For They Don't Know What They Are Doing E-Book

Goerdt Abel

• Herausgeber: Europa Edizioni
• Kategorie: Gesellschafts- und Liebesromane
• Sprache: Englisch
• Veröffentlichungsjahr: 2024

Beschreibung

It seems to most people who are inundated with news from the press, television or the internet that the problems in their own country or in the world are getting bigger and bigger and that politics and politicians are getting worse and worse. 
Politicians are unable to solve the problems at hand, or can only do so poorly. They lack a focus on the common good of all citizens, and their actions frequently constitute the root cause of the issue. Almost everyone is aware that only “bad” news sells well, but they are usually unable to free themselves from this misjudgment. 
Maybe this book can help people overcome this trap of thought and point out ways to make positive changes in the future. Indeed, by analyzing the social development of Homo Sapiens since the acquisition of the ability to write, this work, aims to demonstrate ways in which our political culture can be improved through a more effective selection of politicians and, in so doing,  avoiding potentially catastrophic misappointments. 

Leseprobe

Goerdt Abel

"...For They Don't Know What They Are Doing".

Qualification Of Politicians Worldwide

© 2024 Europe Books | London

www.europebooks.co.uk | [email protected]

ISBN 9791220148559

First edition: March 2024

“…For They Don’t Know What They Are Doing”.

Qualification Of Politicians Worldwide

I gladly dedicate this book to my mother Hildegard, who gave me the ability to accept life's circumstances, to my father Wilhelm, who awakened my spirit, to my late wife Maria, who so happily accompanied me for more than 50 years of life, and to my children Margell and Godard, who have already given me back more than I could give them.

My special thanks go to my late wife Maria Abel, née Flener, who always encouraged me to write, and also to my present partner, Elfriede Ita, née Paumgarten, who accompanied some long evenings devoted to the book with positive support and advice. This also applies to my children Margell and Godard, who helped me with many suggestions for individual chapters of this book.

It was important for me to have the help of Dorothea Lange, née Nolde, who curated and critically supervised the book. Without the many hours she spent on the development of this book, it would not have been written.

My circle of friends also contributed to the creation of the book again and again with suggestions and positive criticism. I would like to mention here: Clare and James Kirkman, to whom I owe the chapter on British Prime Ministers;

Juan Luiz Alvarez, currently Minister of Tourism in the state of Guanajuato in Mexico, who shared with me the role of the executive and general insights into this multi-layered beautiful country;

The Em. Ambassador of Switzerland, Markus Peter, who was able to give me a deeper understanding of this haven of democracy;

Ross Esson, a friend from South Africa, who was able to give me a different view of his country with his knowledge from management consultancy and especially about South Africa;

Mag. Markus Figl, District Head in the first district of Vienna, who gave me valuable contacts to the Austrian academia;

Dr. Gudrun Biffl, who helped me with the concept and finding of politicians and many other of my friends who have always encouraged me to continue.

I.FOREWORD 

Most of the time in life you don't exactly know when something started. My wife Maria and I had been spending the summer mostly in Vienna for several years, and so it was in 2019. With a group of former students, now friends, we met for dinner at a Heuriger or in a restaurant and usually discussed political issues. So, we politicised as usual and got stuck on the topic of "qualification of politicians". Our conclusion: for almost every profession today, a clear and constantly sharpening qualification is necessary.

Nevertheless, this does not seem to apply to "politicians".

Voilà, there we had our topic and thought we should delve into it, especially when you look at the ever-increasing political crises in most - even developed - countries. This led to the attempt to take up this question and bring it closer to a wider circle of interested people in a published book form. We hope that the book will stimulate reflection and perhaps point to possible solutions for the 8 billion people worldwide who currently live in over 194 countries (as of the beginning of 2022) and speak approximately 6,500 to 7,000 languages. On average, people today have a better education and much more education than ever before. The book "Sapiens" by Yuval Noah Harari1, in which he describes the development of "Homo Sapiens" (also known as "human being") up to the present day, sheds light on this topic in detail.

This book does not claim to appeal to readers who cling to entrenched and assumed ideas and a defined de-terministic view of the world - be it for ideological or religious reasons. If there is interest in a discussion, the author welcomes a lively exchange, as it is only through discussion and respect for other opinions that we can evolve and then hope to recognise catastrophic mistakes of the past and avoid them during ongoing developments.

I.A. Evolution Of The Species Homo Sapiens

Thanks to recent research results and their publication in the relevant literature, we have a better idea of the development of mankind since about two million years ago. Findings and scientific knowledge make it possible to determine dates more precisely, and it becomes clearer how our ancestors not only developed physically but also gradually learned to master their environment, including the use of new nutritional options and adaptation to climatic changes.

In particular, the reactions to multiple climatic changes led to migratory movements - unimaginable for us today - until the entire globe was conquered by Homo Sapiens as a habitat. In the meantime, we know that there were several species of the genus "Homo". These include Homo Rudolfensis (East Africa), Homo Erectus (East Asia) and Homo Neanderthalensis (Europe and West Asia), all of which are now extinct. Only Homo Sapiens remained (see footnote 1). However, little is known about the evolution of social behaviour. The relevant research is largely based on assumptions and speculations - sometimes also on comparisons with animal species that are close relatives to us (such as apes), but also many other animals (such as wolves) that show a firmly established pack behaviour.

It is obvious that people came together in groups because they could hardly survive as loners. This means that behavioural patterns have developed - mostly biologically determined - which are still valid today.

