In the Western perspectives of the past,
the Oriental mind has often been seen by turns cunning, ruthless and exotic and filled with endless possibilities. China
and the Far East were beyond the more pressing threat of the Near East,
nor was it colored with a contested Holy Land and a history of crusades. Proximity, the shared Hellenic cultural heritage and universal Abrahamic faiths made the people of
the Near East too familiar rivals to be innocuously exotic.
We still are more likely to charge the Near East
with being archaic, to envision their societies as being some less
evolved version of ourselves. If the Near East is the object of our
antipathy, so Near Eastern history and accomplishments are becoming the
object of our scholarly hostility, at least in terms of popular ideas. Anything even obliquely related to the Near East has
ceased to be an area of neutrality in popular historical study.
Joseph Needham, Sinologist and the original multiculturalist is famous for specious claims about the exotic East. Needham gave us one of the most charged and assumptive questions in sociology- The Needham Question", or why had isolated China if they had accomplished all that Needham and Sinophiles like him claimed, stagnate as the rest of the world thoroughly surpassed them? China neither possessed the degree of "first mover" advantages claimed by Needham and it was in contact with the rest of the world more than Needham cared to realize, causing some of his most egregious errors that have made his name a byword for compromised scholarship in the West (though he is easily the most highly regarded Western "historian" in China).
One could hardly single out Needham in some respects: long before "Berthold Schwarz, or Black Bart", the fictitious friar and inventor of the gun, Europeans had gotten in to the habit of fudging history to increase their own cultural self confidence and to rob others of regard and respect. Today, the pendulum has swung Needham's way, with the excesses of Western multiculturalism and with the economic emergence of China among other nations and cultures who are refashioning their history (often with little restraint in regards to truth or accuracy) to create a sense of their own confidence and to garner respect from other cultures.
Arising from that has been the neatly packaged, "four great Chinese inventions". If it sounds like something emanating from the public relations department of the People's Republic of China, that is because it was. The Four Great Inventions theme was hit upon by the Chinese government in 2005 and was featured as one of the main themes of the opening ceremony of the 2008 Beijing Summer Olympics. They have the added "benefit" in some cases of discrediting inventions from their Near Eastern origins while gladdening the heart of multiculturalists. The assertions however are simply dead wrong and offer not a single shred of support for upsetting sound history.
These revisions also do disservice to the civilizations and the study of history. They overshadow and de-contextualizing important achievements; and most importantly by their agenda they obscure that the accomplishments should be esteemed as the accomplishments of mankind.
Not out of China: Gunpowder, Paper, Compass, Printing Press
GUNPOWDER
Greek fire was one of the most effective thermal devices, although it was extremely dangerous for the users
A combustible liquid, it could be shot from siphons or catapults, and it burst into flames on impact. First developed by the Byzantines in present day Turkey in the 7th century, it was later used by the Turks during the Crusades, and was probably first used in Western Europe in the 12th century.
Early experiments by the Byzantines in the 6th century used a mixture
of sulfur and oil, which would have been terrifying if not destructive. Various versions seem to have existed, and the recipes were frequently
kept secret; experts today still debate the exact composition, although
some recipes are known. It had regional variations. A popular version known around the Islamic was "naft" and had a petroleum base, with sulfur and saltpeter.
Saltpetre was one of the costliest expendables ever required in
warfare, so there was ample incentive to use the least amount possible.
Mixtures in which pure nitrates are not predominant deflagrate only, and
do not explode.
Potassium nitrate
was known to Arab chemists,with the earliest
description is by Khalid ibn Yazid (635-704), and was later described
and used many times, for example by Jabir ibn Hayyan (722-815), by Al-Razi and others. Saltpeter was called
"natrun" but also had other names indicating its ore origins, for example, (
Shabb Yamani or "Yemeni alum") and (
thalj al-Sīn,
or "Chinese snow," as Muslims got the ore from China and Yemen among other
places). Muslims went beyond the use of the impractical ore material,
and began purifying it. George Sarton states in that Muslims were the first to purify saltpeter.
The earliest Arabic manuscripts with gunpowder recipes are two
undated manuscripts, but one of them (the al-Karshuni manuscript) was
dated by historians Marcellin Berthelot and Rubens Duval to be from the ninth to the eleventh
century, both manuscripts mention saltpeter, charcoal and sulphur as the
sole ingredients of gunpowder.
Prior to true gunpowder, the
fire lance was a bamboo tube several feet long reenforced with tightly wound string. It
was loaded with a deflagrating powder and various projectiles, in fact
much like a kind of Roman candle. It was lighted from a fuze projecting
from the muzzle, whereupon it would discharge its fire, gases, and
projectiles to the front at relatively slow velocity. Weapons of this type were used by the
13th century, among the Arabs, in India, and among the Chinese, Mongols and Tatars around 1250. Roger
Bacon already knew about this in 1257, and described it in
Epistolae de Secretis Operibus
of that date as a device to make noise like thunder and a flash like
lightning, giving an anagrammatic recipe for the powder.
