forms and an enclitic copula can be formed from the verb base te. The conjugation of a finite verb looks like this:

Face

Unit hours

Plural hours

1

-me-en

-me-enden

2

-me-en

-me-enzen

3

-me

-me-es

49. Examples are taken from the Pennsylvanian Sumerian Dictionary V. V. Philadelphia, 1984. S. V. banSur.

50 .Tablet from the Yale Museum collection, see DijkJJ. A. van. Existe-t-il un poeme de la creation sumerien? // Kramer Anniversary Volume. Neukirchen-Vluyn, 1976.

page 169

Examples of usage (51): billuda U4-bi-ta e-me-a (var.: e-me-atb) "the order used to be like this" (Ukg. 4 VII 26-28); E2-kur -? e3 za-e lu2-bi pez-te-ep "For Ekura you are really his man" (Iddin-Dagan Hymn In 43); ES ze ?i-in-ga-ge9-na / sa-i-ga-me-en-a / "really you" (Krecher, 1967. p. 100).

The verb me is also present in some stable expressions such as ga-nam-me-agpz "really so", igz Sez-ep-pat-te-atz "let it be so", pez-agpz " let it be so!" (var. " may it come to pass!"). In general, the finite verb te expresses the isolation and actual status of the object of description, as well as the desire for a certain state of affairs for the future.

The bundle performs a predicative function and stands in postposition to a noun, pronoun, numeral, or verb base. J. Gregg believes that the copula is devoid of any semantic load and exists only for expressing certain types of predication, as well as as a carrier of affixes (52). We will show below that this is not the case.

Examples of usage: sipa-me (n) "I am the shepherd" (Gudea Zyl. II 5); um-ma-me-en " I am an old woman "(EN 24); a-ba-me-en "you are who?" (EN 159); ninda-ni SO-am, " his loaves -80 (pieces)" (Ukg. 5 VIII 34); bad3-bi sig4-sag-zi-bi bus-atz "its walls, its bricks rising up-bright red" (LE 414); ensi2-ku3-zu-ani3 "he is a clairvoyant ruler" (Gudea Zyl. In I 12).

If the predicative value is weakened, the copula gets an emphatic value. Using the copula, emphase is assigned either to a single member of the sentence, or to the entire statement as a whole. For example: Shz-bO-atz gi4-mu-un "exactly 60 people came" (TCS 1 149, 8-9); a-ba-atz an-tud2 - de3-en "who exactly can I hit?" (SP 2, 66).

The noun in the genitive case in combination with the copula expresses the meaning of the predicative possessive: kur-ra dimz-ma-bi tu-kam (tu-ak-am) " creation of the mountain - (business) I have it." Here, the bundle expresses the functionality of the name.

In the meaning of the bundle, te can have a value equivalent to the comparative case. This occurs when the identity between two nominal members of a sentence, transmitted by a copula, can be understood as an indication of similarity. For example: sti ka-e us2-sa-bi nir-an-na an-pez us2 - sa-am3 "His (N. - B. E.) arrow, which is near the gate, is like a heavenly rainbow that adjoins the heavens" (Gudea Zyl. A XXV 7-8).

So, we can distinguish four shades of the use of the verb-the te copula in terms of semantics: 7) the copula in its usual use requires the translation " is "or the setting of a dash and indicates the external status of the object; 2) the copula in the emphase function requires the translation "exactly" and indicates the selection of the object in the speech stream; 3) the copula with the noun in the genitive case indicates the functional affiliation, "official status" of the object; 4) a link with an indication of similarity requires the translation "like" or also "is" and denotes the external similarity of two foreign objects. In all four cases, te fixes the substantial isolation of an object from a number of other objects, achieved by a) a simple statement of fact, b-c) accentuation in the speech flow, d) identification by external similarity. Since this is the case, we will have to clarify the usual translation of the verb te "to be", noting that this being always concerns only what is highlighted by vision.,

51. Examples are taken from grammars: Thomson M.-L. The Sumerian Language. Copenhagen, 1984; Kaneva I. T. Sumerian language. St. Petersburg, 1996.

