Friday, March 13, 2026
An auspicious day
Thursday, March 12, 2026
Overheard on the interwebs
"Beauty is the mask of the Divine. By falling in love with the mask, you eventually find the face beneath it."
Democracy before Athens
I heard similar stuff before, so Gemini probably isn´t entirely off the mark here, but since the system is really "tipsy" these days, please feel free to double-check it! I have also removed some weird and irrelevant sentences from the responses...
Was there a democratic polity (like a city-state) in Mesopotamia already 1,000 years (or so) before ancient Athens?
Yes, this is a fascinating area of historical revisionism. Many historians and Assyriologists, most notably Thorkild Jacobsen, have argued for the existence of what they call "Primitive Democracy" in Mesopotamia, occurring roughly between 3000 BCE and 2500 BCE—well over 2,000 years before the Golden Age of Athens.
While these were not "democracies" in the modern liberal sense, they functioned as organized polities where power was shared among a broader group of citizens rather than being held by an absolute, divine monarch.
1. The Concept: "Primitive Democracy"
In early Sumerian city-states (like Uruk, Kish, and Shuruppak), leadership was not initially a hereditary kingship (Lugal). Instead, evidence suggests that the city was governed by a Council of Elders and an Assembly of Men (likely arms-bearing citizens).
The Bicameral Structure: Jacobsen noted that early Mesopotamian myths (like the Epic of Gilgamesh) describe a structure similar to a two-house parliament:
The Assembly of Elders: Senior statesmen or heads of clans.
The Assembly of Young Men: The "warriors" or able-bodied men of the city.
2. Evidence from the Epic of Gilgamesh
The most famous evidence for this comes from the tale of Gilgamesh and Agga. When the King of Kish (Agga) threatens the city of Uruk, Gilgamesh does not simply declare war.
He first goes to the Elders to ask for their counsel. When they suggest surrender, he is unsatisfied.
He then goes to the Assembly of the Men of the City, who vote for war and resistance.
This demonstrates that even a legendary "strongman" like Gilgamesh was originally bound by the consensus of the community.
3. The Transition to Kingship
This democratic structure eventually collapsed due to the constant state of warfare between city-states.
Emergency Dictatorship: In times of crisis, the Assembly would appoint a Lugal (literally "Great Man") to lead the army.
The "Permanent Emergency": As wars became more frequent and prolonged, these temporary leaders refused to hand back their power to the Assembly. Over several centuries, the "Emergency Dictator" evolved into the permanent, hereditary King.
4. Comparison: Mesopotamia vs. Athens
| Feature | Mesopotamian "Primitive Democracy" (c. 3000 BCE) | Athenian Democracy (c. 500 BCE) |
| Origin | Emerged naturally from tribal/clan consensus. | Emerged as a deliberate political reform (Cleisthenes). |
| Authority | The Assembly advised or elected temporary leaders. | The Assembly (Ecclesia) held sovereign power. |
| End Goal | Effective governance and survival. | Citizenship, legal equality (isonomia). |
| Documentation | Clay tablets, myths, and administrative records. | Robust legal codes, speeches, and philosophy. |
5. Why is this significant?
This challenges the traditional "Whig history" view that democracy is a uniquely Western invention that began in Greece. It suggests that collective decision-making is a fundamental human social technology that arises whenever a community is small enough for its members to exert influence but large enough to require organized cooperation.
Even the most ancient structures of human civilization began with dialogue and consensus before they were hardened into the heavy weight of absolute monarchy.
Would you like me to look into the specific roles of women in these early Mesopotamian assemblies (where they often held more status than in later periods)?
xxxxx
In the city-state of Sippar (modern-day Iraq) during the Old Babylonian period (around 1800–1600 BCE), clay tablets provide some of the most explicit evidence for a decentralized, almost "corporatist" form of urban governance.
While not a "democracy" in the Athenian sense, Sippar’s archives reveal that the city was governed by a City Council (Puhrum) where professional groups and artisans held real, documented influence.
1. The "Bab-Mullu" (The Gate of the Citizens)
In Sippar, many administrative and judicial decisions were not made in a palace, but at the City Gate. Cuneiform records describe the city council being composed of:
The Mayor (Rabianum): The presiding officer.
The Elders (Shibutu): Heads of prominent families.
Professional Representatives: Crucially, tablets mention the involvement of the "Overseers of the Merchants" (Wakil Tamkari) and representatives of various Craft Guilds.
2. The Artisan Councils at Ebla and Mari
A thousand miles away, the Ebla Tablets (found in modern Syria, dating to c. 2500 BCE) describe a similar phenomenon. These tablets describe a bicameral-style government where the king (En) was not absolute.
The "Lugal-Lugal": This was a group of "Lords" or "Elders" who functioned as a parliament.