It is only on the basis of the knowledge gained from the past 10 to 12 thousand years of earth's history (as the assumed beginning of more developed agriculture) that scientists today have extensively researched how social coexistence may have developed within and outside the respective groups. Of course, we must not ignore natural selection processes, because random factors such as health, accidents and genetically determined variations in life expectancy must be taken into account. These include external circumstances such as nutritional possibilities or habits, social conditions such as disputes and wars between certain groups and the care of offspring, the elderly, the sick and the weak. In order to survive successfully in smaller and larger groups, a certain order was required in their behaviour towards each other, which also affected the age structure (children, adults, old people). The relationship between the sexes and the interactions between the presumably blurred and fluidly composed groups must also be taken into account.

At that time, too, the need for "leadership" arose to regulate behaviour towards each other. In this context, we have to rely on speculation as to what the selection processes and the associated rules of conduct probably looked like. Evidence from excavations suggests that social orders developed very early. As writings gradually developed, some documents could be deciphered for the most part - so it has become much easier to recognise, describe, interpret and compare the social behaviour of ancestors from around 5,000 years ago with today's approaches.

Let me try to show you some recognisable patterns of social behaviour before and after the development of writing from the almost infinite literature available. The first advanced civilisations are well known, and we can look back quite well to those in Mesopotamia between the Euphrates and Tigris, in Egypt and China, and somewhat later in Mexico and South America. What they all have in common is that they were located in the most fertile parts of the world accessible to them from a human perspective. The prerequisites were always easy access to unlimited supplies of fresh water, e.g. river systems, large lakes or, in the case of the Mayas, underground water systems (cenotes). Pleasant climatic conditions were also important, which Homo sapiens could tolerate well in both winter and summer. Added to this was the possibility of multiple harvests per year, which led to a rapid increase in population and the need to organise coexistence according to certain criteria to ensure the most prosperous coexistence possible.

I.B. Leadership, Dominance, Differentiation, Truth, Falsification

When it comes to the qualification of politicians, one immediately realises the underlying requirements and the complexity of the topic. It is a question of the capacity to lead, which has been analysed many times and is often referred to today with the English term "leadership". The anglicisation of the term is certainly also related to the fact that the term "leadership" has such a one-sided negative connotation in the German-speaking world due to the National Socialist and fascist era in the first half of the 20th century.

There are widespread perceptions and opinions that people who strive for leadership not only in the political arena but also in other areas of society, are primarily concerned with gaining and maintaining power. In other words, it is often about the desire to be able to determine the actions of other people. The basic idea of leadership in the political sphere is to serve "the common good of all". The leader is often unaware of this basic idea or it is subordinated in favour of their own interests, the family, the party or another group. In our democratic societies, it is usually the interests of a party to which one belongs. This means that, by definition, only the group interest of this party is important and attempts are made to enforce it at the expense of all other groups.

Through the development of constitutions, attempts have been made to mitigate this weakness of our communities to enable positive coexistence for all those involved in society. In the last two centuries since the founding of the United States of America and the French Revolution, we have managed to make great progress. Unfortunately, this is not evident when it comes to the issue of "qualification of those politically responsible". Previous solutions, such as grassroots elections on the Internet or within parties, elections at party conferences, and selection procedures among a group of parliamentarians and others, do not seem to bring sufficient improvement. We know approval rates at party conferences of almost 100 %, especially in single-party systems. Unfortunately, this does not only apply to dictatorial forms of society from the right or left but also to democratically organised states, e.g. Austria. At the party conference of the Austrian People's Party in 20222, the only candidate Karl Nehammer was elected ÖVP chairman and candidate for chancellor by around 500 delegates with 100% of the votes. There have already been similar results in the CSU (Christian Social Union in Bavaria, Germany). However, this is especially true for socialist or communist-led countries, such as the former GDR and the former Soviet Union, Cuba and many others. However, they seldom dared to state 100 %, results of 96 to 99 % were more typical. The NSDAP (National Socialist German Labour Party) and other right-wing parties around the world manipulated elections in the same way.

It is difficult to differentiate the issue and to distinguish truth, lies and falsification. It is not helpful that the media (tabloid press, but also all other media such as radio, television, social media, oral radio etc.) have no interest in reporting independently and neutrally. Instead, they openly, and unfortunately sometimes covertly, serve the goal of gaining and maintaining power. This attitude is particularly evident in dictatorially orientated political movements, not only in the last century but throughout almost the entire history of mankind. Regrettably, this is also true today in systems with a democratic orientation. This is not a general condemnation of the media, as there are fortunately also examples of objective reporting, or where this is not the case, at least a clear statement of which opinion is being represented.

I.C. Historical retrospective

Before the development of writing, we are reliant on oral traditions, which may be interesting but do not stand up to objective scrutiny. I will therefore briefly discuss the development of writing systems. According to "Meyers Großes Handlexikon"3, writing is defined as a "system of graphic signs that reproduce linguistic elements". Initially, this relationship is only present to a limited extent; it is often more of a thought (picture) script. Writing, as a system of word syllables, probably first developed among the Sumerians around 3100 BC, as well as among the Egyptians, Hittites and Chinese.

The development of the alphabet, on the other hand, goes back to the Phoenicians and was then presumably further developed by the Greeks through the expansion of the vocal system. For this reason, there are only indirect references to the time before that, partly from books in which traditional stories and descriptions were incorporated, such as the Bible, the sacred book of the Maya (Popul Vuh), Greek, Roman and Germanic legends and other records from various cultures around the world (Japan, China, India, African countries). Without the development of the various writing systems, we would have been able to make very little progress in the theory of knowledge and the foundations for this book would have been meagre.

To a large extent, these narratives are based on patriarchal systems. In most cases, fathers are in the foreground, with a few exceptions that emphasise the role of mothers. Few descriptions exist that deal with interactions within families or between family members. All of these written traditions show us that it was mostly leaders who represented a religious message that prevailed, e.g. Buddha, Moses, Christ, Mohammed or, more recently, Joseph Smith Jessop4. These personalities were revered as prophets or because of other alleged superhuman qualities. The findings were usually presented as supernatural messages. It is rarely described how and why these people were able to reach their special positions. Natural phenomena were sometimes used, as were alleged apparitions of gods and god-like persons. In most cases, these were personalities who came from privileged tribes/groups, but sometimes they also came from very humble backgrounds or families.

