Drink and Babylon!

 

I spent an enjoyable hour listening to a podcast from the 'National Archives.' 

I knew about these but only recently began to listen to them.  Today I listened to one from 2006.

Phillipa Glanville, from the V&A museum, discussing 'The Dichotomies of Drink.'  Very interesting this was too.  A clever woman, well researched, and clearly spoken, discussing drink from the late 1600s up until recent times.  The development of whisky taught me much I did not know, the growth of beer in its many forms, wine, political intrusion and responses to European wars, and the public response during difficult times.

Water being rough if not impure led to much beer drinking, of a  weak kind.  War in Europe led to sales of whisky and rum growing.  Drunkenness also grew alongside the increase in alcohol sales.  Who would have thought...?

A good Podcast, and well worth a listen and I suspect many more also.

This is a good book!

Good that is if you like reading about ancient Mesopotamia!

I do.

Paul Kriwaczek, a Viennese, was head of Central Asian Affairs at the BBC World Service for 25 years.  His wide knowledge of many languages no doubt aided his studies.  This book was published in 2010, a year before he died.

Beginning by comparing Saddam Hussein with the great leaders who had gone before him millennia ago helps us understand, he says, how life in the region continues in similar fashion since settlement began.  Human nature after all, does not change.

From Eridu in the south, where incoming peoples gathered around 5000 BC, through until the fall of Babylon to the Persians and the end of what the author calls the 'first stage' in civilisation, we follow the development of the various societies and indeed Pauls interesting, but not always correct thoughts on the matter.  

Paul was an intelligent and thoughtful man, however, some of his opinions were lacking in my view, indeed, somewhat idiosyncratic I would say.  His view on what was the 'Flood,' is worth reading, but somehow lacks substance to me.  

We hear of the rise of the Sumer super states, Ur and Uruk, the opposition from Elam, and the constant flow of peoples throughout time who eventually take over and, according to the author, continue the culture that they find.  

We read of Gilgamesh, and the various people who brought the rise and fall, and rise again, of Babylon and then Assyria.  Famous names such as Hammurabi pass by, less famous names come and go, leaving a mark in their day and going the way of all flesh into obscurity.  

Of course the rise of both Babylon and Assyria, and her fall, takes up some room.  Both, thanks to scripture, are renown in the west, though not accurately I suggest.  Paul describes the situation at various times attempting to enliven the image, he makes a story of the situation, often I found quite well, and throughout the book he remains easily readable, even I could understand the big words.

The study of those clay tablets covered in 'cuneiform' have offered us much detail on the life of people in the area.  This includes letters from a wife to her far off husband complaining about what he has taken with him on business, or detailing her efforts to sell the goods he has sent back from far off.  

It amazes me how much detail can be found, and it is exciting to consider how many thousands of these tablets have still to be translated.

We see the rise and fall of Assyria, her determination never to be put down again, resulting in her harsh treatment of those who resist.  Our author details also Assyria's harsh treatment of women, so harsh that it is possible to see how Islam can regard their treatment of women as protective!   

States cannot exist for ever under violence, eventually people rebel.  Babylon took over for a period, then the Persians ended this period of life.  Things were never the same again.

Ancient Sumer, and those that came after, developed the sciences as far as possible in their day.  Much of the maths known to the Greeks was already found in Ur and Uruk.  Architecture and art developed quickly, agriculture, in spite of mistakes, fed the people well, and life developed from Temple led authority governing an organised society, to a more 'free enterprise' world under the Kings.  The rich got richer and the poor remained poor as in all societies, but differing times had different responses to human need.

I liked this book, I disagreed with much of Pauls understanding of the situation, but I would wouldn't I?

This book is an easy read, full of information, offers a large reading list at the end, and is well worth spending time on.  Such a shame the author has passed on.

Ancient & Medieval Worlds lecture 1: Mesopotamia part 1

 

Thought some of you might like this.  This is the first in a series of short lectures about the distant past, which some of you may remember...   

There are about a dozen or so in the list.  I have watched this one and found it quite easy to listen to.  Putting it on YouTube allows you to see what the others in line are.

First Day of Spring

Spring music for the official first day of Spring. 

Naturally the sun is shining and the wind is just above freezing, as it is in Spring.  All day people have walked around almost smiling as they considered the worst has passed.  Maybe they are right but as we know another day or two of snow and storm will appear before May.  

The weathermen use the 1st of March as the beginning of Spring for reasons unknown but this time of the year is when the hemispheres share the change over, in the north Spring begins while in the south Autumn arrives.  I read that the cuneiform tablet shown above speaks of this event.  This dates form around 3000 years ago, most likely from Ashurbanipal's library in  Nineveh, Assyria.  