52. Gragg. Op. cit. P. 102.

page 170

external, actually existing and endowed with a function. From now on, the verb te will be translated as " to be - to be (something)".

In contrast to" being-appearance "in Sumerian, there is also" being-belonging", marked with the verb gal2. For example: ka5-a-a gidri an-da-galz "the fox had a stick" (SP 2, 66) ; 1 ez sar uru-bar-abula-gal-tur-ra-ka an-galz "I cap houses in the settlement at the small city gate is located" (SR 36 1-3); sag-men ga-ga ?u-na hes-en-ga "the laying on of the crown is indeed in her hands" (EWO 410). T. Jacobsen distinguished the two verbs "to be" as "to be (in some fashion) / Sosein" and "to be (somewhere )/Dasein" (53). J. Gregg distinguishes two verbs "to be "as" to be " (me) and "to exist, to be possible, to remain, to stay" (ga) (54). Babylonian lexicographers never give Akkadian equivalents to the verb te, but for ga they invariably give basu "to be present, to exist" (Ea I 233; Idu II 51).

From the verb me, adverbial forms are formed that act as interrogative words: te-a "where?" (lit. "in ME?"), those- ?ez "where to?" (lit. "to ME?"), te-pa-?ez (< me-da-se3 ?) "until when?" (lit. "before ME?"), me-da "when?" (lit. "with ME?"). These frozen forms show that the verb te in combination with case indicators contains a shade of uncertainty in its semantic field. Therefore, we are not talking about a phenomenon, but about a "certain phenomenon" - already distinguished, but not yet understood.

In the "feminine" dialect (eme-sal; MSL IV), the verb te has the form [pe] (reading the sign ME as gex (55)). Here, the forms 1-2 l. units - me-en correspond to gen, ge9-en, and the name te does not undergo any phonetic changes anywhere (probably because it was sacralized and not understood by the Sumerians themselves as a verb derivative) (MSL IV, I 15, 36; III 172, 174). Nevertheless, the very fact of the phonetic transition m > h is interesting, which leads to the following thoughts. In Sumerian, there is a borderline state of phonemes /m/-/g/ in the case of pronouns of 1 l. units: mu > guio "my", taz > ge26 "I". The pronoun 1 l. pl. h. me > "ge "our" is also known. Note that the base on /m / marks in Sumerian the relation of the object to the speaker. Here is another example. The spatial orientation prefix mu-has two main meanings: a) direction to the speaker (in kosv. the object of 1 l. unit part) "here, to me"; b) acts as a means of expressing personal emotional interest ("to me", "for me", "as for me") 56. We see that in all the above cases, the phonosemantic nest denotes the self-identification of the subject (or group of subjects), the expression of the "I/we" state, the substantiation of the speaker, and the emotional interest in the object of utterance (57). It is possible that the Sumerian word mu, meaning "name" and "year" (abr. from mu-an-na "the name of heaven").

The same basis of mu - as part of the subordinate union ti- ...- a -? ez means "because of what; since", forming the connotation of causality. The same phrase can be said in two other ways: bar-...-a-ak-a, pat-...- a -? ez, where bar "body, appearance", pat "fate". In other words, this means a reason that is external and indefinite in nature.

Now defining the semantic field of the entire nest, from which, presumably, the word te can originate, it is necessary to highlight the main shades of meaning: 7) visual selection of an object based on its appearance and confirmation of its status; 2) its accentuation in speech; 3) likening two foreign objects by external similarity; 4) substantiation of the speaker, "I/we" - state; 5) personal emo-

53. Thomson. Op. cit. P. 273.

54. Crags. Op. cit. P. 100-101.

55. Ellermeier F. Sumerisches Glossar. Bd I-II. Neukirchen-Vluyn, 1980.

56. Koneva. Uk. soch. p. 110-113.

57. It is interesting that in Nostratic languages * - M - is an indicator of pronouns of 1 l. unit part (Ivanov. Uk. soch. p. 543).

page 171

the speaker's personal interest in something; b) the indeterminate nature of the selected subject in terms of origin and properties. 7) naming, i.e. highlighting with a word, remains in question.