It seems as if the glorified leaders stood out from the normal population by means of physical characteristics, e.g. size (both particularly large or small), strength, speed and longevity. They were also characterised by better mental and emotional abilities, good eyesight, hearing, smell, and social skills such as empathy, understanding other people's motives and charity. Negative traits seem to predominate, such as a lack of compassion, brutality, callousness, complete self-orientation and narcissism. Not to be forgotten are the more intellectual abilities and quick comprehension of complex interrelationships in nature and interpersonal relationships.

In some older cultures, values of equality also appear to have been important, presumably especially where individual success was based on successful cooperation, such as in hunting or similar activities that benefited the community. However, leaders were also helped by emphasising the differences between people. These could be defined by gender, age and/or physical and mental abilities. This then led to extreme demarcations through castes, nobility, priests, the unfree and even slaves and other more subtle forms of dependency. It should also be mentioned here that many of the so-called prophets themselves did not appear with the respective mission or function. The very complex thought structures behind most religions were often only created gradually over centuries after the death of the leaders. Obviously, the focus was on expanding and maintaining the power of the leading groups in the respective religious communities. This realisation is important, as the purpose of my book is to put the selection of leaders on a more rational basis in the future.

Knowledge of previous selection procedures should serve to replace them with better methods. Adequate selection procedures should be more effective than those used in the development of Homo Sapiens to date. They should ensure that the "common good" is more in the foreground. It would help if we could avoid the catastrophic dictators we have had to endure time and again in the history of mankind and are still experiencing today. This would largely or completely prevent the huge damage they have caused to humanity and the planet.

I realise that this is a very lofty and ambitious claim. However, it seems to me that it is high time we devoted ourselves intensively to this topic. If reading my book contributes to this, I will consider it a great success.

II. ANCIENT ADVANCED CULTURES

As interesting and entertaining as some of the traditional legends from the time before the development of writing may be, it makes more sense for the topic of the book if we turn to the times from which written traditions exist that can be verified. Here are just a few examples for which there is relatively reliable evidence:

II.A Egypt5

Egypt is perhaps the easiest cultural area to understand. Its origins can be explained by its unique location. At the beginning of its development, there were virtually no significant influences from external or foreign powers. This means that the development of social structures can be followed almost like a scientific experiment. However, there is no indication of how the first king came to be, and why he and no other was endowed with such a total and absolute claim to power. After studying the development, it is not clear how the position and the associated claim to power could be maintained over thousands of years by a family or a subsequent one with a close circle of relatives and friends (whereby the term "friends" is used here in a broader sense and includes dependencies that were easier to handle due to friendly relationships). Perhaps we used to place too little emphasis on scrutinising and researching the reasons why one or the other was able to achieve a position. We have looked very closely at the subsequent endeavours of how power was maintained, continued and even expanded in a family, or why this did not succeed in many cases.

Back to Egypt: Today we use this term worldwide, which comes from the Greek, and no longer use the original Egyptian term, which is "Kennet" and means "black land", which goes back to the dark mud that covered the banks after the annual flooding of the Nile. The adjoining desert was called "Red Land", which is where the name "Red Sea" comes from because the sea borders the desert. The narrow Nile Valley stretches over 1.100 kilometres, measured from the first cataract at the rocky pass of Aswan to the Nile Delta. It is the largest river oasis in the world. From more than 5.000 years ago to the present day, the inhabitants have been waiting for the arrival of the high tide every year, as the Nile water means food and life for people, animals and plants. The country borders the Mediterranean Sea to the north and the Red Sea to the east. In the south, the country is bordered by the First Cataract and in the west, Egypt reaches as far as the Libyan border. It covers an area of around 1,000,000 square kilometres. However, only 38,000 square kilometres (just under 4 % of the area) are suitable for settlement or can be used for agriculture. The area corresponds to the territory of the Netherlands with around 17 million inhabitants. In 2020, around 102 million people lived in Egypt - more than 20 million in Cairo alone. In terms of usable area, Egypt has one of the highest population densities in the world, comparable only to the Rhine-Meuse-Scheldt delta in Europe, the delta of the Ganges, Meghna and Jamuna rivers in Bangladesh or the Mekong delta in southern Cambodia and Vietnam with Ho Chi Minh City. We can easily understand the social development of the Egyptians from the agricultural constraints of this unique oasis country. The soil is very fertile due to the annual flooding, but it tends to become marshy and overgrown after the floods. As in many other areas of the world, widely spaced individual farms, castles or palace complexes were not practical for sustainable and successful agriculture. The inhabitants had to join forces to build dykes and canals, organise water management by mutual agreement and redistribute the fields each year after the floods receded. They gradually formed larger units (called district communities) until 42 nomes had been formed, 22 of which were Upper Egyptian and 20 Lower Egyptian. At the head of each nome, a nomarch from the population always prevailed. There is no description, justification or explanation as to why this particular nomarch and no other won the upper hand. The formation of nomes also had an effect on the religious development of Egypt, as each tribal organisation usually had its own nome deity, which explains the later diversity of gods in Egyptian religion.

The belief in life after death was very strong, so people spent their whole lives designing tombs and thinking about what would happen after death. The pharaoh decided on the many building programmes for unique temples and pyramids. As we understand it, this was a total absolute monarchy. Due to this leadership culture, a very strict hierarchical order developed throughout Egypt. The former nomarchs became scribes and administrators who were directly subordinate to the pharaoh. In turn, the officials, craftsmen and farmers were subordinate to them. It is worth mentioning that the position of women is judged very controversially. In comparison to later classical antiquity, it appears that women were equal to men in many areas. The population lived monogamously, but polygamy prevailed in the royal family and a few higher official families.