The more saltpetre that the mixture contains, the quicker and more
fiercely it burns. The Chinese had firecrackers for a very long time,
but they contained no gunpowder. They were simply pieces of green bamboo
that would crack loudly when thrown into a fire, and thereby scare away
evil spirits. The proto-gunpowder of the Chinese, which included wax,
resins, oils and roots was not true gunpowder, lacking the necessary explosive
effect of the classic 75 percent saltpetre, 15% charcoal and 10% sulfur; the later two ingredients were not used and the first no where close to the necessary levels.
The proto-gunpowder, when confined in a strong paper tube
the size of a finger joint, would make a terrifying loud bang, and
these new firecrackers were very effective against evil spirits. The invention
proceeded no further in China, beyond incendiaries, fire lances, and
firecrackers. Actual gunpowder and cannon were reintroduced to China by the Portuguese and others, under unfortunate terms of colonization.
The first recording of the formula of true gunpowder, 75 percent saltpetre, 15% charcoal and 10% sulfur was definitely among the Arabs, and clearly set out in formula. They apparently tinkered with Byzantine and Chinese compounds for "Greek fire" and some etymologists read as "Chinese snow", attesting to the wide knowledge of Byzantine, Turkish, Indian and perhaps Chinese ingredients and inspirations they had in creating explosive chemicals.
Several almost identical compositions were first described by the Arabic engineer Hasan al-Rammah as a recipe for the rockets (
tayyar) he described in his
al-Furusiyya wa al-Manasib al-Harbiyya (
The Book of Military Horsemanship and Ingenious War Devices) in 1270. Several examples include a
tayyar "rocket" (75% saltpetre, 8% sulfur, 15% carbon) and the
tayyar buruq
"lightning rocket" (74% saltpetre, 10% sulfur, 15% carbon). He states
in his book that many of these recipes were known to his father and
grandfather, hence dating back to at least the late 12th century.
Compositions for an explosive gunpowder effect were not known in China
or Europe until the 14th century. We can find the first book dedicated for
gunpowder and its uses in the works Hasan al-Rammah's
Al-furusiyyah wa al-manasib al-harbiyya (
The Book of Military Horsemanship and Ingenious War Devices), written in the 1270s, which included the first gunpowder recipes to approach the ideal composition for explosive gunpowder used in modern times (75% saltpetre (KNO
3), 10%
sulfur, 15% carbon), such as the
tayyar "rocket" (75 parts saltpetre, 8 sulfur, and 15 carbon, by weight) and the
tayyar buruq
"lightning rocket" (74 parts saltpetre, 10 sulfur, 15 carbon). He
states in his book that many of these recipes were known to his father
and grandfather, hence dating back to at least the late 12th century.
The place and time of the invention of the cannon is unknown. Because of the explosive power of gunpowder, heavy metal canon was necessary. but its
evolution from the fire lance among the Turks, Arabs and Europeans can
hardly be doubted.
This article was possible with the research and information of Dr. James B. Calvert,
Associate Professor Emeritus of Engineering, University of Denver, Registered Professional Engineer, State of Colorado No.1231
PAPER
Ancient Egyptians used papyrus for printing since. The thick paper-like material produced from the pith of the papyrus plant, Cyperus papyrus, a wetland sedge. Papyrus is first known to have been used in ancient Egypt (at least as far back as the First dynasty), but it was also used throughout the Mediterranean region. It would eventually decline in usage with the popularity of vellum or cheaply made thin, stretched and split hides which had the benefit of being more supple and thus suitable for scrolls and folding. Papyrus however was used until the popularization of cheap paper was introduced from the Arabs
A
form of book was invented in India, of palm leaves. The technology was first transferred to Korea in 604
and
then imported to Japan by a Buddhist priests, around 610, where fibres
(called
bast) from the mulberry tree were used.
The
Han Dynasty Chinese court official Cai Lun is widely regarded to have made paper from
wood pulp in 105 AD. The paper was thin and
translucent, not like modern western paper, and thus only written on one side. There is no evidence of the recent Chinese legend that this paper making technique was passed by a "Chinese prisoner" in Baghdad though the apocryphal tale is widely repeated.
In America, archaeological evidence indicates that about two millenniums ago paper
was invented by the Mayans and spread throughout Central America, Mexico and beyond to parts of North America and South America. Called amatl it was
in widespread use among Mesoamerican cultures at the time of the Spanish conquest. The Mayan and Aztec kept these events chronicled in libraries
full of books written on amatl. Paper was
a central aspect of Mayan and Aztec life used for records, books of government,
ceremonial tributes, clothing, and everyday writing. In
small quantities, traditional paper making techniques are still practiced
today.