The King liked to gather information that would help him run his kingdom, he lasted around 40 years and built up a large Assyrian Empire so he learnt well.  This king not only gathered information it is possible he was academically inclined, unlike some of his kind.  As is the way he obtained high office when the legitimate heir died and he was selected to the position, a good decision it turns out.

The scribes and learned men in Babylon might not have thought so however, Ashurbanipal's desire to know more led him to take such men into Nineveh and make them write out all the knowledge they had.  To ensure they reluctant ones did so he chained them there until they had furnished him with knowledge.

The Babylon folks did not take kindly to their northern neighbours and once Ashurbanipal had gone the Assyrian Empire went into decline.  Another couple of Kings later and an uprising from the south saw an end of the Assyrians empire making for good.  

Down there in far off Mesopotamia (the land between two rivers) the people five thousand and more years BC were happily working out the earth was round, the times table and other difficult maths (they taught the Greeks) and building high Ziggerat temples and other buildings, often just from mud brick, long before most of us considered such things important.

Staring up into the sky their 'Magi' would soon learn the movement of the stars and planets (would they know the difference I wonder?) and interpreting the movements as indication of events on earth.  They would not tell you a 'tall dark man will come to your door on Tuesday' however that is the stuff of girlies magazines not the real world.  Clear skies in the night sky would allow a wonderful panorama above and these men would quickly learn the change of the seasons.  Their understanding from away back is still relevant today (they gave us '60' for minutes in the day) and recognising Spring would be a reason for a celebration I would think.

Spring is here, the skies are bluer, the early morning brighter, now we can enjoy it as the weather improves.

'Setting the Desert on fire'

My best looking and most intelligent niece only ever made two mistakes, she married a Hun and bore his son.  That said she appears to be quite happy about all this in spite of my opinions and the son has turned out to be the only member of the family with the ability to read books.  Since he learnt the art of reading he has always had a book in his face although drink and women have lessened his reading abilities somewhat in recent years.  However when Christmas arrives and the two are together long enough for a briefing re presents he has clearly advised her regarding a book for me.  It is not possible she, wise though she be, would consider such a work as suitable.  Indeed the last book she chose by herself was 'Grumpy Old Men,' a book with which I could not begin to comprehend the reason she sent to me and then could not see any 'grumpy men' within, indeed they appeared quite commonsensical for the most part. 
This year once again she has returned to him for advice and clearly his advice has been good.  "Setting the Desert on Fire" by James Barr is a wonderful fast moving narrative concerning the details of 'Lawrence of Arabia' and his Middle Eastern adventures during the Great War.
Having read so many Great War books I was going through one of those moods when any more offerings were not seen as urgent reads, naturally I have four more lined up after this one all demanding my attention!  However once I opened the book I could not put it down.  Everyone has heard of 'Lawrence of Arabia' British propaganda and tabloid newspapers half truths saw to that but few including myself know the real deal.  This book, the result of four long years trawling through documents, diaries and letters scattered across the globe, enlightens us as to the reality of the popular myth.  Creatures found in Hollywood movies usually bear no relation to the facts I find.

The political problems faced by London were simple enough.  The Royal Navy was now powered by oil rather than coal so guarding the oil fields in southern Mesopotamia was urgent.  The Turkish threat to the Suez Canal could lead to uprisings in Egypt which may lead to loss of the Canal and cut the lifeline to India, the so called 'Rose in the Crown.'  France was desperate to control Syria and the Brits were desperate to avoid any interference from them in that area.  Here also two forces fought for control of the region, London and India.  The Indian end was afraid upsetting the balance in Arabia could lead to disturbances in India and their solutions cut across much of what London, or their people ion Cairo wished to see.  Political games are of ten delicately balanced and strong forces often care little about the harm others may suffer.
The Arabs were of course not asked their opinion.
This is not quite correct as Arab opinion was important, that is getting Shaikh Hussein and Ibn Saud the two most powerful Arab leaders, to follow British wishes in removing the Turks.  Politically this led to vague promises that in reality meant little in western diplomacy however in the Arab mind many steadfast promises were made.  Often this was exaggerated by translation promises and lack of comprehension of the other sides views.  This still causes resentment today.     
Lawrence, or Captain Edward. T.E. Lawrence as we should call him was an intelligence officer in Egypt.  Before the war he had travelled widely in the region working as an archaeologist and just happening to note Turkish positions in the region.  During 1916 he got his way for more action by transferring to the Arab Bureau and entered the Hijaz region to assess the situation.
In Arabia hew as able to convince the Emir of Mecca Shaikh ibn Ali Husein to follow British will and provide men to help deal with the Turkish railway that ran to Medina the then capital and birthplace of the prophet Mohammad.  
For the next two years Lawrence developed the various factions into an army of sorts and indulged in 'Boys Own' type adventures attempting to destroy the railway line.  As time passed they progressed form cutting small sections soon repaired to blowing bridges and long lengths of line.  Each occasion hindered Turkish movements of men and supplies destroying equipment and men.  On occasion the Arab nomadic approach of looting and taking no prisoners caused some degree of disagreement as this cut across the normal British approach to prisoners.
Difficulties with tribes fighting with one another rather than Turks, of shaikhs demanding large sums of money which appeared to disappear, with Husein fear of ibn Saud taking his place from the rear, and above all problems between London, Cairo, and India and the personnel involved each working from his own position all added to Lawrence's struggles.
For political and personal reasons Lawrence's aim was to enable the Arabs to be seen as fighting the war, not a Briton leading them.  This was to stop the French moving into Syria and to encourage the British to allow Arab rule over the land.  Treaties were signed unknown to those in the field, and often hidden for months, promises from one, vague or not, flew between various peoples, all to often Lawrence would no little of these or in some cases be found responsible for them.  It was that kind of situation.