Menes was the first king to also bear the title "pharaoh". After a long and eventful period of battles between Upper and Lower Egypt, he succeeded in uniting the two countries under a double crown in 2.900 BC. Menes came from the former capital of the eighth Upper Egyptian district. Under his rule, Egypt developed into a great power, whereby he did not pursue a policy of conquest, but successfully protected the river oasis from enemy attacks. He succeeded in pushing back the Libyans in the west and also kept the Bedouins in Sinai and the Nubians in the south at a distance. Menes founded the capital of the old empire, Memphis, just south of modern-day Cairo. The royal capital and its administrative areas thus belonged to Lower Egypt.

The development of hieroglyphic writing is one of the greatest advances of this period, and without our knowledge of it, none of this information would be available. The period after Menes, the first pharaoh, is scientifically summarised in 30 dynasties. The first to sixth dynasties are considered the "Old Kingdom". The "Middle Kingdom" comprises the 11th to 13th dynasties and the "New Kingdom" the 18th to 20th dynasties. The "Late Period" extends from the 21st to the 30th dynasty. The periods in between are known as the "First" and the "Second Intermediate Period". The "Second Persian Period" up to Alexander the Great was then added as the 31st dynasty. The king had a clear position of supremacy, which is why he was able to push back the former influence of the nobility. The most important administrative posts and the highest priestly positions were reserved for the royal family. All other officials were appointed by the king or inherited their office from their father. Payment was made in kind, and graded according to rank. The administration was very well organised, it was later adopted by the Macedonian dynasty and also influenced that of the Roman Empire. Egypt's success and empire were based on good administration. It was vital to use the labour force profitably and organise it accordingly. The timing and extent of the flooding of the Nile had to be predicted as accurately as possible and regulated and controlled by a highly developed irrigation system in order to make the agricultural yields available to the whole country.

The future civil servants were taught thoroughly in special schools and had to pass a difficult examination in front of their masters at the end of their training. This was the prerequisite for them to be promoted to higher positions depending on their diligence, talent and encouragement. It is worth mentioning that children of the royal families also repeatedly took part in this training system.

The invention of writing in the period between the first and second dynasties was certainly one of the most important steps in Egypt's later development into an advanced civilisation. The characters have nothing to do with those in the Mesopotamian area, they exclusively represent images from the domestic sphere of life. It cannot be emphasised often enough that without this ground-breaking progress, we would not be able to research and understand the development of one of the first advanced civilisations today. Without the characters of the Egyptians, the subject of this book would not be possible. We will save ourselves the trouble of going into the details of the 31 dynasties - to put it simply, it can be said that the development of Egypt as an absolute monarchy was relatively stable until the pharaoh Halloka in 1100 BC.

However, the transfer of power after the death of a king was by no means always smooth. Unfortunately, there is no recognisable pattern in the literature as to how the respective transfer of power took place, which is why we will not go into all the individual cases. Of course, it would be interesting if we could recognise the criteria by which a new king was able to assert himself if he was not "the eldest son". There is no obvious pattern as to how a king who was not a family member asserted himself. With the death of the last Ramesside, Ramses XI, in 1085 BC, the great age of Egypt came to an end. After almost 2.000 years of unity, the country once again split into two parts and the end of the "New Kingdom" was sealed.

Under Ramses XI, Heribor, a man of unknown origin who had probably originally served in the army, rose to become viceroy of Kush (Egyptian name for Nubia) and attained the highest military power as a vizier. After the death of Ramses XI, he had himself elected supreme priest, following the example of earlier pharaohs, and was thus the first new king to unite the supreme secular and spiritual power in one person. In reality, however, Heribor was only the ruler of Upper Egypt, as Smendes had taken power in Lower Egypt at the same time as the vizier of the northern part of the country.

The division of Egypt lasted around 450 years. In the following hundred years, Libyan tribes succeeded in taking over the rule of Lower Egypt. This was achieved not so much through military superiority, but by penetrating the leadership structures and administration of the nomes. The originally nomadic cattle breeders adapted to the superior culture, customs and language of Egypt and became leaders and commanders of the garrisons and fortresses in the delta.

In the following two (23rd and 24th) dynasties, the country fell apart more and more. Upper Egypt was exposed to attacks from Ethiopians advancing down the Nile. During the 25th Dynasty (751 to 656 BC), the Egyptians were also successfully attacked in the east by the Assyrians, who managed to reach, plunder and destroy Memphis and Thebes in two successful advances. In the 26th dynasty, the country became somewhat quieter again, but towards the end of this phase, the Persians successfully attacked Egypt via the Sinai and ruled for around 200 years. The Egyptians tried again and again to shake off the foreign rule but were unsuccessful (27th to 30th Dynasties). Only Alexander the Great liberated the country from Persian occupation and was welcomed and received with open arms, whereby he was clever enough to fully respect the culture and customs of the Egyptians. This allowed him to found Alexandria and develop it into one of the most important cities in the Mediterranean. Greek, or more precisely Macedonian, domination lasted for 300 years until 30 AD when the Romans took over and Egypt became a Roman province.

We now turn to some other advanced civilisations of the Near East, an area that today is more correctly referred to as Western Asia.

II.B Western Asia With Babylon, The World Empire Of The Achaemenids, Palestine And Phoenicia

The development of advanced civilisations in this area between West Asia, Europe and North Africa is much more complex than that of Egypt. Here, too, the dominant influence of geographical location on the development of human civilisations is evident. Egypt is characterised by the floods of the Nile and the resulting river oasis. The natural protection against other peoples and tribes was essential for the continuous development of Egypt. These are the desert in the west towards Libya, the desert in the east towards the Red Sea, in the north the Mediterranean Sea and the south towards Ethiopia the large land slopes and the resulting cataracts.

