Thanks to Curiosity Stream for sponsoring the video. Go to curiositystream.com/DanDavis and enter the promo code ‘DanDavis’ for 25% off an annual plan. And thank you very much for watching.
Please give your theory on why the coastline is 140km away today from the ruins of Ur which was on the shoreline, people have said its from sediment that has washed down the rivers but 140km of new land cannot be sediment surely.
Hi. I left a comment on one of your very early videos about 3 weeks ago. It was on the Koryos and their culture. You go into detail that strikes me as unknowable in that video. I know you are a fiction writer, but I thought these videos were supposed to be more fact based. It left me very confused on how to receive the videos you place on this channel. I want to keep watching, but have hesitated since then, as I find this so confusing. Can you please explain whether the videos on your channel should be taken as fiction or what?
Those clay bullets were still somewhat in use when I was deployed to Iraq in 2008. I was stationed in a Theater Internment Facility providing medical care to Iraqi detainees. They would sometimes mix their tea with sand, make it into a ball, and leave it out in the sun to bake. Most of the time, they used them to lob messages back and forth between separate compounds, but they did occasionally use them as weapons, throwing them at us from time to time.
@@DanDavisHistory they were quite inventive. They were able to come up with some rather impressive ways to improvise weapons, and their levels of violence easily outstripped anything found in American prisons.
They be keeping black me. Out but those statues and artifacts don’t lie in their gated museums! Yep! They know! So don’t ever hold ur head down like never!
I like how the story of David and Goliath is considered the ultimate story of defeating the odds, but no matter how big Goliath was a stone from a sling to the head was a killing blow. Literally a weapon of warfare
Real winner of that story is Goliath, was just a normal name. Now it means someone who is big and strong and good at fighting. That it takes having god on your side to beat him
if you're wearing a helmet a hit from a sling wouldn't be necessarily fatal and the passage more shows how saul was unfit to rule as he should've fought the duel himself instead of electing a champion to fight on his behest
@@platypipope328 It isn't clear it was fatal. Maybe just disabling long enough for David to approach? Read literally David kills Goliath twice, once with the slingstone and once with his own sword. Also, a King fighting an enemy champion is daft, you pick your own Champion, which is what Saul did. Him being unfit for this decision in particular is an extremely subjective religious perspective at best.
@@platypipope328 a lead sling bullet has been found to pierce bronze helmets rather reliably. Evidenced in both testimg and material culture finds. Slings are deadly.
Halfway through I realized this video was 50 minutes long; it felt like 5! You really make these artifacts come alive and tell such rich but easy to follow stories!
About the capes with armor plating, this would be rather cumbersome but the added defensive bonuses (especially for skirmishers) for troops using hit and run tactics to not catch a sling stone to the back on the way out of range was huge. Japanese samurai wore a similar device that would catch air as the fled and inflate like a balloon, stopping arrows in the void created by the rush of air.
wall were first errected to divert traffic into a funnell for exactly whats been said tolls then defenses are added ancient glasgow is perfect pucture no walls but buildibf cnstructed to funnle traffic through the toll booths the adoinging building facing out wardws ment a wall protection came 2nd money 1st
not just to controll your cities population but those coming in and to influence them think wall martbetc when your in its not obe way out and tp get out theres many turns
@@Psychol-Snooper Yeah, I have a dictionary. You can't just claim the definition of a word is whatever you want it to. You are responding to the word "underrated" in the comments. Dictionaries exist, you should try using one, troll.
@@jeremiasrobinson You responded to my sincere request for clarification with a comment that was both illiterate and smug. When I reply mirroring your rudeness back at you... I'm a troll. Why don't you look up the psychological definition of "defection" to see a mirror of your behavior. 🙃
experts on ancient combat and weaponry made extensive research into the equipment and fighting style of the retiarius. they found that the net was not very useful at all against a skilled armed fighter. it was there more for the style that the retiarius had to uphold (like all the other types of gladiators who all had their style which included elements that we of no practical use) if net was used by the Sumerians and Akkadians, it was most likely to hunt unarmed civilians who were to become slaves. after all you don't want to damage the merchandise :)
So glad we have someone covering these incredibly important but much less well known periods. These very early civilizations are endlessly fascinating.