The first paper books and indeed modern paper mills were invented in Baghdad in the 8th century where the Arabs invented a method to make a
thicker sheet of paper. The manufacture had spread to Damascus by the time of
the First Crusade in the 11th century, but the wars interrupted production, and
it split into two book making centres. Cairo continued with the thicker paper. Iran became
the centre of the thinner papers.
Paper making was also adopted in India. The first paper
mill in Europe was in Spain, at Xavia (modern Valencia) in 1120. More mills
appeared in Fabriano, Italy in about the 13th Century as an import from Islamic
Spain. They used hemp and linen rags as a source of fibre. The oldest known
paper document in the West is the Mozarab Missal of Silos from the 11th Century,
probably written in the Islamic part of Spain.
Paper is recorded as being
manufactured in both Italy and Germany by 1400, just about the time when the
woodcut printing technique was transferred from fabric to paper in the old
master and popular prints.
Some historians speculate that paper was a key element in
global cultural advancement. According to this theory, Chinese culture was less
developed than the West in ancient times prior to the Han Dynasty because
bamboo, while abundant, was a clumsier writing material than papyrus; Chinese
culture advanced during the Han Dynasty and preceding centuries due to the
invention of paper; and Europe advanced during the Renaissance due to the
introduction of paper and the printing press.
In the very small quantities needed for popular prints,
paper was affordable by the European urban working class and many peasants even
in the 1400s, but books remained expensive until the nineteenth century.
However, even poor families could often afford a few by the 1700s in England, if
they so chose.
Paper remained relatively expensive, at least in
book-sized quantities, through the centuries, until the advent of steam-driven
paper making machines in the 19th century, which could make paper with fibres
from wood pulp. Although older machines predated it, the Fourdrinier paper
making machine became the basis for most modern paper making. Together with the
invention of the practical fountain pen and the mass produced pencil of the same
period, and in conjunction with the advent of the steam driven rotary printing
press, wood based paper caused a major transformation of the 19th century
economy and society in industrialized countries. With the introduction of
cheaper paper, schoolbooks, fiction, non-fiction, and newspapers became
gradually available to all the members of an industrial society for the first time by 1900.
MAGNETIC COMPASS
Lodestone is a
naturally magnetized piece of the mineral magnetite. They are naturally
occurring magnets. Ancient people first discovered the property of
magnetism in lodestone.
Pieces of lodestone, suspended so they could turn, were the first
magnetic compasses, and their importance to early navigation is
indicated by the name
lodestone, which in Middle English means 'course stone' or 'leading stone'.
John
B. Carlson researched the earliest compasses of lodestone, in Central
America. The purposefully shaped
polished bar with a groove and composition of the magnetic mineral with
magnetic moment vector in the floating plane),
the Olmec, a sophisticated people who
possessed
advanced knowledge and skill in working iron ore
minerals, used what would be called a zeroth-order compass, if not a
first-order compass. The pieces of the device today
could undeniably used as a geomagnetically directed pointer and the
original whole bar pointing
magnetic
north-south. The groove functions well as a
sighting mark, and the slight angle it makes with the axis of the bar
appears
to be the result of calibration. Whether such a
pointer
would have been used to point to something astronomical (zeroth-order
compass)
or to geomagnetic north-south (first-order
compass) is entirely open to speculation. The observation of the family
of Olmec site alignments calibrated 8° west of north is a curiosity in
its own right, and the possibility
that these alignments have an astronomical or
geomagnetic origin should be explored. Other scientist have discovered
similar remnants of ancient American devices utilizing the directional
property of the stone.
It is constructive
to compare the first millennium Chinese, who used the lodestone compass
for geomancy,
with the Gulf Coast Olmec since both were
agrarian-terrestrial societies. The Olmec's apparent concern with
orientation and
skillful use of magnetic minerals also
stimulates one to draw cross-cultural parallels. The evidence and analysis offered in
this article provide a basis for hypotheses of parallel cultural
developments in China
and the Olmec New World. If the Olmec did
discover the geomagnetic orienting properties of lodestone, as did the
Han Chinese,
it is most reasonable to speculate that they
would have used their compass for comparable geomantic purposes. It
should, however,
be recognized that the Olmec claim predates the Chinese discovery of the geomagnetic lodestone
compass by
more than a millennium.
The first incontestable reference to
a magnetized needle in Chinese literature appears as late as 1086
according to Li Shu-hua in "Origine de la Boussole. The
Dream Pool Essay by scholar Shen Kua (which exists in translation by problematic sinologist Robert Needham) is reported to contain a detailed description of how geomancers
magnetized a needle by rubbing its tip with lodestone, hung the
magnetic needle with one single strain of silk
with a bit of wax attached to the center of the needle, and that a needle prepared this way sometimes pointed south,
sometimes north.
According to researcher Barbara Kreutz there is only a single Chinese
reference to a dry-mounted needle (built into a pivoted wooden tortoise)
which is dated to between 1150 and 1250, and claims that there is no
clear indication that Chinese mariners ever used anything but the
floating needle in a bowl until the 16th-century.