The geography of Mesopotamia is completely different, as it is characterised by the large two-river system with the Euphrates in the west and the Tigris in the east. Both rivers originate at the foothills of the southern Caucasus and today flow together into the Persian Gulf. In the times before the birth of Christ, the Persian Gulf was larger, as it had not yet been filled by the sedimentation masses of both rivers to the extent it is today. At that time, both the Euphrates and the Tigris still flowed individually into the Persian Gulf. The region between the Euphrates and Tigris, also known as Mesopotamia, had no natural geographical protection in any direction. This meant that the area was always open to raids and attempts at conquest by peoples from the west, the north, the east and also from the Arabian Peninsula in the south.

The incentives for such raids were very high because Mesopotamia offered very good agricultural conditions due to the two rivers and the subtropical climate, could feed a large population and had already developed an advanced civilisation with corresponding wealth. In addition to the favourable climatic conditions, the prerequisites included well-organised collaboration, which, similar to Egypt, served to maintain the canal systems. The success of these endeavours enabled the population to lead a comfortable life by the standards of the time. In all cultures, this was and is the prerequisite for being able to devote themselves to cultural activities in addition to farming, fishing and hunting. Prosperity allowed both kings and the ruling classes of the nobility and priests to erect large buildings, temples and fortifications. The most famous building among many others is the Tower of Babel, also known as the "eighth wonder of the world". It is worth taking a closer look at individual developments and personalities. We will see that, as in Egypt, a despotic monarchy repeatedly prevailed as a form of government.

The literature hardly ever discusses how the first kings enthroned themselves. The standard solution for the transfer of power was the appointment of the first-born son of the principal wife, which did not always work smoothly. In cases where there was no heir or an heir was not recognised, other solutions had to be found, which were usually fought out in long military conflicts and always had very detrimental consequences for the population.

With the exception of Greek and later Roman civilisation, there is no evidence that a selection system for choosing the most capable leader was even considered at this time. There is no recognisable restriction of a temporal nature or by various institutions. Time and again, rival groups fought for power or a share in the exercise of power. These violent methods are identical in almost all cultures: religious leaders in all possible hierarchical forms, militias and various aristocratic groups, either by birth or by privilege, usually acquired in the civil service, i.e. in general "the officialdom", whereby the groups did not hold on to power in the long term. Let us return to West Asia, where I will confine myself to the essential points. It is worth reading up on all the details if you are interested6. The state formations that emerged could not last as long as in Egypt, as they were constantly exposed to attacks from neighbouring peoples. Two tribes originally settled here, the Semitic Akkadians in the north and the Sumerians in the south. It is assumed that the Sumerians immigrated in the fourth and fifth millennium BC. However, excavations also suggest that the presence of the Sumerians dates back to the third millennium BC and is therefore older than that of the Egyptians.

In contrast to Egypt, it appears that the state order in Mesopotamia was based more on religious belief. The village communities gradually developed into city-states, which were also divine states. The invisible "Lord" and thus his representative on earth, the absolutist priestly prince, exercised all power. He commanded the warriors and the entire population was obliged to obey him. Temples were usually built on hills so that they towered over the houses. The temple served as a place of worship and was also the seat of administration, jurisdiction and economic transactions. Standardised systems of measurement were developed early on, mainly the sexagesimal system (place value system based on 60). The cities and some of the fields were protected by huge walls, gates and defence towers.

The cities often sank back into insignificance within a short time. It is assumed that the reason for this was the frequent alteration of the major river courses. There was a constant danger of being cut off from the water supply by neighbouring city princes. There were also frequent raids by Bedouins from the south or mountain tribes from the north. Despite the preference for smaller organisational units, it was therefore necessary to unite to form larger city-states. However, the Sumerians' main contribution to the development of this part of the world was less political and more cultural, and here the development of writing is particularly noteworthy7. I will briefly discuss the development of writing because it is one of the prerequisites for the political development of humanity, as can also be seen with the Sumerians. This writing goes back to the beginning of the third millennium BC. The scribes were called "Dubsar" and used square tablets measuring 4 x 4 cm, which could easily be held in the hand. The signs were pressed with a wooden or reed handle into a soft, quick-drying clay, which was fired and made durable. The characters resembled a wedge, hence the name "wedge writing" that is commonly used today. In contrast to the hieroglyphs of the Egyptians, which were characterised by a multitude of memorable images, the cuneiform characters of the Sumerians are much more difficult to decipher. The writing was quite schematised and a decorative line pattern is recognisable. Fortunately, a large number of tablets have survived, which can be attributed to the Sumerians' love of writing, who recorded even the smallest purchases and many everyday events in writing.

Forms of cuneiform writing can be found in many primitive peoples, including the Indo-European Persians in their ancient Persian script. This also applies to the extinct Hittite people, who were leaders in Mesopotamia for centuries. The decipherment of the cuneiform script was only achieved in the 19th century and many scientists have tried their hand at it. The German humanist and grammar school teacher Georg Friedrich Grotefend (1775 to 1853) had the first successes. With great effort, he succeeded in deciphering the royal name "Xerxes". The Englishman Henry Rawlinson must also be mentioned as an important figure for further decipherment. As an English major on his expeditions to Persia (1847), he discovered the largest rock inscription on a steep rock face, whereupon he lowered himself down the high rock using a pulley and copied the characters. He painstakingly managed to translate the text into English, which he presented in England. This marked the beginning of the decipherment of all other cuneiform scripts. Sumerian died out as a living language soon after the death of King Hammurabi (1728 to 1686 BC). The language was only used by Babylonian priests and taught in their public schools (similar to Latin in the Middle Ages). In the chapter on China, we will see similar stages in the development of writing systems and also find similar developments in the advanced civilisations of America.