Very good content packed into a storyline that's condensed enough to avoid bogging down in mind numbing academic minutiae, but with the right amount for a decent understanding. The flow or cadence of the narrative is superb which makes Dan's videos so enjoyable to hear and learn.
It's not even my birthday but it sure as hell feels like it. Ancient Mesopotamia is where my interest lies the most. I love history but esecially these times all the way up to the Bronze Age Collapse are so incredibely interesting! Thanks for these amazing documentaries!
Hope you do a video on the Assyrians. Their towering lamassu, depictions of mutilated foes in their art, alongside the gorgeous lion hunt scenes and even depictions of siege crafts. Incredibly evocative, awe inspiring stuff.
hahahah I had a talk with one of my best friend in Denmark today. For the first time in years. And I mentioned him Fall of Civilization. Which I love. I listen to multiple times, especially the Sumerian age. Like Holy crap, those kind of people build the Pyramids? He had never heard of it. So he mentioned Dan Davis to me, which absolutely love listening to. I never heard of him. So here I am. And I started subscribing 10 second into the first episode I am watching. Re-watching. As I zoned out in my games a little too much the first listen. But it was so good, I had to listen to it again. We know each other too well, because we both love history, science, facts, philosophy. To think. So now I am writing my new article. And I am so going to mention this.
Thank you so much for your hard work, Dan. Your videos are especially relevant for the quotes you give from ancient texts, like this one 0:13 "From the city of Nipur an inscription on the pedestal of a statue erected by Sargon, says the following, 'Sargon, king of Akkad, overseer of Inanna, king of Kish, anointed of Anu, king of the land, governor of Enlil, he defeated the city of Uruk and tore down its walls. In the battle of Uruk he won, took Lugal Zaghezy, king of Uruk, in the course of the battle and led him in a collar to the gate of Enlil.'"
I've been reading William Hamblin's Warfare in the Ancient Near East to 1600 BC. This video is excellent as a supplement to that book because not only does it refresh the earlier chapter it also brings in some outside knowledge. Love this video Davis.
I saw the Stele of the Vultures a few days ago at the Louvre. It's absolutely phenomenal. Highly recommend a trip to Paris just for the Mesopotamian section alone
Just discovered this channel. 20 minutes in am subbed and I have two tabs open just waiting for me. Pity its a work night. I can't wait for Friday. Great channel and heart felt thanks
I am almost speechless. This is so wonderful, thank you! So clear, so well presented, so based in primary sources but up to date with historiography. Truly, what a pleasure.