Let us now consider compound names and verbs that contain ME in their composition (58):

te-a ("ME-water") "ablution"; "command", "request", "conspiracy formula, any cliche"

me-dini2 ("ME-create") "create", "external form"; "become"; "growth" te-duio ("ME-to be beneficial") "to be abundant, fruitful", "to be numerous"

me-gar (shz-me-gar) ("ME-set") "state of depression", "state of thoughtfulness"; "silence"," silence " me-lam2 ("ME-increase") "shine"," shine "me-me " dance, jump", "fast jump"; "delight, joy, exultation";

"rite"; "attract attention" me-te ("ME-approach") "compliance with its purpose", "beautiful view"

me-zu ("ME-to know")"clairvoyant"

me-li ("ME-to grow") "mode of action";" performance of office, duties " me-me-a "pouring water";" clean, uncultivated field " me-gal-zu ("ME-great-to know") "to interpret a dream".

All the meanings of the above words point to ME in the following contexts:

7) creating an object as the upward direction of its form, 2) drawing attention through enthusiastic dancing and jumping, 3) the way of acting, as well as the image of the position, 4) contemplating invisible images in the process of thinking, silence and interpreting dreams, 5) looking, 6) speech, uttering cliches, 7) washing as renewal, clearing the original appearance. From the totality of meanings emerges the semantic core of ME, which could previously be understood from the data of the language grammar and syllabaries. Now we will formulate a general property that is characteristic of all semantic chains of the term. So, MES are associated with a) the external form of the object, with its vertical orientation (through growth, dance, jumping), b) with the act of speech, c) with the look, d) with the image of words and actions both in reality and in a dream, e) with the removal of dirt from the external appearance. The same moment of transition from the invisible to the visible, from the potential to the actual, from the nonverbal to the verbal, from the inactive to the active, from the secret to the manifest, from the beginningless to the initial is emphasized everywhere. ME's represent the boundary of this transition - they contain as much of the explicit as of the secret. They express the unconscious desire of the subject to express itself, to manifest itself, to fix itself in space and time through self-identification in the image and word, to escape from the darkness of the unknown and non-existence. The semantic core of ME is the will to be, manifested on the planes of sight, speech, action, office as a mode of action, rite as a mode of action, and speech (59). "In the beginning was the Word..." says the Gospel of John,

58. According to the dictionary of the Sumerian language: Nypeg V. Reizammer A. INIM. KI.EN.GI (Das Sumerische). Marktredwitz, 1985-1986.

59. " The act of volition necessarily presupposes the previous presence in our consciousness of certain desires, desires, and aspirations connected, first, with the idea of the ultimate goal to which we are striving, and secondly, with the idea of those actions and actions that are necessary on our part for the realization of our goal. (...) ... a complete volitional act should be understood as a system of behavior that arises on the basis of the emotional and instinctive drives of the organism and is completely predetermined by them... What we commonly call causeless desires are such insofar as their cause is hidden or hidden in the unconscious realm. Further, the drive is usually refracted in complex thought processes; it tries to take over our thoughts, because thought is the approach to behavior, and whoever takes the approach takes the fortress. Thinking is a kind of transfer mechanism between drives and behavior and provides organization