Sargon I (of Akkad, 2350 to 2295 BC) was descended from the Akkads. The Akkads belonged to the great Semitic family of peoples. Sargon I became the leader of the region on the Euphrates and the founder of the Akkadian Empire. He extended his power far beyond the borders of Mesopotamia, creating the first universal empire in history. It stretched from the Persian Gulf to the Syrian coast across the Taurus to the Black Sea.8 He ruled the country in a centralised manner and, on his orders, the Semitic language became the language of the state instead of Sumerian. Sargon I no longer felt himself to be the representative of the deity, as the Sumerian priest-princes still did. He elevated himself to the status of god but continued to allow the worship of the old Sumerian gods and the new gods of the Akkadians. As early as 2150 BC, the empire collapsed due to attacks by the Gutaeans, a mountain tribe from the nearby Iranian mountains. In 2000 BC, the Sumerians once again succeeded in gaining control over Mesopotamia under the leadership of Urnamma. He founded a new dynasty, but it was only successful for a short time and the Sumerian empire then disintegrated into insignificant small states. After a long period of confusion, a new Semitic tribe, the Amorites, succeeded in gaining supremacy over the whole of Mesopotamia. This happened under the leadership of Hammurabi (1728 to 1686 BC). He became the most famous king of all Mesopotamian rulers. Under him, a unified Semitic empire emerged, into which the Sumerians were gradually absorbed. Babylon became the capital, which gave rise to the name Babylonia for the entire empire. Hammurabi succeeded in uniting the cosmopolitan spirit of the Western Semitic people with the cultural heritage of the Sumerian-Akkadian population. The city god of Babylon, Marduk, was elevated to the status of god of the empire and at the same time worshipped as the sun god.

Hammurabi tirelessly took care of many details in his country. Taxes had to be paid on time and he made sure that the poor and weak were heard. He acted as a judge on important issues and had a code of laws summarised into a closed system of around 300 paragraphs. Fortunately, French archaeologists found this collection in the ruins of Zusa. The punishments for legal offences were very severe, in accordance with the laws of a desert people.

The security of the state was achieved through a standing army. The most important literary works of Mesopotamia were also codified in the time of Hammurabi. These include the Epic of the Creation of the World and the Epic of Gilgamesh. These two works can also be seen as the prelude and model for the rich treasure of the legendary world of Asia Minor and Greece. Hammurabi was followed by other West Semitic rulers for around a century and a half. The empire then collapsed under the onslaught of the Hittites, Khurites and Kassites.

The Hittites are considered the oldest Indo-European civilisation. Their history is shrouded in legend and poorly documented. They belonged to the steppe peoples and it is assumed that they introduced a new form of warfare with their horse-drawn chariots and were thus able to assert themselves against other ethnic groups. The leadership system differed significantly from the previous cultures in Mesopotamia. There was no rigid absolutism, the king was the leader and judge, determined policy and also represented the people as a priest before the deity. He was assisted in his official duties by a council and presided over a court. This was made up of his closest relatives, priests, officers and officials. Like Egypt, the country was divided into nomes and administration was the responsibility of the vassals appointed by the king, whom he selected from the subjugated ruling dynasties of the small states. The people were divided into free and unfree, whereby it is assumed that the relationship between the two groups was tolerable. A significant difference to the previous cultures is that the centre of the settlements and towns was not the temple, but the castle situated on a slight hill. This was easier to defend and was additionally secured with double walls and strong gates.

The king's special position and the validity of his dynasty were particularly jeopardised in his absence. Therefore, betrayal and murder often determined the succession to the throne. Under King Telepianu (around 1524 to 1500 BC), a legal succession was introduced. A son of the first wife was designated as heir to the throne in the first place and a son from a possible second marriage in the second place. The family was regulated by paternal law and the marriage was a marriage of purchase, as was customary in Asia Minor. Criminal law was based less on the principle of revenge and retribution but emphasised more the help and rescue of the injured party. In Asia Minor, as in Europe, there were great migrations of peoples that destroyed the Hittite Empire. The Kassites, a mountain people from the Caucasus, took over for several centuries. They adopted the superior culture of the Western Semites and were gradually absorbed into the occupied people.

The Neo-Assyrian Empire (900 to 612 BC) came into being under one of the most famous kings of his time: Nebuchadnezzar (around 1130 BC). The position of the king among the Neo-Assyrians was different from that of Egypt and Babylon. He was not a god like the Pharao of Egypt or the king of Babylon, but merely a governor of the deity. From this, the Assyrians derived the claim to have the divine mandate of Assur to establish world domination in his name. This was the justification for their brutal campaigns of conquest and ruthless methods of war. The New Assyrian Empire was characterised by unspeakable war atrocities and the subjugation of neighbouring peoples. Shortly before its downfall, New Assyria achieved its greatest expansion with the subjugation of Egypt, but the end came surprisingly quickly at the hands of the tribes of the Medes. The Medes had often tried to attack the Assyrians and had trained their foot soldiers according to their fighting methods. Thanks to their numerically superior cavalry, they finally achieved victory. After the fall of New Assyria, the oppressed countries took terrible revenge, slaughtering the population and destroying all of Assyria's cities.

Babylon flourished once again under the particularly capable king Nebuchadnezzar II (605 to 562 BC). Under his reign, the legendary Tower of Babel was built, which had a base area of 90 square metres and a height of 90 metres. The structure consisted of a total of 6 square towers and carried the Temple of Marduk at the top. The mighty building was destroyed during the subsequent Persian reign and fell into ruins and today only the foundation walls remain, which a German scholar by the name of Koldewey uncovered during the excavation of Babylon. Under King Cyrus, the Persians succeeded in rounding off their empire with the conquest of Babylon (538 BC).