Dan I never got my alert bloody youtube, I can't believe you uploaded, fantastic I just love you're work the whole package, going to get my virtual headset and lie back and enjoy. Thanks Dan for sharing. 🇮🇪
Been studying this part of history & even it's mythology a ton lately, in preparation for my next episode. This is yet another sync encountered in my research. skål 💪🏽🐻
I personally feel that it's likely that the Steele of Vultures is depicting an actual formation. Firstly throughout history whenever artists are depicting Phalanx/Spear Wall like formations they tend to do it in this way, by having loads of overlapping spears, we see this both in purely artistic depictions and in military manuals and that's probably just because it's a simple way to depict that formation. Secondly a spear wall type formation is just a really simple and easy formation to come up with while also being incredibly effective, there's a reason why this formation has been independently invented and reinvented several times throughout history, it's easy to train soldiers to be effective in this formation and it's easy to come up with. It's just sorta the natural thing to do if you have a bunch of dudes with spears and shields to think "what if we lined them all up with their spears pointing towards the enemy and the shields overlapping", even children playing with wooden weapons tend to come up with this idea as well even though they have little exposure to history. It might not have been anything as advanced as say the Phalanx, which was a much more complex formation than just having dudes with spears line up. But it seems highly likely that the Sumerians had probably invented some basic military formations like a spear wall if they had been conducting warfare on any kind of scale. It's basically unheard of for armies to fight completely uncoordinated if they have any significant experience or come from any kind of organized state. On the other hand I think it is going too far to conclude that they had standardized equipment based on the similarity in this Steele. That seems more like artistic shorthand to me plus it probably looked more impressive to have them all be fairly well equipped. It's just significantly easier to depict a bunch of completely identical dudes rather than giving them all individual gear, plus the artist very likely did not see the battle for themselves and were just told what happened and thus probably didn't know what the soldiers were actually wearing. They were probably just told something along the lines of "this many spearmen were present" and just drew that. Again looking at other historical depictions of battles it's rare that artists actually depict the gear accurately, often it's depicted as fairly identical even in battles where we know for a fact the armies didn't have standardized equipment such as on the Bayeux Tapestry, where both sides seem to be wearing roughly the same gear with only a few differences in colors and weapons. In general in historical depictions of battles they only displayed differences in equipment when it mattered to them, such as showing the banner or emblem of a specific lord/king, so in medieval depictions of battles you can often see a lot of banners because the monk drawing it wanted us to know who was there but they all wear basically the same armor. This is mostly just because artists were rarely present for the battles they were depicting and so just depicted whatever they thought a soldier looked like, you can usually glean some general info about equipment from this such as which weapons were the most common (in this case spears but in the Bayeux Tapestry there's a lot of swords) and what the armor of that period generally looked like, this Steele clearly shows helmets in a very specific pointed shape so that was probably a common design for helmets in this period because these are things the artist probably did know. The shape of the shield also seems notable, it seems really square which is a rare shape for shields to have, the only other square shields we really know of are the Roman scutum. Essentially when trying to glean information from artistic depictions of warfare you have to consider what exactly the artist might have known, if you know anything about modern warfare you'd know just how inaccurately movies and games portray that, but like some details from them are correct such as tanks existing and their general shape, the same would have been the case for historic art about warfare. There are general biases that tend to stay true throughout history such as a tendency to always depict everyone as wearing the best and most impressive armor and having the best gear, that's a bias that holds true to this day with how games and movies love to focus on hyper advanced weapons and special ops soldiers. Also as a sidenote those helmets were probably almost definitely bronze because leather armor isn't really a thing. It's probably a case of either the soldiers wore bronze helmets or they wore a woolen cap.
"leather armor isn't really a thing" this is a common misconception based on the fact that archaeological artifacts of leather armor don't often preserve into the modern day. Many fencing manuals mention armor of boiled leather being used as a cheap alternative to more proper options, specifically gauntlets/arm bracers. Chances are that nobody was running around in a cuirass of leather but there are also examples of "coat of plates" style armor with the plates riveted onto the underside of the armor that might have appeared as such to a contemporary observer. I do agree though that the helmets worn were more likely bronze than leather. I don't really see even boiled leather serving much good for head protection on it's own.
I have always seen the Sumerian army depicted in stele described as a phalanx or less often as a shieldwall so it's interesting to see that such descriptions are open to interpretation. I wonder how well trained a Sumerian force would've been in combat. Considering the numerous accounts of their defeats by mountain tribes it would seem that perhaps it wasn't as well trained or motivated as a name like 'phalanx' (which tends to conjure up images of Alexander's army) would have people believe. On another note, I was lucky enough to see the Standard of Ur and the golden helmet in the British museum a few years back. Amazing artefacts. I also wonder, despite being the earliest civilization, why Sumer hasn't really penetrated the public consciousness much. I can't think of any representation of Sumer in pop culture - not in novels, comics, films, TV, or games, unless it's a passing mention - they never take centre stage. Another excellent and informative video too.
