Dead Names, Dead Dog: Sumerian Shenanigans

After that digression, let’s dive back into Dead Names…

There has been as much controversy over the term “Cutha” as over the origins of the Sumerians, Yezidis, and Todas. I put forward my thesis that the Lovecraftian entity known as Cthulhu may be a form of KUTULU, a Sumerian word meaning “Man of Kutu” or “Man of the Underworld.” This has been attacked, naturally, by those who see in my Sumerian phraseology as well as my Sumerian history errors reflecting poor scholarship. However, as we will see, the facts instead support the case I made in 1975 and which I make again today. What I did not know at the time was the extent of the idea of the Sumerian city of Cutha and its deep significance to chthonic, or underworld, deities.

“Simon” goes on to show that Cutha was, indeed, a city with a vast metropolis connected with the Underworld. He’s made a credible case, and I’ve been able to find this in other sources. Thus, I’m going to enter this into the errata.

It’s too early for his supporters to celebrate, however. Often, what is more interesting than what “Simon” says is what he doesn’t say. “Simon” brings up his “Sumerian phraseology” and then lets it drop, as if he’s proven that “Kutu-Lu” is a correct word as well. Actually, as I posted not so long ago, his only source for this information is two posters on the Internet who, to my knowledge, have no personal knowledge of Sumerian. What’s really going on here?

Unlike “Simon”, I actually went out to get a Sumerian grammar – in this case, the appropriately named Sumerian Grammar by Dietz Edzard, published in 2003. Here’s what I found:
Complex explanation: The section on the genitive case (Section 5.4.2.3) details the “X of Y” construction that is required to create the “man of Kutu” phrase. In most cases, the X (“lu”) does come before Y (“Kutu”), leading to a construction “lu-Kutu”. The only exception to this order must be accompanied by a possessive particle added as a suffix, which is not present in “Kutulu.”

Simple explanation: No. Nuh-uh. No way. Never happened.

Thus, by keeping the attention on a lengthy explanation of the city of “Cutha”, “Simon” has neglected the main point – that the phrase “Kutu-Lu” still has no basis in Sumerian. (And if someone more knowledgeable regarding Sumerian does, somebody point me to a reference!)