There is a debate over the parallel development or diffusion of the
magnetic compass. At present, according to Kreutz, the
evidence we have is that the Chinese invention predates the first
European device as Chinese had previously been aware of its orienting property prior to documented navigational use.
The first known European mention of a magnetized needle and its use among sailors occurs in Alexander Neckam's
De naturis rerum (On the Natures of Things), written in Paris 1190.
An unproven assumption is that the Arabs served as an intermediary,
improving and introducing the navigational compass between China, Europe
and parts of South Asia and East Africa. In the Arab world, the earliest
known reference however comes in
The Book of the Merchants' Treasure, written by one Baylak al-Kibjaki in Cairo about 1282.
Since the author describes having witnessed the use of a compass on a
ship trip some forty years earlier, some scholars are inclined to
antedate its first appearance accordingly. There is also a slightly
earlier non-Mediterranean Muslim reference to an iron fish-like compass
in a Persian talebook from 1232. Much of this information was only
widely disseminated recently when published by Western researchers
leaving the possibility of earlier mention in Arab texts that would give
credence to an exchange of information rather than several parallel and
near simultaneous invention of a similar device.
The
Arabs who benefited by their invention of the astrolabe, knowledge of
other directional reckoning devices and other more precise navigational
techniques did not place a tremendous amount of value on the lodestone
compass in seafaring, seeing it as one of many useful devices for
orienting. The
early Arabic sources on the magnetic
compass are very detailed about designs and uses giving credence to
longer development of the principles and the device however. One of the
chief uses that was found was the application in a device that with a
timepiece could assist with the orientation of daily prayers.
PRINTING PRESS
The history of ancient woodcuts and block printing goes back at least four thousand years ago in Middle East and Near East.
Woodcuts were used in ancient Egypt, Sumeria and Babylonia. Later among
the Greeks and Romans and still later the Chinese used wood blocks for
stamping patterns
on textiles and for text reproduction and illustration. By AD 1000 examples of woodblock printing on paper were popular in Islamic Egypt.
Woodcuts
appeared throughout Europe at
the beginning of the 15th cent., when they were used to make religious
pictures for distribution to pilgrims, on playing cards and simple
prints, and for the block book which
preceded printing. At that time the artist and the artisan were one,
the same person designing the cut and carving the block. One of the
first dated European woodcuts is a St. Christopher of 1423.
These were not printed using metal movable type nor were they utilizing the type of press necessary in the printing press which had the all important function of allowing rapid arrangement and printing of copies. The "block-print", that is, characters or pictures
were carved into a wooden block, inked, and then transferred to paper in a similar way that block printing had been in use in numerous regions, including Europe. A new block had to be carved for each new
impression, and the block was discarded as unusable as soon as a different
impression was needed. Since each word,
phrase or picture was on a separate block, this method of reproduction was expensive and
time-consuming. Woodcuts were also not sufficiently durable as they would split in the
press after repeated use, though they were later combined into the movable type presses for limited illustrations.
By the middle of the 15th century several print masters were on the verge
of perfecting the techniques of printing with movable metal type. The first man to
demonstrate the practicability of movable type was Johannes Gutenberg (c.1398-1468), the
son of a noble family of Mainz, Germany. A former stonecutter and goldsmith, Gutenberg
devised an alloy of lead, tin and antinomy that would melt at low temperature, cast well
in the die, and be durable in the press. It was then possible to use and reuse the
separate pieces of type, as long as the metal in which they were cast did not wear down,
simply by arranging them in the desired order. The mirror image of each letter (rather
than entire words or phrases), was carved in relief on a small block. Individual letters,
easily movable, were put together to form words; words separated by blank spaces formed
lines of type; and lines of type were brought together to make up a page. Since letters
could be arranged into any format, an infinite variety of texts could be printed by
reusing and resetting the type.
By 1452, with the aid of borrowed money, Gutenberg began his famous Bible
project. Two hundred copies of the two-volume Gutenberg Bible were
printed, a small number of which were printed on vellum. The expensive and beautiful
Bibles were completed and sold at the 1455 Frankfurt Book Fair, and cost the equivalent of
three years' pay for the average clerk. Roughly fifty of all Gutenberg Bibles survive
today.
In spite of Gutenberg's efforts to keep his technique a secret, the
printing press spread rapidly. Before 1500 some 2500 European cities had acquired presses.
German masters held an early leadership, but the Italians soon challenged their
preeminence. The Venetian printer Aldus Manutius published works, notably editions of the
classics.
The immediate effect of the printing press was to multiply the output and
cut the costs of books. It thus made information available to a much larger segment of the
population who were, of course, eager for information of any variety. Libraries could now
store greater quantities of information at much lower cost. Printing also facilitated the
dissemination and preservation of knowledge in standardized form -- this was most
important in the advance of science, technology and scholarship. The printing press
certainly initiated an "information revolution" on par with the Internet today.
Printing could and did spread new ideas quickly and with greater impact.
Pre-Gutenberg Printing
Blockprinting in Blind on Clay and Gold
| MS 5106 |
|
| ROYAL INSCRIPTION OF NARAM-SÎN: NARAM-SÎN WHO BUILT THE TEMPLE
OF ISHTAR |
MS in Sumerian on clay, Akkad, Sumer, 2291-2254 BC, 1 brick printing block,
13x13x10 cm, 3 lines in a large formal cuneiform script, large loop handle.
Context: There are three more
brick stamps of Naram-Sîn with the same text known: one in the Oriental
Institute of University of Chicago, one in Kalamazoo pbublic library,
Michiga, and a tiny fragment in British Museum. (Frayne 1993: 120-21)
Commentary: Naram-Sîn was the
first king to use blocks for printing bricks. Prior to him the
inscriptions on the bricks were written by hand. These 3 brick stamps
with the known bricks, is the earliest evidence of printing, in this
case blindprinting on soft clay.
 Published: Andrew George, ed.:
Cuneiform Royal Inscriptions and Related Texts in the Schøyen
Collection, Cornell University Studies in Assyriology and Sumerology,
vol. 17, Manuscripts in the Schøyen Collection, Cuneiform texts VI. CDL
Press, Bethesda, MD, 2011, text 24, p. 50, pl. XX. |
| MS 1937 |
|
| TO NINGIRSU, MIGHTY WARRIOR OF ENLIL, GUDEA RULER OF LAGASH
MADE IT SPLENDID FOR HIM AND BUILT FOR HIM THE TEMPLE OF THE SHINING IMDUGUD
BIRD AND RESTORED IT |
Blockprint in blind in Sumerian on clay, Lagash, Sumer, 2141-2122 BC, 1
brick, 32x32x7 cm, 6+4 columns, in cuneiform script.
Context: Foundation inscriptions
of Gudea in The Schøyen collection are MSS 1877, 1895, 1936, 1937 and
2890. Building cones, see MSS 1791/1-2.
Commentary: Gudea built or rather
rebuilt, at least 15 temples in the city-state of Lagash. The present
brick has deposits of the bitumen that originally bound the bricks
together in the wall of the temple.
 Published: Andrew George, ed.: Cuneiform
Royal Inscriptions and Related Texts in the Schøyen Collection, Cornell
University Studies in Assyriology and Sumerology, vol. 17, Manuscripts
in the Schøyen Collection, Cuneiform texts VI. CDL Press, Bethesda, MD,
2011, texts 29-30, p. 52, pl. XXV. |
| MS 2764 |
|
| AMAR-SIN OF NIPPUR, CHOSEN BY ENLIL, MIGHTY HERO, THE TEMPLE
OF ENLIL, BRICK STAMP INSCRIPTION |
MS in Neo Sumerian on white marble, Sumer, 2046-2038 BC, 1 brick printing
block, 18,5x10,0x3,5 cm, single column, 7 lines in cuneiform script, with a
handle on the back.
Context: There are only 2 more
brick printing blocks of Naram-Sîn known, one intact with a cylindrical
handle in Istanbul, and a tiny fragment in British Museum.
 Commentary: Naram-Sîn was the
first king to use blocks for printing bricks. Prior to him the
inscriptions on the bricks were written by hand. These 3 brick stamps
with the known bricks, is the earliest evidence of printing, in this
case blindprinting on soft clay.
Published: Andrew George, ed.:
Cuneiform Royal Inscriptions and Related Texts in the Schøyen
Collection, Cornell University Studies in Assyriology and Sumerology,
vol. 17, Manuscripts in the Schøyen Collection, Cuneiform texts VI. CDL
Press, Bethesda, MD, 2011, text 16, p. 20, pl. XII. |
| MS 1878 |
|
| AMAR-SIN IN NIPPUR, CALLED BY ENLIL WHO SUPPORTS THE TEMPLE OF
ENLIL, POWERFUL MALE, KING OF UR, KING OF THE 4 QUARTERS OF THE
WORLD |
 Blockprint in blind in Neo Sumerian on clay, Nippur, Sumer, reign of King
Amar-Sin, 2047-2038 BC, 1 brick, 17x19x6 cm, originally ca. 33x33x6 cm, 9
columns, (10x11 cm) in cuneiform script. |
Context: An original brick printing block of Amar-Sin is MS 2764.
Commentary: Enlil was the chief Sumerian god, whose main temple was
in Nippur.
See also MS 1876/1,
Hammurabi brick, Babylonia, 1792-1750 BC
Published: Andrew George, ed.:
Cuneiform Royal Inscriptions and Related Texts in the Schøyen
Collection, Cornell University Studies in Assyriology and Sumerology,
vol. 17, Manuscripts in the Schøyen Collection, Cuneiform texts VI. CDL
Press, Bethesda, MD, 2011, text 34, pp. 55-56, pl. XXVI.
