Skip to content
Above Top Secret
Ancient Aliens

Zecharia Sitchin: where the modern Anunnaki story actually comes from

Almost everything popularly believed about the Anunnaki traces to one author writing from the 1970s. His readings of Sumerian are rejected by Assyriology, and the objections are checkable in a dictionary.

ATS Research DeskDocuments and archives
2 min read
A cuneiform tablet

Sumerian and Akkadian have been readable since the nineteenth century. The texts can be checked against a lexicon.

The modern Anunnaki story — that Sumerian texts describe extraterrestrials who came to Earth for gold and engineered humanity to mine it — has a single principal author. Zecharia Sitchin published The 12th Planet in 1976 and eleven further volumes over three decades.

It is worth tracing, because this site covers the Sumerian record and readers arrive having met Sitchin’s version without knowing it is his.

What the Sumerian record actually is

Illustration

Enormous, and readable. Hundreds of thousands of cuneiform tablets survive, and Sumerian and Akkadian have been deciphered since the nineteenth century. There are grammars, dictionaries and a professional discipline.

The Anunnaki appear in it as a category of deity — the great gods of the pantheon, associated with the sky and with the underworld depending on period and text. They are gods, in a religious literature, doing what gods do in such literature.

The specific objections

Assyriologists have addressed his readings in detail, and the objections are concrete.

Nibiru. Sitchin renders it as a planet with a 3,600-year orbit. In the texts the term is used of a celestial position or crossing point, and is associated with a body identified with Jupiter or Mercury in different contexts. The extended orbit is not in the sources.

Anunnaki as "those who from heaven to earth came". The term is a divine epithet; the etymology Sitchin offers is not the one the grammar supports.

The rocket depictions. The cylinder seal imagery he interprets as spacecraft is read by specialists using an established iconographic vocabulary — one seal frequently reproduced as showing a solar system is, on the standard reading, a star and symbols with known conventional meanings.

Why it is persuasive anyway

Because it is internally consistent, extensively footnoted, and written with confidence about a body of material almost no reader can check.

Cuneiform is a genuine specialism. A reader encountering a detailed argument about Sumerian vocabulary has no way to evaluate it independently, and the apparatus of scholarship is doing work the scholarship does not support.

What this leaves

A real and remarkable literature — the oldest written record of human religion and law — being read through a framework its own specialists say is not in the text.

The Sumerian material genuinely is extraordinary. It does not need to be about spacecraft to be worth reading, and treating it as though it does is a poor way to treat the first thing anybody wrote down.

Join the discussion

Still open on this one:

  1. 01

    Has any Assyriologist supported the readings?

    Not to our knowledge, in the peer-reviewed literature. That is worth stating plainly given how widely the interpretation circulates.

Join the discussion

Be the first to comment

Sources

Open them and check for yourself. Where a record is public, it is linked.

  1. The British Museum collection

    British Museum

  2. Electronic Text Corpus of Sumerian Literature

    University of Oxford

0 comments