The final victory brought more confusion as one promise or another was pushed aside to suit worldwide requirements.  All to often consideration for the Arabs themselves were considered unimportant.  The Arabs of course were not one nation, they remain today a variety of tribal and sectarian groupings forced together into political states invented by more powerful nations and their requirements.  Political turmoil in itself is not the fault of the west, that would occur anyway but it is always good to have someone to blame, especially if you have oil and money.  
For most of the war Lawrence's role, along with that of many other British officers and men who joined as time went by, remained a secret back home.  It was the French, in an attempt to prove their position, that revealed his work.  A great hero was created and common myth keeps this going for years afterwards.
Lawrence was not in my opinion a man you could get close to.  He was certainly affected by the war but appears to have been a troubled soul before this time.  he claimed in his 'Seven Pillars of Wisdom' that he had entered the town of Dara then in Turkish occupation and been arrested as a deserter from the Turkish army and roundly whipped and abused by the commander of the town.  Much of this appears from this book to have been an invention of his mind.  The 'Seven Pillars' was not meant for popular publication and given only to friends and this may have allowed him the freedom to express his rather unusual desires more openly.  He certainly indulged them after the war.  The settlement saw Lawrence back in 'England' and later he went on to join the RAF as a lower ranked airman.  Captain W.E. Johns famous for his 'Biggles' books was working at the RAF recruitment office when this strange character entered to sign on.  Orders from above came through and it was only later did he realise what was going on, the purpose of his enlistment was never clear.
Lawrence died a hero by crashing his motorbike at high speed in 1935.  His influence on the Middle East must have hung heavy with him as he saw the major powers mishandling the situation there.  At least some of those he worked with were inspired by their actions there, one Francis Stirling was to join him and later became the leader of the 'Long Range Desert Force' in the North African campaign, this was the beginning of the SAS. 

The book is well researched and a racy read.  My knowledge of that aspect of the war was limited to General Allenby's push up through Palestine and the actions of the Arabs against the railway line did indeed go a long way to helping him by disrupting Turkish movements and greatly hindering the Turks in their operations.  The suffering of Turkish prisoners is not something to consider however but the Turks had followed the usual Middle Easter approach and treated all peoples badly.  The book does not gloss over the good and bad aspects of Arab and political behaviour, it shows the British in a poor light all too often and exposes the confused mix of Arab politics.  
Well worth a read and a change from the Western Front!    

Reading the Distant Past

What a great book!
The author takes us through ten cities beginning five millenniums BC and ending with Babylon and its fall.  Indeed she steps over into the first century AD but the bulk of the book concerns the far distant and still much unknown past.
5000 years BC people had begun to develop cities instead of large family groups spread over the area.  Increased population saw a drift into the far south of Mesopotamia (the land between two rivers) and Eridu the first stop is far in the south of what we know call Iraq.

Eridu

 

Eridu was considered the first city by the Sumerians, Sumer being the name given to the area, the city built they say by the god Enki.  He is said to have built his great temple here and over the centuries this was rebuilt time and again, each occasion carefully flattening and sealing the previous building before rebuilding began.  The archaeologists who dug deep into the mound found there was indeed a temple, a small square box shaped building the size of an average room dating from around five thousand years previously.

The gods feature much in the history.  Each city had its own, usually a female and male and the women often more important for reasons unknown.  Greeks and some early Christians developed the idea of a female goddess, pure and holy, clearly not based on any real woman around them.  I wonder why such goddesses are sought by so many?

The gods become confusing as time passes, some visit one another, several become top god depending on who is the top man, and all look after their city if they are fed and watered properly.   Some temples had at the top a variety of rooms for the gods use, each with following helpers.  The fact is we know god exists and if we don't find the real one we need to invent one to suit.  This did not help when cities went to war and one or other destroyed the loser mind.

The difference between these gods and the real God is that Jesus is alive and can be found, reading the theology here made the biblical story appear so much clearer and straight forward.

