why does Mesopotamian civilization seem so grim and joyless compared to Egyptian civilization?

Question

mesopotamian civilization compared to egyptian civilization

Answer 1

Compaired to Egyptian culture, Mesopotamian culture looks grim and joyless because we have very little material to pull information from.

The Mesopotamians wrote in Cuniform, which for the longest time was used only for the recording of legal, religious and economic scriptures. The Egyptians had hieroglyphs for tombs, temples and monuments, but they also had a printed and cursive form (much like our languguage) they used for letters, poems and stories. Also, the climate of Egypt is excellent for the conservation of paper, leather, cloth, wood and other biodegradable items; this means we have a large sample of every day items that make the Egyptians seems more like modern people. Mesopotamia was a jungle where warm, wet weather makes it hard for things like cloth, wood and paper to survive, so we lack the human characteristics of this culture to help us identify with them. What does survive from them are stone and clay carvings, which (again) only deal with the legal and religous aspects of life.

Also, archaeologists and anthropologists (the people who study the ancient world) are taught not to impose on their finds their own feelings and believes. Many fail and will often paint the ancient world in an over-romantizied or grim light to make their finds more popular. Egypt was the center of attention for most of the Age of Exploration and Colonization because the sand perserved most of its past, and Egypt was under the control of some of the richest European countries that could afford sending people there to study the finds. The land that was once Mesopotamia was inhabited by people in the middle of several religious and ethnic wars; and survival tends to come before social studies.

Another reason Mesopotamain culture is painted so grimly is because of the three texts so often refered do by scholars: Gilgamesh, Hammurabi's Code and the Anuma Elish.

The Anuma Elish is the Mesopotamian creation story and tells of how each generation of gods does its best to destroy the other. In the end, humanity is created from the remain of the now dead older generation of gods and are placed on earth to serve the younger gods. This servant-master relationship is much harsher than the children-parents relationship the Egyptians have with their gods, and so cast a grim like on how the Mesopotamians might have lived; opressed under the thumb of a cruel priesthood, but since we have no evidence to support (or deny) this, we let our imagenations take over.

Hammurabi's Code is a list of 282 some-odd laws for the citizens of Mesopotamia. Famous for its harsh punishments for petty crimes, it again paints a very grim picture of how life must have been from them. But, if all the future had of our society was a list of our laws, I don't think their view of us would be much better (example, in North Carolina it is illegal to sing off key. To us it is a silly law, but for someone in the furture, they might believe the culture was very opressive and a bit totalitarian in that even leisure was dictated by law).

Gilgamesh is the story of a Mesopotamian man who travels the world to learn how to live forever. He meets gods, savages and monsters along the way, loses his dearest friend and ultimately fails at his quest. To us, this is a horribly depressing story, but to the Mesopotamians it was enlightening: it told them to not worry about the great beyond, but to embrace the life they had and enjoy it to its fullest. The quote "Eat, drink and be merry, for tomorrow we die" is from Gilgamesh.

In truth, the culture was probably no more grim or joyless than ours is, but because we don't have anything to prove this, we let ourselves picture the past as the worst it could have been rather than how it probably was.

~~ Abaddon

Answer 2

I find Mesopotamian History to be fascinating. I find certain aspects of Egyptian history to be fascinating as well. I am not sure exactly what you mean by "grim and joyless" when referring to Mesopotamian history. I will assume you are asking why life seemed to have been relatively more tragic, violent, and diffucult in Mesopotamia than in Egypt. On the most basic level, I attribute this contrast simply to geographic influences. These cultural hearths developed in fertile areas with access with to water -- Egypt in the Nile Valley, and Mesopotamia along the Tigris and Euphrates rivers. Life in ancient Egypt was considerably more stable than life in Mesopotamia. Egypt is geographically sheltered. Egyptian government and society was greatly isolated by deserts on the East and West, treacherous cataracts along the southern portions of the Nile, and the Mediterranean Sea to North. Egyptians enjoyed a more peaceful existence (evidenced by long periods of dynastic rule). The predictable, annual flooding of the Nile insured a more consistent food supply. Naturally, reliable food production and a stable political, economic, and social system fosters a more pleasant existance. In contrast, Mesopotamia did not share in the same good fortune. Mesopotamia lacked the natural barriers that sheltered the Nile Valley. The fertile land along the Tigris and Euphrates Rivers was at a premium. Typically, rainfall was low, so farmers depended on irrigation to grow crops. Violent struggles for land and water access were common. Unpredictable weather and devestating floods often led to crop shortages. This is evidenced by a long history of warfare and political upheaval. Ancient Mesopotamians explained the natural world around them through the various and often malicious deities. Existence in Mesopotamia was brutal and unstable. While the Egyptians viewed the Pharoah as both a religious and political leader, it is obvious why priests held a more important role in early Ancient Mesopotamian society than did the kings.The relative ease and stability of life play an important role in the underlying tones found in a civilization (i.e. religion, literature, government, social structure, art etc...)

Answer 3

I personally don't see the Mesopatamian civilization as grim and joyless. I do think they differ from Egyptian civilization in several ways. I think this is because Mesopatamia was not impacted as much as Egypt by Alexandrer the Great. He took control over Egypt and built Alexandria, named after him, there. It seemed like in history that Alexandrer was not as forceful and so I think they were less influenced by Hellenistic (the blend of like Muslim, Greek, and Roman culture) culture compared to the Egyptians.

Answer 4

You forget the golden rule!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Whoever has the gold makes the rule.

It appears that it was not "feasible" for the definers of Mesopotamian civilization to glorify one of the OLDEST known civilization(s) of the world. Perhaps, it has something to do with the Catholic church... (Sodom, and Gomorrah), or the accessibility and ease in "digging up" the Egyptian civilization.

Based on my limited knowledge, of the three oldest indo-European civilizations, Egypt was given more attention and coverage, because, it was well covered in the canonized Bible.

In summation, The oldest, civilizations: Mesopotamia, Egypt, Mohenjodaro and Harrappa, should be equally important, yet the writers of "books" refuse to discuss all three contemporaneously, because it does not fit their agenda...whatever that may be. WOW sounds like a conspiracy theory.

DJ

Answer 5

Romanticism. Mesopotamian civilization is mostly known to history students and history buffs. Even though Egypt may have indeed been a much more richer lively place, it has been romanticized constantly in plays, books, movies and probably a dozen other mediums. Even when we look at Egypt through the stern eye of a historian, we can't help but remember all of the visions of Egypt we have already seen.

Answer 6

I think it is your own view of things. Mesopotamian poems and other records show that it was a civilization which had great appreciation for the joy of life.

Answer 7

you need to understand the civilizations as their history describe them. You can't add your own judgement to what you learned. All I am trying to tell you is that you obviously prefer the Egyptian history but its just a matter of "like" not fact. Don't have wishful thinking about what you learn in history. Understand the facts, compare, contrast information and then, if you choose or like one better than the other is a matter of your opinion not historical facts.

Answer 8

What makes you say that?