They probably sucked azz at fighting and relied on bows for all their killing power. Because their bronze melee weapons and wicker armor probably sucked so much that committing to a melee kill meant getting mortally wounded yourself. So I bet they just formed two rabbles in front each other hollered at each other while shooting arrows. And when one line falters you commit to sending in your garbage infantry armed with shanks. Coming from that precedent you can see why chariots would be effective
Well in what context where those defeats? Will future historians learning of our defeats in afghanistan and vietnam count the american military as weak? Where these defeats due to extended guerrilla warfare at the limits of their empire?
This FAKE history was exposed by Joseph Halevy("The Problem with the Sumerians") in the 19th Century. You cannot use the bible to substantiate history. Just because they removed Egypt from Africa, manufacture fake Babylonian tablets (another Piltdown man) and come up with the "Dead Sea Scrolls", you cannot change the fact that their are Pyramids in Central and South America, when the whole of Europe thought the world was flat in 1492AD. As a result, we can logically deduce that the Greek "Philosophers" are also Fake, using predicate logic. LOL. Good try though!
@@GuyRBrewer109 Get a f'n life. I didn't make any claims about anything at all in my comment, much less about any of the gibberish you seem to be responding to.
Very good summary. I'd add that a further advantage of city walls is that it introduces entry points to the polity which can then be used as customs posts for import/export duty, and thus can, over time, help fund themselves.
I really like how you analyze and interpret ancient artifacts instead of showing a bunch of re-enactments or little dots moving around a map. I hope other history channels might take a cue from you in the future.
Yay, my favorite Bronze Age region! I was hoping you would make a video about this. Though I have watched many videos about it, few go as deep as yours.
Love these videos. Would really enjoy one about Nuragic culture, Gigantija, Neolithic Orkney/Hebrides, etc. There's so much to cover out there but you go into such a depth that I always learn something new. Thanks for making these!
I really like the theory of James C Scott that these ancient cities, because of diseases, lost population, so they required extra population to keep them going. This meant that conquering people to get slaves was required for these cities/empires to survive.
27:40 if you have ever been in the infantry, youd know how much leadership sees themselves as big men who have total control of the battlefield taking credit for anything succesful. When in reality its the dudes in formation making things happen. Some things never change.
Please don't compare modern day infantry to ancient one. Unlike modern day infantry ancient foot men fought in high consternation formations{they can note if he was being Cowardly or weak} . The men expected their leader to fight and look epic doing it
@@MohamedRamadan-qi4hl "there is nothing new under the Sun"... saith the preacher.. Infantry still fights in formations, only this time maneuvrability and utilization of cover and concealment is used more and just as in any era, discipline, skill and courage dictates which formations break or dispose of the opposition. There are men of renown and combat prowess even in modern infantry.. some in leadership but not all as depicted here. How will we ever know the truth from propaganda. Im not sure. I dont know much about history but I know enough of my own experiences.
@@ninertactics dead wrong. in modern warfare due to the immense power of modern day fire power. Modern day infantry don't work in tightly packed formations as that would be suicide. Rather they are very spread out and the high leadership don't fight with them. That is the opposite of how it always worked basically just 300 years ago. All of your leadership were always with you on the battlefield and due to how tightly packed all of you are you can easily notice how they are doing and if they are being brave or not
@@MohamedRamadan-qi4hl like I said, infantry still uses formations , maneuvrability , cover and concealment are emphasized and used now more often, I dont know why Im repeating but here it is. It does make sense without radios then to have leaders close for command and control but a fireteam leader for example doesnt get too involved in a firefight as his main duty would be to dictate where his guys concentrate fire and security of flanks, getting too sucked in combat could spell disaster for a team. Chaos of combat and fog of war are still big factors on the ground level. If nobody takes a step back and maintain situational awareness then its usually seen as fault of bad leadership. I wonder how succesful can that be versus a force that maintains awareness. Like I said ,I can only speak of what I know of.