The Achaemenid Empire 9

Cyrus II of the House of Achaimenes was originally a Persian vassal of the Median kings. He defeated the Medes in 550 BC and appointed himself the great king of both kingdoms with the consent of the nobility. The Medes and Persians are related to Indo-Germanic tribes. The Medes settled in what is now western Iran and the Persians in the south, which they called "Parsa". Cyrus created his empire, which stretched from the border of India to the Ionian Sea, in just 11 years. His successes were based on the military superiority of the Persians, who were above all excellent horsemen and archers.

Persia also differed culturally from its neighbouring states, which is probably the reason for its political rise. As with most Indo-European peoples, it was believed that nature was animated by hostile and friendly deities. Zarathustra summarised these ideas in a body of thought as early as the sixth century BC. For this reason, he was persecuted by the nobility and the priesthood but was surprisingly able to assert his ideas at the Persian court. He developed the idea of a universal religion that was no longer only intended for a specific people. In his governmental affairs, King Cyrus largely followed the ideas of Zarathustra, which were based on a concept of understanding between peoples, tolerance, leniency and the application of a comprehensible law. In the occupied territories, Cyrus left the local princes their thrones, but appointed governors (satraps). The Greeks then simply called the resulting nomes satrapies. Satrapies had great powers as administrative officials, judges and commanders-in-chief of the military. The satrapies had to cover the costs of their administration themselves and also pay considerable sums to the royal house. Xenophon, the Greek writer (born in Athens between 430 and 425 BC, died in Corinth in 354) admired the king and dedicated a work to him. In the guise of the founder of the Persian Empire, Cyrus represents the ideal image of a perfect ruler, which applied both in times of peace and war and to his relationships with enemies and his subjects. In addition, Xenophon's writings were intended to show what means should be used to found an empire, consolidate it and administer it for the welfare of its citizens. Even Cicero admired the work. From today's perspective, it is interesting to see that people at that time were already thinking about what made a good politician, leader or person exercising state power.

Cyrus' grandson Dareios, himself a staunch follower of Zarathustra, succeeded in further expanding the Persian empire and strengthening its internal administration and infrastructure. Although the Persians conquered other empires, which often had a superior culture and history, they allowed themselves to be influenced little or not at all. They pursued independent paths in both art and politics, which were successful for centuries and are well documented today.

The temples common in Mesopotamia were completely absent in Persia because Ahuramazda (the all-encompassing light god of the sky) did not possess and was unaware of gods houses nor images. Persia's success came to an end with Darius I's attempt to conquer Greece in order to secure the western side of his empire. The following description is written more from a Persian perspective. In the next chapter, we will examine the same historical period from a Greek perspective.

In 490 BC, Darius I landed on the island of Euboea with an impressive army. After conquering the capital Eretria, the army crossed over to the mainland to attack Athens. The Persians met the numerically weaker Athenian army at Marathon. The better armour of the heavily armoured Athenians, also known as hoplites, enabled them to evade the Persian hail of arrows and then defeat the Persian troops thanks to their thrusting lance. This was a great victory for Athens. However, they knew that the Persians would attack with an even larger army in the future, and the death of Darius I delayed the Persians' next campaign. After suppressing the revolts in Egypt and Babylon, his son Xerxes once again devoted himself to the subjugation of Greece. With an army that was huge by the standards of the time, Xerxes succeeded in overrunning the Greeks at the Thermopylae bottleneck. He was then able to occupy and incinerate Athens, which had been abandoned by its inhabitants in good time. Central Greece was helpless in the face of Persian superiority. The Athenian statesman Themistocles surprisingly managed to take the reins of power in these difficult times. He forced the much stronger Persian fleet into a decisive battle in the narrow sound of Salamis. The Persians were unable to realise their superiority here and Xerxes had to watch the defeat from the mainland and then returned to Persia. He handed over command of the land army to Mardonios, the best general in his empire.

The Spartan and Attic hoplites united and finally succeeded in winning the war in 479 BC on the plain of Platai and in the naval battle of Mycale. From the Greeks' perspective, this was the victory of the polis, a community of free citizens who determined their laws, against a world empire ruled by a despotic king and his family. These ideas were probably best expressed by the poet Aeschylus and the historian Herodotus. Both are concerned with the eternal struggle of the forces of free human dignity in a democracy against absolute despotism. For Aeschylus and Herodotus, salvation for the state and the community was "right moderation" in the face of hybris, seen as "self-exaltation". Moderation also includes self-knowledge, whereby the individual must subordinate himself to the goals of the community. This is in contrast to despots of all colours, who are always trying to gain control and thus world domination. In Persia, Cyrus succeeded in subjugating the Near East, but Darius and Xerxes subsequently failed in their attempts to conquer Nubia, Carthage, Scythia, Thrace and Greece. Persia, however, continued to be the great empire of the Oriental world within the borders from the Indus and Jaxartes to Cyrene and Ionia. The Achaemenid great kings wanted to bring prosperity and development to the people they conquered in accordance with the Zarathustrian concept of world religion. They also used this to justify their claim to rule over the occupied countries and people. This was successful in many areas: Improvement of agriculture, cultivation of trade and transport, expansion and maintenance of the infrastructure with safe roads, and irrigation systems as well as acceptance and a certain tolerance of different cultural traditions. Over time, all these ideas began to disintegrate. The satraps gained more and more power, which was accompanied by an increase in pomp and waste and a decline in administration. Internally, intrigues and even assassination plots were the order of the day. Xerxes was actually murdered by his supreme guard commander Artabanos in 465 BC.