 

 Ubaid

 

Certainly the folks back then knew how to make pottery.  This bowl goes back to 5400BC and was found in a grave at Eridu.  That's seven thousand years ago and more!

The cities had various problems with water.  To the north the desert region depended in the end on irrigation making use of the changing rivers the Tigris and the Euphrates, later water came from the Zargos mountains when the Assyrians took charge.  In the south near the Gulf the tides from the Gulf caused different problems in the southern marshes.  It is thought the varying weather and shifting water led to a fatalism that permeates even Islam today, whether this is true I know not but it is a thought.  When you depend on the weather you tend to live with your eye one the sky.

The early chapters appear to indicate a lifestyle in which peace and love circulates and everyone shares everything and lives in harmony with one another.  Certainly this is possible, ancient cities on the Indian/Pakistan border had no walls and appear to have settled lives so why not Eridu.  We know however that human nature is corrupt and already people spoke of the flood and what had occurred in the distant past, human nature does not change.  It is possible a decent society existed but on occasion as time moves on through the millenniums it is clear soldiers exist, walls are created and aa dominant level of society is calling the shots.

The increase in exchange of goods required better husbandry and records of trade, the beginning of writing appears about 3500BC and by then someone, possibly in the temple is organising society to ensure life continues and this means ensuring the farmers plant crops, the herdsmen and shepherds do their stuff and appropriate offerings are made to the gods.  A powerful civil service arises everywhere and soon scribes become just as important.  

Early writing featuring simple signs indicating beer or wheat eventually develop into Cuneiform script which exists for thousands of years afterwards.  Many late clay tablets feature translations into Greek on the reverse side.  Where would we be without writing?

 

   UR

Ur is one of the most famous cities discussed in the book.  Famous because Abram, who you may have heard off originated here before making his way north to Harran with his father than setting off to Canaan to become the first of the Hebrews.  It was fascinating to discover something of the situation 2000BC when he left.  UR had developed into a small state and ruled over many for over a hundred years or so and near the end of that time Abram and all his moved away.  The folks in UR had not been good at treating the neighbours well and by 2000 the Elamites had come from the east miffed at their treatment and laid waste the city.  They were very miffed!

 

The author, a woman, begins with the historical dig at each city, tells us the history and of the discoveries made at each city.  This is an excellent read and not boring, at least not to me.  She flows along making special mention of women whenever she can, as women do!  Each town has its occupation indicated, the ideology if it had one and the various gods enthroned.  Some reveal a great deal about those who inhabited the city while others leave a lot to be desired.  Where possible Gwendolyn Leick explains the various interpretations for the difficulties presented and the glossary and notes at the back help a great deal while pondering the findings.

 

 Adad Gate

Nineveh offers an interesting problem for those wishing to dig into the remains.  It is situated opposite Mosul, the city now controlled by Daesh (what we should call ISIS).  This makes it interesting as Daesh refuse to accept the past as important and tend to chop heads of those who dig there.  Most now avoid the area and this appears reasonable to me.  The ancient city is a huge space in which hundreds of archaeologists could spend years researching the past, that however will not happen for some time.

 

 Sippar

This is a poor review of a good book.  My excuse is the tendency I suffer at the moment to fall asleep, sometimes when walking down the street, and the feeble mind is even more feeble than ever this week

If you wish to understand the past read this book.  One thing that we know from such works is that human nature does not change and people now are just as they were ten thousand years ago, people do not change.

 

Mesopotamia

Mesopotamia is, they say, where civilisation began. They appear to be right. here we see Jarmo a settlement going back to 7000 BC. From the information available (found here) there was a village of over a hundred people living there, farming, with domesticated animals and using items made 300 miles away. With no bus service and few cars available at the time walking, domesticated asses maybe or possibly river travel, were the only means of movement. It is amazing that folk travelled so far in such circumstances. There again we all know the desire to see what is over the horizon and that pushed early man a little further all the time. A wide variety of foodstuffs have been discovered along with various tools. It is easy to guess from looking at this small society the family groupings, the leadership required, and also the petty jealousies and ambition that runs through all human endeavours. "Human nature," as Thucydides said,"Never changes."

I don't know about you but I find such history fascinating. Clearly this was the result of many years development. Communal activity created the township, the buildings and organised the tasks. i suspect these people often spoke of the days of yore when the ancients walked the earth,the older ones informing all who would listen that it was "Better in the old days." No doubt the music of the day annoyed the elders, kids behaved badly and did not do what mum told them. Antagonism towards neighbours near and far may have caused small wars now long forgotten. However they would also have joined with local people to oppose larger forces from outside. Having said that there does not appear to be much in the way of defence in this structure, at least from what little evidence is seen here. I find this fascinating and not because I am old enough to remember them personally. Some say this proved Adam and Eve (and the rest of the bible) wrong. But does it? Six days or six billion years? Who knows, but there must have been an Adam somewhere.