page 172

but there could also be a look in the beginning. Here is how a modern cultural critic G. D. Gachev writes about the creative function of vision:: "Before the beginning of vision for a person, everything is closed, deaf, mute, and imperceptible... impenetrable... and suddenly, what was happening? Openness to Being towards, uncloseness of a person (and Being in general), their conversion, appeared in front of a person, a person. The light fluttered out of the slot like a bird, with a triumphant cry , like the first manifestation of life in a newborn. And the world was flooded with light and became known as "light". So, the wave of the eyelids is bottomless. (...) It is precisely in the fact that vision is inherent in free will, and there is a radiation made in looking. The ear does not radiate, and the nostrils, and the skin, but only perceive or reflect involuntarily. The eye, when it opens, gives the flowing images consent to reflect - and by this act of consent, it creates them, describes them, outlines their forms. When I look, I don't know what's going on here: do images - pressure particles - rays flow down on me, or does the eye remove the shells from distant objects, tracing them with its rays as if stroking them with its hands, and through touch, along the ray conductors, from them, from things, points flow down into the person? (...) Here the eyes are closed - and the person feels only himself: more precisely-there is no" I "and there is no "not-I", but everything is a haze of extension, continuous. Here the eyes are open - and the person has left himself and feels the sharpest sense of peace outside of himself... the world is like a Person, a person (for a person looks with his face, and projects his face into the spreading being) - and can relate to it, love it... " (60). This argument perfectly expresses the feeling of the beholder drawing the line between "I" and "not-I", "our" and "alien", visible and invisible, already known and not yet known. The feeling is completely primal, wild, emotionally acute - "the light fluttered out with a jubilant cry", we also recall the jumps and the plastic expression of exultation in the dance. Gachev compares a person who looks and screams with a newborn who declares himself, and we will not forget this comparison, since it is true for several reasons: a) the moment of birth is the separation of the baby from the mother's womb and the manifestation of its life form in the external world, b) at birth, the baby's eyes open and it passes from passive perception of sensations to active external activity, b) at the time of birth and for a long time after that, the baby screams, and his cry is an indicator of good health for doctors. This is the initial separate state not only of organic life, but of any process in principle. This state is characterized by a transition from internal to external, which is clearly demonstrated by the cuneiform sign ME, which represents the image of the tongue sticking out of the mouth (61).

So, as a result of our research, we found out that ME cannot be defined and explained as an object, since this category marks a process, more precisely , the initial phase of any process, which is the selection of an object from among similar ones, its self-declaration through formal and actual manifestation in the world, and the totality of its properties that relate to the properties of observing intelligence. This phase of volition can have both a spatial and temporal interpretation, presenting itself in space as a visual image of an object or object that ensures its existence, and in time-in the context of updating and ordering the world after the New Year. But this is a topic for another article.

the latter depends on those internal urges and motivations that come from the deep foundations of our psyche" (Vygotsky L. S. Pedagogical Psychology, Moscow, 1996, pp. 160-162). Thus, Vygotsky's formula for a complete act of volition (drive + thinking + behavior) indicates, first, the inseparability of the end and the means in the consciousness subordinate to the drive, and secondly, the struggle between the unconscious and the conscious beginning of the psyche at the moment of the final choice of the goal. The position of the will is just on the border of these principles.

60. Gachev G. Cosmo-Psycho-Logos. National Images of the world, Moscow, 1995, pp. 164-166.

61. Deimel A. Sumerisches Lexikon. Bd IV. Roma, 1935-1950. S. 532; Lambert М. Grammaire sumerienne. Fasc. IV: La Formation du syllabaire // Ecole du Louvre. P., 1977. P. 12.

page 173

ON THE ORIGINAL MEANING OF SUMERIAN ME (Images ofWeltanschauung and the Methods of Their Study) V.V. Yemelyanov

The article discusses the problem of translating and interpreting Sumerian ME by means of the Old Babylonian cuneiform vocabularies and the Neo-Sumerian Gudea texts. The main supposition is that the word was derived from the verb ME "to be apparent, visible" and its original meaning was "will to live". The author understands ME as the first stage of the life-process: transition of a subject from the inner world to the outer space (as one can conclude from the cuneiform sign ME "tongue put out of mouth"). This is why ME's are so important in the New Year period of Sumero-Babylonian calender texts.

Permanent link to this publication: