Of Phonecians and Mesopotamians

[frekk]

BTW, I really think that the Mediterranean coast doesn't belong to Mesopotamia.

Certainly not geographically, but culturally ... up to a certain point they certainly fall into that sphere. It's a very very close relationship, as one can see by Biblical events which record great amounts of interaction with the eastern cities and speak of them as very familiar places. In fact, Biblical accounts are directly responsible for the discovery of Sumeria in the first place. Woolley was actually looking for Abraham's hometown, described as "Ur of the Chaldees" in the Bible, and he found it - and thus was discovered Sumerian civilization.

Calling Rome "Hellenistic" is a bit too far, as Alex didn't invade Italy, and Latin was spoken in Rome, not Greek. And when Rome conquered the world, they imposed their idea of unity through diversity, so that parts of the Empire were somewhat Hellenistic, but that's it.

Alexander didn't invade Italy, but Greece colonized it long, long before that. Southern Italy was covered with Greek polises (eg Cumae, Gela, Himera, Kasmenai, Kaulonia, Leontini, Locri, Metaponton, Nea Polis, Pyxus, Rhegium, Segesta, Selenis, Siris, Sybarus, Syracuse, Taras/Tarentum) while Rome was still a small village, and Rome is a direct product of that influence. Hellenization isn't purely a process brought about by Alexandrian conquest ... Hellenization was occuring long before that, through Greek colonialism and trade and the apparent willingness of numerous peoples around the Meditteranean coasts to adopt Greek scripts, artistic styles, mythological systems, urban forms, technology, military methods, and economic networks. This is a process that started centuries before Alexander or Rome, beginning in about 700 BC. Because Rome is one of these cultures that did adopt so many facets of Greek culture, it is considered to be a Hellenized culture.

Further the Roman ideal of unity was entirely made possible by this huge sphere of Hellenized cultures - it provided an initial basis for the Empire. With a few exceptions (Gaul, Germania, Britain - all difficult places for the Romans) the territories they ended up incorporating were all places with a strong background in the Hellenic constellation of cultures.

 

[Kyriakos]

First off, from the region around modern Israel, Lebanon, Syria, and Jordan arose 2 civilizations that shaped history, Phoenicia and Israel. Phoenicia through its trade and colonizing legacies, and Israel through its Judaeo-Christian (sp?) traditions that approximately 2 thirds of the world including practically all of western Eurasia adhere by.

I wouldnt say that Phoenicia "shaped history". Its main lasting achievement was the foundation of Carthage, which ultimately got utterly destroyed by Rome. According to popular theories though it is possible that what is today known as the greek alphabet (alpha, beta etc) was initially a phoenician alphabet. (the minoans and mycenians used a sort of hyeroglyfic writing, known as grammike a and grammike b. Classical Greece used the greek alphabet, which for the most part is the one we also use today).
I am not entirely sure that this could be said about judaic people either (since Israel is the country, and at any rate i dont think that you mean that the country itself was significant), although i am somewhat of mixed views on this matter:
-The main contribution of the jewish people, of real *global* scale that is, is Christianity. But for many people that is seen as not an alltogether positive contribution.
-The "wondering jew" culture of the jews that settled in the west led to the rise of significant literary movements, like yiddish literature, and also many other people of the arts were jewish (like the one in my signature for example). Personally i am fond of the rather darker quality of jewish folklore (in comparisson to greek and norse) but i am not sure that mythology and literature are really achievements that carry a great significance in the civ series games.

 

[Israelite9191]

When I talk about the contribution of the Israelite people I am talking about the whole mind frame of the western (and in a sense the entire modern) world. The ideas of linear time, the importance of idividuals, and monotheism all cam from the Isrealites. Befor them Greeks, Germanics, Celts, Mesepotamians, etc. etc. all believed that time works in a circle and that everything that happens already heppened and will happen again. By this logic individual acheivments have no significance. The great importance of the Israelite mind set is best expressed in the book "The Gifts of the Jews, How a Tribe of Desert Namds Changed the Way Everyone Thinks and Feels" by Thomas Cahill. I also did meen the importance of the country because if the country had not existed the ideas of the people would never have been expressed to the wider world.

P.S.- Varwnos, you have good taste in literatrue.

 

[frekk]

I wouldnt say that Phoenicia "shaped history". Its main lasting achievement was the foundation of Carthage, which ultimately got utterly destroyed by Rome.

Dunno ... the invention of an alphabetic script that is today the foundation of all known alphabetic scripts certainly is a lasting achievement. Too, Carthage had an enormous impact on Meditteranean civilization felt long after Carthage was destroyed. Phoenicia was a major agent of technological and cultural diffusion in the Meditteranean, even influencing Greek culture. It's like saying Rome had no impact because it fell.

I am not entirely sure that this could be said about judaic people either (since Israel is the country, and at any rate i dont think that you mean that the country itself was significant), although i am somewhat of mixed views on this matter:
-The main contribution of the jews people, of real *global* scale that is, is Christianity. But for many people that is seen as not an alltogether positive contribution.
-The "wondering jew" culture of the jews that settled in the west led to the rise of significant literary movements, like yiddish literature, and also many other people of the arts were jewish (like the one in my signature for example). Personally i am fond of the rather darker quality of jewish folklore (in comparisson to greek and norse) but i am not sure that mythology and literature are really achievements that carry a great significance in the civ series games.

Well, Jews have had an impact on world history but it's really difficult to say exactly how much. Part of the problem here is whether or not it counts as a "civilization" of its own during the diaspora, or just a subculture with an unusual history.

I'm always dismissive of people extolling ancient Judea as some sort of advanced state, as it was a relatively minor kingdom with an interesting culture, but outside of the religion it was just a tiny regional power dwarfed even by nearby neighbours like the Phoenicians, not to mention the great centres of civilization which lay around it in all directions (Egypt, Babylon, Greece, Rome etc). Culturally it was definately unique and noteworthy, powerful it was not, except in a very localized context.

Christianity is a difficult case too ... its not solely a product of Judaism, but rather a collaborative effort resulting from the collision of Hellenism and Judaism. And the Christianity practiced today, descending from the Nicean Creed, is hardly the Christianity of the first, Jewish Christians. In its earliest form it is not recognizable as notably distinct from other Judaic groups, as Judea was highly sectarian during this period with numerous radical interpretations of the religion - Hellenism was a serious crisis for Judaic culture which caused massive social fragmentation. Certain tenets of the particular Christian sect, however, did give it the potential to evolve into something highly different, but in the 1st century this was not yet the case. By the time of the Nicean creed, Christianity had adopted a very Classical feel, reflected in its art, holidays, customs, iconography, certain rituals, and so on. By the medieval period, Christianity was arguably a (much reduced) continuation of Western Rome's central authority "by other means".

I'm not really certain Christianity in sum was either beneficial or harmful. It certainly wasn't marked by any great leaps forward for Rome or the cultures which followed, and in some specific ways ******** the development of Western civlization. On the other hand, the preservation of the Latin and Greek languages and texts, in addition to offering a lingua franca for medieval Europe, enabled the Renaissance which ushered in the modern age, and I think acting as an agent of diffusion (across space or in this case, time) is certainly an important historical role.

 

[frekk]

When I talk about the contribution of the Israelite people I am talking about the whole mind frame of the western (and in a sense the entire modern) world. The ideas of linear time, the importance of idividuals, and monotheism all cam from the Isrealites. Befor them Greeks, Germanics, Celts, Mesepotamians, etc. etc. all believed that time works in a circle and that everything that happens already heppened and will happen again. By this logic individual acheivments have no significance.

Crazy talk! Greeks highly prized individual achievement. So did the Romans. Celts and Germanics were very fierce individualists. The only group you've mentioned that this really applies to would be the Mesopotamians.

 

[Israelite9191]

Fekk: I know perfectly well about how military valor and such was highly prized by the Greeks, Celts, Germanic, and Romans, as well as intelectual valor by the Greeks and to an extant the Romans. What I mean is that the Western world did not appreciate that the acts of one person can change course of history. They believed that if you acheived military valor you were a great person, but it did not matter in the long run, just as the achievments of Alexander to the them were not unique as the hellinization of the world would have happened anyway according to the ancient mindset. And beside that, linear time, you have to admit, is a Israelite invention.

P.S.- I have also read the theory that Moses invented the idea of an alphabet (that is a set of symbols each representing ONE sound). I believe I read it in "Guns, Germs, and Steel", although I am not sure.

 

[Kyriakos]

I am not sure why you think that anyone expected the world to just become hellenised by itself. It is more probable that if the persians hadnt come close to ending ancient greece there wouldnt ever have been a large campaign against Persia, and therefore the hellenistic kingdoms of the middle east wouldnt have become a reality. Before the collapse of Egypt and Lydia the Greek states in asia minor covered a large part from the coast inwards, and some colonies (coastal) in other places (cyrenaica, bithynia etc) and i dont think that there was any prospect of war between the ionian states and Lydia.

 

[Israelite9191]

Vwarnos: You misunderstood me. What i'm saying is that when something happened Greeks an other pre Judaeo-Christian societies believed that since time revolves and that everything thata happens already happened and will happen again, individualism is practically nonexistant. I am not talking bout actual historical situations and events, I am talking about the mindset of ancient peoples.

P.S.- I just noticed that you live in Greece. When I make these statements please note that I am not refering to different world views as being inequal I am mearly stating what the views were and are.

 

[kryszcztov]

@ frekk :
Re Mesopotamia : It's a matter of definition. Links between some regions don't make them united under one culture. Israel as a kingdom and a people was very different from other Semitic people. As for Phoenicia, they were rather free until the Assyrians conquered them in the early millenium BC. True, they were Semitic and they had cultural connections with the people who were in today-Iraq, but IMHO Mesopotamia is in the east. "Fertile Crescent" is a much better world to name the whole place, from the Dead Sea to the Chatt-al-Arab (which didn't exist before !).
Re Hellenisation : OK, if this is the definition of the word, then indeed it started with Greek colonies in the Black Sea, Southern Italy, etc... I'm not convinced that Rome is solely a product of this. They were a tribe coming from elsewhere, and were under the might of the Etrurians for some time. They absorbed much of Greek culture, to the point that we refer to Greco-Roman culture, but in fact I believe that the Romans did more than just absorbing, they got it for themselves. They didn't sit on their heritage. Sure, they contributed little to theorical science, but did so much in technics. Whereas other places like Ptolemaic Egypt, the Middle East or Africa (Carthage) didn't do much at that time (Roman Empire). By Ptolemaic Egypt, I speak of the whole country or province, Alexandria was rather unique and islolated in the process... and run by Greeks anyway.

 

[frekk]

They believed that if you acheived military valor you were a great person, but it did not matter in the long run, just as the achievments of Alexander to the them were not unique as the hellinization of the world would have happened anyway according to the ancient mindset.

ehh ... where are you getting this idea from? Greeks, and in particular Romans, were keenly aware of the impact of individuals on society and history. It had much more to do with things than just military valour. Why do you think they were the world's first great recorders of history? Read accounts of the Greek wars with the Persians or between Spartan and Athens and you will quickly see that they did not view their survival or expansion as an inevitably, but as the direct product of great leadership. They were very much aware of being nearly finished by Persia, except for an ingenious plan and good leadership, for instance.

And beside that, linear time, you have to admit, is a Israelite invention.

Cyclical time is an Oriental notion that didn't make it much further West than the Fertile Crescent. Greeks et al didn't have any notions about reincarnation or any of that. In fact they regarded concepts like reincarnation and rebirth with a certain degree of horror.

P.S.- I have also read the theory that Moses invented the idea of an alphabet (that is a set of symbols each representing ONE sound). I believe I read it in "Guns, Germs, and Steel", although I am not sure.

Nope, that was the Phoenicians. It's why we call it a phonetic alphabet.

 

[Kyriakos]

The only thing which you may have heard and missinterpreted about "cyclical time" and the ancient greeks is the notion of the cyclical substitution of the types of government. But that wasnt anything metaphysical, just brought on by the many cases where Poleis (plural of Polis ) changed governments from oligarhy to tyrany, then to monarchy, then again oligarchy etc.

regarding re-incarnation and ancient Greece: Pythagoras iirc believed in re-incarnation, but he was a strange figure in general. Diogenes on the other hand (the famous cynic philosopher) was making a joke of that belief, and claiming that he also felt that dogs (cynes in greek, the word cynic was derived from that as well) were in reality his brothers, and that cynic philosophers (although i am not sure about that part) may become dogs when they die

 

[frekk]

@ frekk :
Re Mesopotamia : It's a matter of definition. Links between some regions don't make them united under one culture. Israel as a kingdom and a people was very different from other Semitic people.