Commentary: Enlil was the chief Sumerian god, whose main temple was
in Nippur.
See also MS 1876/1,
Hammurabi brick, Babylonia, 1792-1750 BC
Published: Andrew George, ed.:
Cuneiform Royal Inscriptions and Related Texts in the Schøyen
Collection, Cornell University Studies in Assyriology and Sumerology,
vol. 17, Manuscripts in the Schøyen Collection, Cuneiform texts VI. CDL
Press, Bethesda, MD, 2011, text 34, pp. 55-56, pl. XXVI. ommentary: Enlil was the chief Sumerian god, whose main temple was
in Nippur.
See also MS 1876/1,
Hammurabi brick, Babylonia, 1792-1750 BC
|
|
| MS 1815/1 |
|
TOWER OF BABEL BRICK
NEBUCHADNEZZAR, KING OF BABYLON, GUARDIAN OF THE TEMPLES ESAGILA AND EZIDA, FIRSTBORN SON OF NABOPOLASSAR, KING OF BABYLON |
|
Blockprint in blind in Neo Babylonian on clay, Babylon, 604-562 BC, 1
brick, 33x33x9 cm, single column, (11x15 cm), 7 lines in cuneiform script
blindprinted into the wet clay, within a lined rectangle, prior to baking.
 Context: Bricks with this
inscription were found during the excavation of the great Ziggurat. It
stands just north of Esagila, the temple of Marduk, also mentioned in
the inscription.
Commentary:
The ziggurat in Babylon was originally built around the time of
Hammurabi 1792-1750 BC.
The restoration and enlargement began under Nabopolassar, and
was finished after 43 years of work under Nebuchadnezzar II, 604-562 BC.
It has been calculated that at least 17 million bricks had to be made
and fired. Babylon with the ziggurat was captured by Kyros 538 BC,
Dareios I 519 BC, Xerxes ca. 483 BC, and entirely destroyed by Alexander
I the Great 331 BC. It is this tall stepped temple tower which is
referred to in Genesis 11:1-9, and became known as "The Tower of Babel".
The bricks are specifically mentioned in Genesis 11:3: "Come, let us
make bricks and bake them in the fire. - For stone they used bricks and
for mortar they used bitumen". The black bitumen is still visible on the
back of the present baked brick. These bricks are considered so
important and interesting that British Museum had their copy on exhibit
with special handout descriptions, from where parts of the present
information is taken. For a stele illustrating The Tower of Babel, see
MS 2063. Nebuchadnezzar II was the founder of the New Babylonian empire.
He captured Jerusalem in 596 and 586 BC, burnt down the temple and all
of Jerusalem, carried its treasures off to Babylon, and took the Jews
into captivity (2 kings 24-25). Nebuchadnezzar II is the king who is
named more than 90 times in the Old Testament. Daniel 1-4 is almost
entirely devoted to the description of his greatness and reign, his rise
and fall, and submission to God.
Exhibited: 1. The Bibliophile
Society of Norway's 75th anniversary. Bibliofilklubben 75 år.
Jubileumsutstilling Bok og Samler, Universitetsbliblioteket 27.2 -
26.4.1997; 2. XVI Congress of the International Organization for the
study of the Old Testament. Faculty of Law Library, University of Oslo,
29 July - 7 August 1998.
Published: Andrew George, ed.:
Cuneiform Royal Inscriptions and Related Texts in the Schøyen
Collection, Cornell University Studies in Assyriology and Sumerology,
vol. 17, Manuscripts in the Schøyen Collection, Cuneiform texts VI. CDL
Press, Bethesda, MD, 2011, text 79, p. 181, pls. LXVIII, LXX.
. |
|
| MS 5236 |
|
 INVOCATION TO THE GOD PHOEBUS APOLLO WHO RULES OVER MAN,
POURING OUT LIBATIONS TO HIM, THAT HE MAY TAKE UP ARMS AND GO THROUGH THE
ENEMY'S ARMY TO FREE OR DISCHARGE THE PEOPLE; IN HEXAMETER
Printing in Greek on gold, Euboia, Greece, or Knidos, Turkey, ca. 6th c.
BC, 1 lamella with rounded corners, 2,8x9,0x0,1 cm, 6 lines in fine Greek
capitals of Euboia or Knidos type.
Provenance: 1. Provenance: 1. Edith Horsley, London (1965-2000).
Commentary: This is the only gold example
of amulets known generically as ephesia grammata, for lead ones, see
Kotansky 111-112. References to them in Greek comedies and other
literary texts, suggest that they were mass produced and frequently
worn. This is the only surviving example that actually has been printed
and not incised, directly into the soft metal. The thin sheet of gold
was placed over the prototype with raised letters, and pressure applied
to the upper side of the gold in order to print the letters in blind.