Only recently I found out that Sumerian was a language isolate, like Etruscan and Basque. But how did they end up there? Speculation: During the glacial maximum the Persian Gulf was mostly dry land and their ancestors lives there along the extended Euphrates River. When our current interglacial began the sea levels rose and over millenia the Sumerians moved further and further upriver to their final areas until the sea levels stabilised.
They could not move further upriver due to people already there, mostly Semitic speakers. They didn't go to the surrounding hills and mountains since their culture had evolved to live along rivers and plains.
They weren't the only language isolate in the region. The Elamites inhabited southwestern Iran from the beginning of the Uruk period until their conquest by the Achmaenid Persians in 539 BC. They spoke a language that appears to also be unrelated to any other.
This FAKE history was exposed by Joseph Halevy("The Problem with the Sumerians") in the 19th Century. You cannot use the bible to substantiate history. Just because they removed Egypt from Africa, manufacture fake Babylonian tablets (another Piltdown man) and come up with the "Dead Sea Scrolls", you cannot change the fact that their are Pyramids in Central and South America, when the whole of Europe thought the world was flat in 1492AD. As a result, we can logically deduce that the Greek "Philosophers" are also Fake, using predicate logic. LOL. Good try though!
Based on this first example I have to rate you as one of the very best presenters of history in the RUclips universe. Thank you. Keep up the good work and the very best of luck to you.
Man this gotta be one of your best works. The structure and pacing as we arch across millenia leading up to Sargon and the pay-off 👌👌 You do have "profesional documentary writer" on your resume besides "professional book author", right?
In Sumerian texts a lot of rebellions in cities occurred, so we cannot say it was a Uruk expansionist/territory grab. Could be that someone took an ally city and Uruk went and took it back.
I would like to thank you for your time consuming effort to bring us a wealth of information and knowledge. All of videos are very entertaining and well delivered. So glad to found your channel. 👍👍💯❤
Just found your vids and my first thought it that your voice makes everything you say sound legit.. I am cautiously excited for a new youtube history channel!
Great video, some of my research focuses on this (recently published a paper on copper/bronze weapons from the Early Dynastic and Akkadian periods at the site of Khafajah in the Diyala region), my Phd supervisor Clemens Reichel excavated at Tell Hamoukar. You covered the topic really well! There are some fantastic Akkadian artifacts you could have discussed; the Sargon victory stele, the Naram-Sin stele, the Nasiriyah stele and others that depict Akkadian soldiers and warfare.
I was captivated by this video. Perhaps if the Near East becomes a series, a good follow-up would be the Assyria, since they formed what was likely the largest ancient professional army complete with the first cavalry units and advanced siege tactics. Or perhaps the Mitanni, who actually had a respectable empire with their armies being led by a chariot aristocracy, the Maryannu.
This FAKE history was exposed by Joseph Halevy("The Problem with the Sumerians") in the 19th Century. You cannot use the bible to substantiate history. Just because they removed Egypt from Africa, manufacture fake Babylonian tablets (another Piltdown man) and come up with the "Dead Sea Scrolls", you cannot change the fact that their are Pyramids in Central and South America, when the whole of Europe thought the world was flat in 1492AD. As a result, we can logically deduce that the Greek "Philosophers" are also Fake, using predicate logic. LOL. Good try though!
Watching videos like this always makes me wonder what they'll say about this period of time in another 5000 years. We think their weapons were primitive and useless when in reality they were probably extremely deadly in the right hands.
I'm really glad you mentioned that the army number is a round number in the sexigesimal system. So many people forget that numbers had sacred roles in Sumerian culture and were not literal most of the time.
Video suggestion= the history of freedom (or more precisely the lack thereof) in ancient society. I recently saw another RUclipsr describing most people in ancient Mesopotamia as “essentially slaves”. How much of their own lives did people in various ancient cultures control? Thanks again for the channel!
Just as a question if you live in the West: how free do you think *we* are? And how do *you* define free? Full disclosure, my definition is "no forced sinning, spiritual and social".