Sure ... but there was no Israel at one point. Their ancestors were not distinguishable from other Mesopotamian cultures (and even Israel, in its earliest incarnations, was only mildly different). The difference was an evolution. One must remember too that it appears many of the great figures of Judaic mythology were, actually, Mesopotamians themselves .... Abraham, for instance, came from Ur, the city of Gilgamesh. And the number of typical Mesopotamian motifs and icons found in Judaism is rather astounding - magical clay tablets, descriptions of bull cults among Israelites, a "magic garden" in the creation story, the flood, and so on. Archaeology has even unearthed strange evidences such as the Ajrud potsherd, depicting a "Yahweh of Sumeria" with "his Asherah", a possible deity.

It's just so difficult to draw cultural boundaries in the pre-Hellenic ancient world. Trying to pin down the origins of the bull cult, or the Pharoahs crook/Asherah staff/crozier, or a thousand other icons, is impossible.

"Fertile Crescent" is a much better world to name the whole place, from the Dead Sea to the Chatt-al-Arab (which didn't exist before !).

Geographically, sure, but there is need for a cultural expression for that region, and "Fertile Crescentites" is a bit awkward. That's not to say there was no cultural variety in the area (just like "European culture" does not imply total similarity from Italy to Norway to England to Russia).

 

[Israelite9191]

First off, I got my information on Greek perspective in particular form the book "Sailing the Wine Dark Sea, Why the Greeks Matter" by Thomas Cahill. Secondly, cyclical time is a concept that was used all over Eurasia until the Christian period brought linear time out of Israel. For instance, why do you think Stonehenge is circular and an astronomical calender, or why the Celtic calender works in a circle? Finally, I did not attain my notions from Greek politics.

 

[Crayton]

Civilization 4 does include 1 Semetic civ: the Arabs.
Is it plausible that an expansion package will include a northern (Fertile Crescent/Mesopotamian) Semetic civilization.
I'm all for Akkadians, Hebrews, Babylonians.
My beef is that each of these cultures/dynasties were in power for two, three, and four hundred years respectively.
In Modern Times that is an entire history's worth. Take the United States for example.
In Ancient Times (our historical perception of these times) these centuries are thin slices of civilization history.
The Arabs have been a force in civilization history for the past 1400 years and represent Abbasids, Cordobans, Umayyads, etc...
An Ancient Semetic civilizaiton spanning 2400 to 500 should be included just as well: representing Akkadians, Babylonians, Chaldeans, etc...

I would like to see Jerusalem as a capital city in Civilization 4 (give it the importance it deserves) and I enjoy the impact that Judaism had on the world; but, make the Hebrews part of a larger Civilization 4 civ: Phoencians or 'Ancient Northern Semetic' civ.

 

[frekk]

First off, I got my information on Greek perspective in particular form the book "Sailing the Wine Dark Sea, Why the Greeks Matter" by Thomas Cahill.

Anybody can write a book. What primary sources or other evidence is there? Can you name any indication at all that the Greeks believed in "circular time"?

Secondly, cyclical time is a concept that was used all over Eurasia until the Christian period brought linear time out of Israel.

Err ... cyclical time and circular time are completely different things. Cyclical time simply suggests that there are patterns within systems that are repeated periodically and sometimes predictably, and this is certainly true. That doesn't mean it's not linear.

For instance, why do you think Stonehenge is circular and an astronomical calender

Can you imagine any other way to create a sundial? It's a factor of the function of the object. Any astronomical calculator *must* be circular. Just as every calendar must be cyclical and repetitive, or you'd have to just make it up as you went along - in which case it wouldn't do its job which is to predict the changing of the seasons. It doesn't mean the people using it don't believe in linear time or think that time itself will start over again. It simply indicates they are aware of cycles in natural systems. Most of the civilizations you're referring to, with a few isolated exceptions like Seneca etc, really didn't get into any metaphysical concepts of time itself like ideas about time having a fixed beginning and end or everything as a "time loop". Aristotle philosophized about time, and considered it to be nothing more than a measurement of motion. To quote, "time is the number of movement in respect of the before and after, and is continuous.... In respect of size there is no minimum; for every line is divided ad infinitum. Hence it is so with time." In other words, time was not a "thing" that existed anymore than a mile is a thing that exists independantly of whatever it is measuring. They just saw timekeeping as a practical tool to predict cyclical systems upon which their lives depended, one that we all use constantly even today. The only group of this sort that I can think of that had any such notions was the Norse, who envisioned Ragnarok and the final end of the world. This is the basis of Hebrew claims of linear time; but true modern concepts of linear time, and Judeo-Christian beliefs in a final judgement, are altogether different things. The Judeo-Christian concept is not necessarily linear, since after the final judgement, God might start it all over again. Indeed, in Judeo-Christianity, God has already "reset" the world at least once with the Flood. Who's to say he would not reset time as well?

Modern concepts of linear time do not, in fact, have any origin in religion. They come from Francis Bacon. Theologians laid claim to linear time *after* Bacon's theories, and never spoke the words "linear time" (in any language) prior to that, simply on the basis of the idea that Judeo-Christianity had a beginning and end of this world - something hardly unique in religious thought and not necessarily linear (since most models of circular time have beginnings and ends of the world, for instance the Aztec systems of time).

 

[Urederra]

I've just realised there is no Mesopotamian civ in Civ4 !!! Only Egypt and Persia, but that is not Mesopotamia at all. Come on, Spain should go instead.

France should go instead, or the incas. C'mon, You put the incas and the mayas and you will leave out the spanish (who conquered them?).

The problem is that there is only 18 civs, and with this small number somebody is going to miss a civ or two.

 

[kryszcztov]

I'd take out Spain, because all their power was based on their colonial empire. They had quite a small influence in Europe itself, compared to powers like France, England, Germany or Russia. The Maya and Inca, for instance, had a fair influence in their respective area, hence why we're talking so much of them centuries after their destruction. Correction : the Spanish only conquered the Aztecs and maybe the Inca, but surely not the Maya, who disappeared centuries before the Conquistadores arrived in America. You're right about the fact that everyone is gonna miss one civ or two, but having no Mesopotamian civ in this game feels like a huge loss when you know that a large part of the beginning of civilization happened there. And it's the first time in Civ history, we always had Babylon so far. And we're gonna have 18 civs instead of Civ3's 16 civs. What I call a bug.

 

[frekk]

Correction : the Spanish only conquered the Aztecs and maybe the Inca, but surely not the Maya, who disappeared centuries before the Conquistadores arrived in America.

There are actually millions of Maya Indians still in the Yucatan. The first few contacts between the Spanish and the natives of the mainland was actually with the Maya (not the Aztecs). The very first contact happened due to a shipwreck, Gonzalo Guerrero surviving and going native, tattooing his face, piercing his ears, marrying a Mayan noblewoman and becoming a powerful Maya lord. He helped organize resistance to Spanish expansion into Maya lands and possibly directed attacks against expeditions which followed. Cortes was unable to land on the Mayan shores because of the fierce resistance he met at every landing, so after landing at Mayan settlements at Cozumel, Campoche, and Champoton, he is finally able to make an effective landing only much further up the coast, at Vera Cruz, which was then the site of an oppressed and weak tributary vassal state of the Aztecs.

The Mayan "disappearance" really just refers to the sudden abandonment of several major cities for unknown reasons. Not all Mayan cities were abandoned, just the ones in a specific geographic region (the southern lowlands). The Mayapan Empire didn't even form until after the supposed "collapse" of the Maya. It broke up into 16 kingdoms around 1461, and this was the state of the Maya at the time of Spanish contact. While the Aztecs are conquered between 1519 and 1521, campaigns against the Maya do not even begin until 1528 and are very difficult for the Spanish. It is not until 1541 that the Spanish are in (somewhat) control of the Yucatan. However, Spain is not able to colonize the Yucatan in the same manner as the Valley of Mexico, and control is tenuous. The Chiapas Maya first rise up in 1712 and continue to do so sporadically into the 1990s. In 1847 there is a general uprising of the Maya across the whole of the Yucatan (the War of the Castes) - the Maya take control of the entire peninsula for a few short years, the Mexican government reasserts itself, and in 1860 it happens all over again! So no, the Maya never disappeared.

 

[kryszcztov]

Mmmh, interesting ! Now I know I'm a n00b in history, though it's really interesting. Just a question : what are your qualifications, or is it that you read so much ?

Anyway, no Mesopotamian civ, even in the very large sense that contains the Phoenicians and Carthaginians, is a very sad thought. Sumerians or Babylonians would even be more important than the Persians IMO.

 

[Kyriakos]

i would like to see the hittites, lydians and babylonians in some x-pack