Normally printing refers to use of paper or vellum and ink, or without
ink (blind printing), applying blocks or movable types of wood, stone or
metals. If the definition of blind printing also includes soft
materials like wet clay, lead or gold, in addition to paper, this
lamella appears to be the earliest printing in Europe. The above
information is partly kindly supplied by Dr. Dominic Montserrat. |
|
Psychology of Power. (Excerpted from doctoral candidate's dissertation, do not copy)
“an Islamic center, one that would be open to everyone, from being constructed adjacent to the site of the World Trade Center bombing.”
How is the ADL still a respectable organization with this history? It sounds more like a hate group.
“In the absence of any serious threats of anti-semitism,” indeed. The “American Al Qaeda,” youtube and tv news phony Adam Gadahn/Pearlman is the grandson of an ADL board member. That “Revolution Muslim” group whose members had all been West Bank settlers from Brooklyn.” There was a story recently of a Jewish girl at George Washington University who painted swastikas on her own dorm door and got caught by a concealed camera. Makes you wonder how coordinated, funded and organized it all is.
Consider: ADL Trains US Police Forces and FBI
The Department of Homeland Security was Joe Lieberman’s idea. Dana Priest was interviewed on C Span Washington Journal about a week ago (before the full impact of Priest’s massive study of the explosion of US intelligence gathering contractors was buried under the chatter over Julian Assange’s revelations.) Priest said that no one understands how Homeland Security works; it’s an agglomeration of laws and rules pulled in from numerous other government institutions.
ADL has access to police information (not going to bother right now to research the police information systems that link records from all over the country into databases accessible to . . . . to ADL.
You want to go public with your activism, you feel patriotic; are you willing to expose your private life to attack by ADL who will intimidate you?
Americans have been systematically and systemically intimidated.This happened before: this is how Zionists in Germany from the 1880s thru 1940s terrorized the German public. THAT is why Germans reacted in rage to the Jewish people among them.
I had no idea about the ADL’s activities.
After Italian prime minister Silvio Berlusconi publicly whitewashed Mussolini’s fascist regime, the ADL gave Berlusconi an award (!!), the Distinguished Statesman Award. Why? Because under Berlusconi, Italy was a close ally of Israel. [Source: Norman Finkelstein's eye-opening book Beyond Chutzpah] The take-home lesson here is that the ADL hasn’t been a civil-rights organization for a very long time. Instead, it’s part of the Israel Lobby.
Here’s the way the game is played: someone criticizes Israel. The ADL then blasts the critic for anti-Semitism, a serious charge (if true). Thus the ADL spends much of its time in defaming critics of Israel. The ADL tried this on Walt and Mearsheimer, but without success.
Who gets to define what antisemitism is; who gets to decide whether the charge is true or false; and underlying those steps, why do Jewish people get special treatment and special protections beyond any other group in the US or, given the worldwide portfolio of the State Dept. office of antisemitism, in the whole world? Why do Jews get special treatment, and why are Jews the legislators, judge, and jury on how their privileged treatment is carried out?
Jeff Blankfort back-of-the-envelope history is predictably ridiculous, omitting the ADL’s long history of civil rights activism.
I was fortunate enough to get a copy of at least part of its spy’s file on me, which was sent by the ADL to both Israel and South Africa, and after 10 years, received a paid settlement from the organization without agreeing to sign a “confidentiality agreement.”
In other words, that I can talk about what we learned from the depositions and evidence I am free to talk about which is why when the listeners to my radio program on a public radio station complain to the ADL about me, they are told simply “to monitor” my programs, since it is not about to take any action against me.
A few years back, I was on a panel with two other anti-Zionist Jews at KPFK in Los Angeles where we were supposed to debate three full blown zionists, one of them from the ADL, who pulled out at the last minute without sending a replacement. It was too bad but smart on the ADL’s part because I had a large file from our case that I was going to ask its representative about, beginning with its spy’s work for the South African apartheid regime and why he had not only the key but the floor plan to the office of Alex Odeh, the head of the American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee in Orange County who was killed when a Jewish terrorist blew up the office.
When it has come to “civil rights,” there has been only one litmus test for the ADL and for other mainstream Jewish organizations, “Is it good for the Jews.”
So why the ADL has actively opposed “affirmative action” for African-Americans because, they say, it presupposes quotas which once negatively affected Jews, they buy off black politicians and preachers so they will keep quiet about it. It is all for immigration reform benefiting Latinos, not just because it offers them a chance to hire a cheap nanny or gardener, but because it, like the American Jewish Committee, has been actively wooing the growing numbers of Latino voters because that would be in Israel’s benefit.
In fact, ADL has a special department for Hispanic Affairs, and like the Congressional Black/House Negro Caucus, all of its members of the Latino Caucus in Congress are in the Israel Lobby’s pocket. It has been so successful that there is not a single well known Latino leader who speaks critically of Israel. Next question?