Artisanal Input: Records from Mari and Ebla explicitly mention that the heads of certain technical groups—such as the Chief Smith or the Chief Weaver—were consulted on matters of state treasury and military logistics.
In these cities, the "popular" groups weren't just workers; they were considered stakeholders in the city's survival. If the "Elders" wanted to go to war, they needed the blacksmiths to agree to forge the weapons and the merchants to fund the campaign.
3. The "Colony Assembly" of Kanesh
Perhaps the most striking example of popular representation comes from the Old Assyrian Merchant Colonies (c. 1900 BCE) at Kanesh. Clay tablets from this period describe the "Karum" (The Quay or Colony Assembly).
The "Small and Great": The tablets explicitly state that decisions were made by the "Assembly of the Small and the Great" (ṣeher rabi).
Meaning: This phrasing suggests that both the wealthy elites ("the Great") and the common artisans/merchants ("the Small") had a vote or a voice in the legal and economic disputes of the city.
Summary: The Mesopotamian "Council" Model
| City | Date | Governance Feature |
| Sippar | 1800 BCE | Craft overseers and merchants sat on the City Council (Puhrum). |
| Ebla | 2500 BCE | A council of "Lords" limited the King's power. |
| Kanesh | 1900 BCE | Decisions made by the "Assembly of the Small and Great." |
| Shuruppak | 2600 BCE | Records of a "Bicameral" assembly of elders and young men. |
Why this matters to you
This historical reality supports your interest in decentralized power. It shows that absolute monarchy was actually a later distortion. At the dawn of civilization, the "Temple-Cities" were run more like cooperatives where your craft gave you a seat at the table.
Would you like to explore the specific tablets from Sippar that describe the "trial of the commoners"?
xxxxx
The "Trial of the Commoners" is a term often used by historians to describe a specific legal phenomenon documented in the Sippar archives (and nearby Nippur), where the city's judicial power was exercised not by a king, but by the community itself.
The most famous specific case often cited as the "Trial of the Commoners" (or the "Silent Witness" case) actually comes from Nippur, but it follows the exact legal structure used in Sippar.
1. The Case: The "Nippur Murder Trial" (c. 1900 BCE)
This tablet is one of the most remarkable legal documents in human history because it shows a king (Ur-Ninurta) deferring his power to a "popular assembly" to decide a complex moral and legal issue.
The Crime: Three men murdered a temple official. They then told the official's wife, who remained silent and did not report the crime.
The "Democratic" Intervention: The King did not simply execute them. He referred the case to the Assembly (Puhrum) of Nippur.
The Representation: The tablets list the members of this assembly. It wasn't just nobles; it included artisans, a bird-catcher, a potter, and a gardener. These were the "Commoners" acting as a jury of peers.
2. The Verdict of the "Popular Groups"
A heated debate ensued within the assembly, which is transcribed on the tablets:
The Prosecution: Some members argued that the wife was an accomplice because of her silence and should be executed alongside the murderers.
The Defense (The Commoners' View): The "lower" members of the assembly argued for her. They stated that she was not a participant in the crime and that her silence was the result of her being a victim of circumstances, not a conspirator.
The Result: The Assembly of Commoners acquitted the wife. The King accepted their verdict. This is the first recorded instance of a "jury of peers" overriding a potential state execution.
3. Professional Representation in Sippar
In Sippar, the "popular" groups were even more formalized. We have tablets where the "Assembly of the City of Sippar" and the "Karum of Sippar" (the merchant council) acted together.
The Representatives: The tablets explicitly mention the "Overseer of the Barbers" and the "Chief of the Carpentry" acting as legal witnesses and representatives in property disputes.
The Function: These artisans had a "Seal of Office." When a "commoner" was on trial or involved in a contract, the head of their respective guild sat on the council to ensure the law was applied fairly to their class.
4. Why this is "Democratic"
Historians like Thorkild Jacobsen argued that this proves Mesopotamia had a functioning Judicial Democracy long before Greece.
Decentralization: The King was not the law; the City was the law.
Inclusion: A gardener or a potter had the legal right to debate a murder case alongside a high priest.
The "Gate" Justice: Decisions were made at the city gate, in public view, where any citizen could observe.
Summary of the "Commoner" Influence
| Element | The "Sippar/Nippur" Model |
| Jury | Composed of artisans, bird-catchers, and laborers. |
| Power | Could acquit defendants even against "State" interests. |
| Identity | Representatives were chosen based on their craft/guild. |
| Legacy | Forerunner to the idea of "Common Law" and public trial. |
This suggests that 4,000 years ago, your identity as an "Artisan" (your craft) would have given you a direct voice in the justice of your city. Absolute, faceless law had not yet fully crushed the individual's role in the collective.
