RoR: Forum

Ancient Sumer may have served multiple roles in the evolution of philosoophy.

Toward the end of Spencer MacCallum's xlnt "The Art of Community," he discusses the emergence of the state, hypothesizing that Sumer was the source.

In brief, Sumer and many other city's grew steadilly on the banks of the Tigris and Euphrates during a period when the climate was virtually ideal for farming. Ultimately, however, there was only so much water, and low annual rainfall made irrigation mandatory. As cities upstream took more and more water, it became more difficult to irrigate downstream, and any drought would hit the cities downstream particularly hard.

Naturally, the cities most affected responded by sending parties to attack and destroy the irrigation systems upstream, with resultant counter-raids. The need to provide protection under the circumstances resulted in a warrior class emerging.

Meanwhile, the Sumerian texts appear to indicate that there was little in the way of comprehensive understanding of life - philosophy, of course, but true in every field of endeavor. Instead, each person learned a trade or craft by rote, as a set of rules and procedures passed down generation by generation. The farmer did not think, "I farm and then I give a portion of the crop to the priests so that they may encourage the Gods to bless me and the city." That's too sophisticated. Instead, he might think, "I farm the land as my role, and I give the crops to the priests because that is how it is done, and they give some of the crops to me because that is their role."

Lack of change from year to year, generation to generation, made a system of roles and rotes workable, and in fact necessary, lacking the epistemological tools to do any better.

However, once the water conflict started, ultimately one city would send enough of the new warrior class to actually occupy a foreign city, which had evolved not just its own language, but also its own roles and rotes. In order to deal with this, the conquerors and conquered both had to evolve a way to talk about talk, introducing the whole technology of logical analysis.

Once the conceptualization of ideas an sich occurred, then it became possible to establish trade, to analyze the value of a thing in terms of logical comparison, and the market economgy was born.

Post 1

Wednesday, August 22, 2007 - 8:34pm

Early (Yes) Deep? (Maybe) Unique? (Hardly)

This thought may be deep, I address this below. Yet however "deep" this thinking is, there is no question that Sumerian in general is the earliest (somewhat) understood recorded (written) thinking. Yet the proper translation of much of Sumerian is disputed, and the Sumerian language was recorded over a period of more than two millenia, with much change over that time. The pictographic writing of Mohenjo Daro, the Linear A texts of Crete, and the "Goddess" writing described by Marija Gimbutas is all of similar or even possibly older ages, but is not yet translated. If Gimbutas' claims are correct, the Goddess culture and its "writing" is the world's oldest.

One of the most problematic of unsolved questions regarding the language is the proper understanding of a symbol which some scholars interpret as an initial /m-/ others as a /g-/ and others as an /ng-/. It is not even known if the first person pronoun is "mi" showing, perhaps, a relation of Sumerian to the Eurasiatic languages which include Proto-Indo-European, or a "gi/ngi" which might show a relation to the Basques, the peoples of the Caucasus, or the early Sino-Tibetans.

I am curious what the source is for these quotes, what date is attributed to them, where they were found, and who translated them?

Also, by the dates of 1600-1900 BC, Semitic, Myceneean and Indo-Iranian wisdom texts existed, if not in written form, then at least in oral form which was passed on to us.

Finally, while one can generously attribute benevolent interpretations to some of these sayings, one could cynically compare others with texts from the worst parts of the Pentateuch or the Koran:

"Who can compete with righteousness? It creates life."

The Lord saw that Abraham was righteous, and promised him his descendents would outnumber the sands of the Earth.

"You should not cut the throat of that which has already had its throat cut."

Don't beat a dead horse? (English) Don't cook a calf in its mother's milk (The Torah) Lay off the indiscriminate civilian massacres? (Zawahiri to the late Zarqawi?)

"Whatever it is that hurts you, don't talk to anyone about it."

Keep a stiff upper lip? (English) Lie to your enemies, and hide your weaknesses? (Any manual of war, terror, revolution or Jihad?)

"He who possesses many things is constantly on guard."

It is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle...?

"To be wealthy and insist on demanding more is abominable."

Money is the root of all evil?

A little of your own analysis, some comparison (See especially the words of the Sages in Giovanni Reale's From the Origins to Socrates.) with other contemporary pre-philosophical thought and some documentation would be especially helpful here. Quoting primitive desert peoples, no matter how innovative they might have been, without context, comparison, or analysis, may serve as a good penance if one feels guilty for having called their descendants and relatives racial epithets (The Elamites, the closest relatives of the Sumerians were the earliest inhabitants of Iran) is perhaps self-consoling, but it is only the possible promise of the beginning of profound thought. Let's hear some original or contextual thought, and have something to discuss.

Ted Keer

(Edited by Ted Keer on 8/23, 1:15pm)

Post 2

Tuesday, March 6, 2012 - 12:06am

I agree with Ted (sadly missed here) that we should not easily project ourselves on the past. The thousands of years that separate us from them speak to our greater and deeper development.

Kyril wrote: "But it initially wasn't very impressive: mostly just economic records ..."

Just. That is the anti-capitalist mentality. I do not mean that Kyril is against free enterprise, not at all. I do mean though, that the depth and breadth of the prejudice against commerce is difficult to perceive without great effort.

Why is "abstract philosophy" granted a moral superiority over "mere" economic records? I submit that Plato's "Republic" informs the opinions even of those who regard themselves as advocates of free enterprise.

Post 3

Friday, March 9, 2012 - 6:53am