The ADL has not “actively opposed” affirmative action. It filed a brief in favor of Bakke. It has been on the side of affirmative action proponents in virtually every other case, the latest being the brief filed in favor of Bollinger in Grutter v. Bollinger, as I pointed out the last time you made this nonsensical argument. Just about everybody I know at both organizations supports affirmative action, a policy, needless to say, which does not benefit Jews in any meaningful way today and in all honesty, probably hurts them. What you say is just complete and utter bullshit, the absolute opposite of the truth.
No reasonable person would conflate opposing racial quotas with being against affirmative action. It is propaganda on your part, nothing more.
As for Grutter vs Bollinger, this is how one site summed up ADL’s position:
“Anti-Defamation League (Gratz & Grutter)
While supporting the University’s commitment to diversity, ADL believes the University’s admissions scheme denies prospective students equal protection by emphasizing their race, and not relevant individual characteristics.”
The American Jewish Committee, the state department of the Jewish establishment which focuses on outreach to the African-American and Latino communities took a supportive position.
I have not made any claims that apply to the organized Jewish establishments. They are dedicated to doing what is best, or what they think is best for Jews, and that is the criteria for their inter-group and inter-faith relations, the latter being used to make non-Jews feel guilty for not having done more to save Jews during WW 2, an argument that has grown more than a bit tiresome and was never valid to begin with.
Jews, as individuals, have played important roles in major political and social struggles that we have seen in America, although at a declining rate since the founding of the state of Israel. Hophmi, it appears, is not one of them.
Rather he/she/it is clearly one of those Jews who has answered the call from the big machas of the Zionist International to get on websites and do their hasbara schtick.
For the life of me, I just can’t figure out the motivation for that press release, or the fact that given the outrage, even from hasbara kooks like Jeffrey Goldberg, that the press release has not been deleted or modified in any way.
I had thought they merely became corrupt. I like to think of myself as a realist, but ‘reality’ keeps on being worse than I had guessed. Does that make me an optimist? :)
Lo and behold, it turns out my comment could have easily been viewed by many as sensationalist exaggeration, given the unfamiliarity with ADL’s history.
This isn’t directed at you, Colin. It’s just that your post reminded me of several others of similar nature.
By the way, it’s good to see you posting again. That’s some hiatus you’ve been on.
I wonder how this will play in Hollywood? Their therapists will be working overtime this week.
Jeff’s dates suggest that this collaboration against the anti-apartheid ‘communists’ went on until about the time the Soviet Union collapsed, at the end of 1991. It would have undermined the ADL’s anti-racist facade completely if it had been allowed to become widely known. The alliance between center-left (or left-liberal) US jews and black rights activists in the US broke down in the late 1960s at least partly because of israel’s collaboration with apartheid south africa.
A very little part, since there was virtually no Israel-South African collaboration at that point. There are many reasons why the Black-Jewish alliance broke down and plenty of blame to go around, but South Africa does not have much to do with it.
Hatchets haven’t got a chance against white phosphorus or nuclear bombs.
What was also a part of that and critically important was a deal made in 1973 between former American Jewish Congress head Arthur Hertzberg and Rep. Charles Rangel in which the Congressional Black Caucus (which more accurately should be called the House Negro Caucus) would continue supporting without question US aid for Israel (which would also come to mean not publicly complaining about Israel’s arm sales to South Africa) in exchange for the Jewish establishment’s backing of the CBC’s domestic agenda.
The CBC/HNC kept its side of the bargain to its everlasting discredit while there should be little doubt but that the way those welfare programs were designed and administrated has been ultimately detrimental to the larger African-American community.
On the the other hand those House Negroes who agreed to take their marching orders from AIPAC invariably found the funding and critical political backing to maintain their seats.
There were a number who didn’t, the most notable being Cynthia McKinney. They were all eventually driven from office. That Rangel is now threatened with being driven from office himself thanks to his other criminal activities seems an altogether fitting end to his career.
In a sense, much like many of our conventional wars, they were a proving ground for the tactics and technology of oppression. Wasn’t South Africa the largest purchaser of weaponry from Israel, particularly due to sales restrictions imposed by other countries? There is also much written about cooperative efforts in chemical, genetic, and bio-warfare.
Great piece, Jeffrey. Thank you for your continued efforts in providing accurate background and uncovering the truth.
Comin’ down the rail-road track,
Oy, there’s a new-kind discourse comin’
Comin’ down the rail-road track!
It’s that anti-Zionist Special,
Runnin’ down those zio-hacks….”
Thanks for that piece and the follow up. I didn’t know of the adl’s collaboration with the anti-commie goons of that earlier period, before WW2 and during the mccarthy witch hunts.
but South Africa will soon be the new Zimbabwe.
And Iraq will soon be the new Cambodia.