Prophecy?
Overheard on the interwebs: "Trump´s destiny is to die in office. He is a Sun King". But wasn´t the sun king ritually sacrificed?
The hinge of ages
Some astrological speculations c/o John Michael Greer on the recent conjunction between Saturn and Neptune at zero degrees Aries. Last time it happened was 2,500 years ago - right at the cusp of the Axial Age.
Interesting, at least if you believe in astrology. Then, the predictions get more and more mundane (pun intended). Trump´s attack on Iran (which happened about eight days later) doesn´t show up in the charts at all?! If you want to be charitable, the indications of trouble at sea for the UK, or the inability of the US military to deal with unspecified impending changes, points to a war. But note that the Middle East is supposed to be calm...
Note also the peculiar optimism of the chart, since Jupiter (the Great Benefic) is exalted. This supposedly will make the working classes regain some of their lost standard of living. Sounds highly unlikely in the middle of an impending oil crisis...unless it sagely heralds a socialistic war economy in which the poor will benefit from higher rations!
Saturn-Neptune great conjunctions in Aries are very rare, but Saturn-Neptune conjunctions in general are not. As I noted in a previous post, astrologers have noted that the previous three have been correlated to dramatic changes in Russian history: the 1917 revolutions, the death of Stalin 1953, and the collapse of Communism in Eastern Europe in 1989 (which triggered the dissolution of the Soviet Union two years later). The most dramatic thing that could happen to the Russian Federation in 2026 is (of course) the death of Vladimir Putin and the military victory of Ukraine...
The Hinge of Ages: Saturn conjunct Neptune
Oh, and what happened to this divination? It actually sounded more correct!
But as usual, we just have to wait and see...
Wake up to politics
I´ve covered this before, but opinion polls supposedly suggest that most Trump/MAGA supporters are in favor of Operation Epic Fury. The number of MAGA Republicans who support the war is much larger than the number of non-MAGA Republicans who do so. This is true both in percentages and in absolute numbers. Only 3% of Republicans identify clearly as both MAGA and anti-war. From this, some gadflies conclude that there isn´t a "split in MAGA" over the Iran war. It´s all sound and (non-epic) fury from the legacy media, signifying nothing.
However, there seems to be a problem with the relevant polls.
Those who self-identify as MAGA usually take that to mean "100% support for Trump". The label is ideologically empty and is used to express extreme trust in the person of Donald J Trump. Those who oppose the Iran war will probably not identify as MAGA for that very reason. But this skews the result. If "MAGA" just means "I love Trump", then almost *by definition* MAGAs will be much less likely to oppose Trump´s policies on any issue.
The writer of the first article linked below believe that the midterm elections *will* cause trouble for Trump since many new Trump voters in 2024 were independents and are likely to switch their allegiance (many of these might be opposed to the war or dissatisifed for other reasons). However, he believes that this isn´t the same thing as a major split in MAGA, since the MAGAs who are "Trumpier than Trump" (Steven Bannon, Tucker Carlson, MTG) command very little support.
I can´t help wondering if political commentators are simply talking pass each other. They have different definitions of what "MAGA" is supposed to be. The ideologically orthodox populists may be a minuscule group and perhaps nobody outside their circles gives a damn about what Bannon is saying, but if a larger group of independents leave the "MAGA coalition" (in the broader sense), Trump is in trouble anyway! And that´s true even if this particular group is smaller than the MAGA cultists for whom Trump simply can do nothing wrong. Elections can be decided by a few swing voters...
Another interesting finding (second link) is that 26% of Republican voters believe that Trump started the Iran war to distract from the Epstein files, while a whopping 81% of Democrats think so.
Make it plain on tablets
Vision boards are dangerous, apparently. Never even heard of them before, but our sistah in Xrist Doreen Virtue have the receipts. Please note that Virtue actually say that vision boards may work. But since they aren´t Biblical but rather occult, you shouldn´t use them anyway.
I didn´t think I would have to defend "positive thinking"!
That being said: I´m sure Virtue is right when she said that everything she got from vision boards "felt wrong" in some way. Well, yes, that´s because the material world is imperfect. In that sense, "turning to God" might indeed be a better option if you want "eternal peace". But while humans can´t live by bread alone, most of us do need that darn bread somewhere at the base of Maslow´s pyramid. And if the good lord doesn´t provide it, well...
Our techno-populist future
Vance is a rather notorious Trump sycophant. It seems the Vice President has a sycophant all his own. The guy who wrote "Code Red" (and the article below). Translation: Peter Thiel wants to sell his techno-dystopian future to the American electorate as "populism". Let´s welcome the new techno-populist future! I´m sure it´ll be waaaaay better than the techno-bureaucratic future on offer from The Other Team...
This isn´t going very well, is it?
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)