Talk:Ama-gi

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ancient Near East, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of ancient Near East–related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Ancient Near EastWikipedia:WikiProject Ancient Near EastTemplate:WikiProject Ancient Near EastAncient Near East
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Politics: Libertarianism Low‑importance

	Politics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Libertarianism portal This article is supported by WikiProject Libertarianism (assessed as Low-importance).

Visual arts

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Visual arts, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of visual arts on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Visual artsWikipedia:WikiProject Visual artsTemplate:WikiProject Visual artsvisual arts

Human rights Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Human rights, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Human rights on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Human rightsWikipedia:WikiProject Human rightsTemplate:WikiProject Human rightsHuman rights
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Neutrality Dispute

Some editors to this page have repeatedly made changes to hide the fact that no specialist in the Sumerian language agrees with the linking of this word to liberty in any publication. There are a lot of libertarians out there who will have to make up new explanations for their tattoos if word gets out that the liberty "definition" of the Sumerian word is a modern libertarian invention. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.70.98.37 (talk) 22:39, 20 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Finally, it is in this document that we find the word "freedom" used for the first time in man's recorded history; the word is amargi, which, as has recently been pointed out by Adam Falkenstein, means literally "return to the mother." However, we still do not know why this figure of speech came to be used for "freedom."

Samuel Noah Kramer. The Sumerians: Their History, Culture, and Character (Kindle Locations 1073-1075). Kindle Edition.

--94.26.67.60 (talk) 22:33, 9 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Can we resolve this neutrality dispute? Kramer is an extremely well-reknowned Assyriologist and the citation above should serve Wikipedia's citation requirements. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.171.96.92 (talk) 17:18, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

2024

I would suggest return to Mother means return to origin. The state of being in debt has been resolved and your property is free from claim. The extrapolation to our current use of freedom may be a stretch. 2600:1005:B050:5AE8:3C19:4BF1:2275:888C (talk) 01:22, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Kramer

More interesting context found here: http://www.quebecoislibre.org/10/100115-4pr.htm

The Sumerologist Noah Kramer described it as follows in his book From the Tablets of Sumer: Twenty-Five Firsts in Man's Recorded History, The Falcon's Wing Press, 1956:

Urukagina, the leader of the Sumerian city-state of Girsu/Lagash, led a popular movement that resulted in the reform of the oppressive legal and governmental structure of Sumeria. The oppressive conditions in the city before the reforms is described in the new code preserved in cuneiform on tablets of the period: "From the borders of Ningirsu to the sea, there was the tax collector." During his reign (ca. 2350 B.C.) Urukagina implemented a sweeping set of laws that guaranteed the rights of property owners, reformed the civil administration, and instituted moral and social reforms. Urukagina banned both civil and ecclesiastical authorities from seizing land and goods for payment, eliminated most of the state tax collectors, and ended state involvement in matters such as divorce proceedings and perfume making. He even returned land and other property his predecessors had seized from the temple. He saw that reforms were enacted to eliminate the abuse of the judicial process to extract money from citizens and took great pains to ensure the public nature of legal proceedings.

Kramer explains the context in the following very interesting paragraph from another of his books, The Sumerians. Their History, Culture and Character (University of Chicago Press, 1963, p. 79):

As can be gathered from what has already been said about social and economic organization, written law played a large role in the Sumerian city. Beginning about 2700 B.C., we find actual deeds of sales, including sales of fields, houses, and slaves. From about 2350 B.C., during the reign of Urukagina of Lagash, we have one of the most precious and revealing documents in the history of man and his perennial and unrelenting struggle for freedom from tyranny and oppression. This document records a sweeping reform of a whole series of prevalent abuses, most of which could be traced to a ubiquitous and obnoxious bureaucracy consisting of the ruler and his palace coterie; at the same time it provides a grim and ominous picture of man's cruelty toward man on all levels—social, economic, political, and psychological. Reading between its lines, we also get a glimpse of a bitter struggle for power between the temple and the palace—the "church" and the "state"—with the citizens of Lagash taking the side of the temple. Finally, it is in this document that we find the word "freedom" used for the first time in man's recorded history; the word is amargi, which, as has recently been pointed out by Adam Falkenstein, means literally "return to the mother." However, we still do not know why this figure of speech came to be used for "freedom."

Historically speaking it is very clear that amargi (or amagi) means freedom. The question asked by Kramer is why in sumerian context "return to the mother" has taken this meaning. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.174.103.32 (talk) 11:23, 31 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

An academic source discussing this might be interesting, another Libertarian source is just another Libertarian source claiming it means freedom. "Historically speaking it is very clear that amargi (or amagi) means freedom" is just your interpretation, not a fact, and we don't even know who you are. This is Kramer's interpretation of a word that means "return to the mother" and Kramer says he is "reading between the lines". Dougweller (talk) 20:41, 31 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I've resolved the neutrality issue with a citation to Samuel Noah Kramer's book. I believe Dougweller may have misread the above paragraph in which Kramer points out that by reading the Urukagina texts between the lines one can perceive the dispute between temple and palace and which side the citizens of Lagash were supporting. The scope of the "reading between the lines" would have come to an end by the time Kramer brings up his reading of amargi (the parallelism between "Reading between the lines, ..." and "Finally, ..." indicates these statements are peers, not that the latter is subordinated to the former). 67.171.96.92 (talk) 05:11, 27 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pronunciation

How do you pronounce Ama-gi? Is it Ah-muh jee or ah-muh gee? -- 07:27, 5 December 2005 65.104.11.58

There's no evidence that the Sumerian language had a "soft g" or dzh type sound -- but scholars' conclusions about Sumerian pronunciation are basically informed tertiary guesses... AnonMoos (talk) 20:40, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Reliable secondary sources

Wikipedia requires that all assertions in articles be sourced and cited to a verifiable, reliable secondary source. Claims that are not verifiable and cited will be tagged, and then removed from the article. If you wish to make a more disputable claim, it would be best to discuss on the Talk page first. N2e (talk) 02:33, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The "Instituto Politico para la Libertad" needs a citecheck

I have tagged the Instituto Politico para la Libertad citation in the 2009-05-05T09:54:34 version of the article [1] as {citecheck}. I'm quite willing to believe that IPplL may utilize the Amagi Sumerian symbol; but the given citation URL does not seem to support it. Can someone provide a link to a web page that actually does support it? N2e (talk) 17:31, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It's right here. Skomorokh 17:57, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

{citecheck} has been removed. Thanks Skomorokh for pointing that out. I had missed it when I first looked at the IPplL page. I do see it now up in the upper righthand corner of the website, blending into the background color of the page. In my view, that is sufficient for now. Technically however, no primary sources are supposed to be used to backup assertions in Wikipedia; WP should be cited to verifiable, reliable 'secondary sources. But seeing as no other editors active in this article seem to be bothered by it, and several of the other groups who utilize the Amagi symbol are also referenced by primary sources, I do not choose to contest the issue at the present time. N2e (talk) 19:41, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Common sense trumps V. :) Skomorokh 19:59, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Georgian School

The section with a link to some unknown Georgian school of economics is orthographically and grammatically wrong and seems to be little more than advertising. I suggest deleting it. SchnitteUK (talk) 16:49, 30 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]