Persia once again succeeded in gaining control over Greece by skilfully exploiting the Peloponnesian War between Athens and Sparta. In 387/386 BC, the so-called Royal Peace was concluded, which established Persian supremacy over the Greek states. The further disintegration and final collapse of the Persian Empire was sealed by the appearance of Philip of Macedon and his son Alexander. After the death of his father, Alexander forged a plan to conquer Persia at the age of 22. After several very successful battles after 334 BC, he succeeded in winning the decisive victory at the Battle of Gaugamela (331 BC) within just 4 years. Darius III fled in the spring of 330 BC and was murdered on the orders of the satrap of Bacnia, Bessos. Alexander found the body when he finally caught up with the pursued man and was wise enough to punish the murderer and have Darius III solemnly buried in his family tomb. At the same time, Alexander confirmed his claim to be the rightful successor of Darius. After Alexander's death (323 BC), Hellenistic culture merged with Persian culture. The moral way of life of the Hellenes and their conception of the state was combined with the old oriental art of administration and organisation. The Hellenistic language was also adopted, albeit as a colloquial language, which was called Koine and became the common language of merchants, in the chancelleries and in everyday life. We will now turn our attention more briefly to the other cultures of Western Asia, Palestine and the Phoenicians.

Palestine

The great interest in Palestine and Israel is a European and American phenomenon that goes back to Christianity, which was adopted by Greece, Rome and then Europe. We will see that the area contributes little specifically to our topic, but we want to mention it for the sake of completeness. Palestine was a land of passage between the continents of Africa and West Asia. The inhabitants mostly lived in small city-states, where their independence was limited or completely taken away. The name Palestine goes back to the Philistines, a people who colonised the area in the 12th century BC. In 135 AD, the Romans used the name "Provincia Palaestina". Despite the long coastline, the lack of good harbours did not encourage seafaring, unlike the Phoenicians, who will be discussed in the next section. The first known colonisation was by the Canaanites, who lived in small fortified towns on hills and spoke a Semitic dialect. We can assume that the coastal strip was mostly under Egyptian rule. The Philistines immigrated in the 12th century and belonged to an Indo-European language group. They were very warlike, occupied the southern part of the coastal plain and brought with them knowledge of ironworking, bringing the Bronze Age to an end in this part of the world. The Philistines were tightly organised and already had iron chariots, ships and weapons made of iron. It is assumed that they brought the alphabetic script of the Phoenicians with them. Egyptian hieroglyphic writing and Sumerian cuneiform were difficult to learn for broad sections of the population and it was only alphabetic or phonetic writing that enabled a larger number of people to learn to read and write. Later, there were no difficulties in deciphering the Syrian-Palestinian inscriptions.

Around 1300 BC, Semitic nomads from the east increasingly attempted to invade the cultivated land. They came from southern Mesopotamia and became known through the story of the patriarch Abraham. Gradually, the nomads settled down and mostly lived peacefully in an ethnic group called Israel. As the coastal strip was repeatedly raided by other tribes, the Israelites were inclined to move on to Egypt and the fertile Nile Valley. They were very welcome as helpers in the construction of the pyramids but had to work in hard labour and tried to flee back to Palestine, which they managed to do with great difficulty. This legend lived on in the traditions of the tribes and formed the basis for the belief in God that still exists today. According to the traditions, the most important man was Moses, to whom the Ten Commandments were supposedly proclaimed by God on Mount Sinai. The Ten Commandments are understood as God's contract with the people of Israel. It is a purely monotheistic conception of religion that does not tolerate any other gods alongside itself. Over time, the Israelis mixed with the Canaanites and also adopted the ancient Semitic script. The younger Hebrew nomads took over the political leadership. The fusion of the two cultures is regarded as the birth of the Jewish people. Some time passed before the two groups developed an amicable coexistence.

Leaders emerged who were called judges, who owed their authority less to their noble lineage and more to their divine calling. The greatest threat to the Israelites was posed by the Philistines, who had occupied the coastal strip and were spreading further and further into the land due to their warlike prowess. As a result, the fragmented tribes of Israel united under the last judge Samuel, who, with the support of the people and the elders, anointed Saul as king, who then united all the tribes in defence against the Philistines. He came from a respected family and had already proven himself in battle. However, his luck ran out in the following clashes and he lost the next major battle. In order not to fall into the hands of the enemy, Saul decided to commit suicide, thus clearing the way for David as his successor.

David had already distinguished himself in the battle against Goliath and at the age of 30 he succeeded in securing the kingdom, recapturing the Ark of the Covenant and building Jerusalem into a fortified capital. Thanks to the many victorious wars that David waged, his country became the most powerful state between Egypt and Assyria. His successor and fortunate heir was his son Solomon (around 970 to 930 BC), who avoided every military conflict, even at the loss of some of the lands his father had conquered. He promoted trade and focussed on building up the wealth of the country, through which major caravan routes led from Mesopotamia to Egypt. Solomon had the roads inspected, secured them against robbers and demanded high customs duties. He himself took part in the trade with horses and chariots, for which he even had settlements built. Because of his great wealth, Solomon was glorified everywhere, which led him to set up a service to decorate the capital with all its splendour, following the example of the Egyptians. This included the famous temple, which he had built where the Dome of the Rock stands today.

It took seven years to build and measured 10 x 10 metres, with a height of 15 metres. As in the neighbouring oriental empires, the splendour of the folding structure came at a price and was not without criticism due to the associated tax burden. The building was seen as wasteful and also a threat to religious tradition. After the death of Solomon, the empire once again fell into two parts: A militarily strong kingdom in the north called Israel, comprising 10 tribes, and the smaller Judah in the south with the capital Jerusalem, consisting of only 7 tribes, although it remained the spiritual centre for the old traditions.