@@justinkennedy3004 you raise excellent points. In comparing freedom we can work at positive and negative freedom. In the west. You have the freedom to do many things. But many of those things you do not have the ability to do. for example you can experience great freedom personally as a business owner. But not everyone in America can own a business. Conversely the freedom of one is often based on the disadvantage of another.
@@DanDavisHistory i was stationed at Tikrit during the war. Zecharia Sitchin created a grave disservice to the ancient history of this beautiful country!
What I love about this type of study is you can have all these digs and scriptures and evidence and still at the end of the day it’s still “as we know for now” new things can always pop up and come to light that completely contradicts original thought. It’s fascinating!
Outstanding day! New content from Dan. Keep up the good work! Thank you for all your hard work; I can only imagine how much time it takes to make your excellent, educational presentations.
Perhaps the Standard of Ur is an actual war chest. The caped soldiers of the king looks to me to be a representation of rank as in General, Captain & Sargent of men as each has a different number or arrangement of dots on the same area . I Think of the wagons as an early armored division, the tank of the day.
That’s an interesting interpretation. Maybe there weren’t any footsoldiers portrayed, and everyone depicted on that artifact was some form of officer. The capes were then an insignia of rank, similar to the plumes on the helmets of Roman centurions. The “tanks” may have been for the upper elite/nobles, or even just specialists who knew how to operate them, like in WWI
Never heard of the "single boss per shield" concept for that illustration before! But it does make sense, the number of heads match the number of bosses in the top row, and there are the same number of spears as bosses
But looking at it again... There are two hands on each spear, which does not match the boss gripped shield hypothesis very well... It could perhaps be a representation of tower shields slung across the backs of the soldiers, like we se in bronze age greek art. And that is why we cant see them in the lower picture, as they are on their backs, and we are seeing them showing of their spears and axes rather than in phalanx formation. Or maybe it is a sort of front and side flattened perspecive (similar to the one of the war wagon below where the reins are resting on piece on the side that would make sense to interpret as facing forward) and it is a combined formation of spearmen and shield bearers. One could interpret the two front heads as carrying the axes sticking out in front of the first shields. And so perhaps, the heads we see are sheildbearers at the front and the spear/pikemen reaching in between the shields. (In which case the boss theory is kind of back again, two heads and two axes sharing one rectancle with 6 spears and 6 bosses).
Hello! I found your videos recently, and have really been enjoying them. I’m glad to see people making videos and writing fiction about the Bronze Age, it’s a truly fascinating time. I was wondering about your opinion on the difference between archeological cultures and ethnographic cultures? As I understand it, archeologists tend to be pretty cautious about combining the two. Their reasoning (again, as I understand it) is that there are a number of cultures today and in the historical record that would present a very similar material record or archeological culture, but we know from existing evidence that their ethnographic culture was very different (ie ((pulling this out of my ass a bit, just as an example)) modern Vermont and the Deep South (EDIT: or even two parts of the same large modern city) might produce a very similar archeological material record but have very different cultures). I do agree with what you say in some of your videos about weaponry - the likelihood of these finds being ceremonial or ritual objects, as archeologists suggest in lieu of definitive evidence of their purpose, seems pretty low to me as well. Do you think that the same logic you’d apply to the clubs applies to the distinction archeologists usually make between archeological and ethnographic cultures?
Linen found in the clay bullets : For that much to be found on all the clay bullets, cannot logically be deduced to be a sling pouch, as there is not enough pressure applied to get that from a well worn pouch. But-- if a linen were used while drying and molding a bullet in mass numbers and necessary friction and compressing the water out of the clay bullet being molded = much more probable and more realistic.
Grateful & thrilled that you’re touching on this region’s history! Such a treat! Outstanding and engaging work as always, Mr. Davis; cheers P.S. I have read that at one time, Sumerian’s classification as Indo-European was considered rock-solid. Obviously that’s not the case nowadays; however, some linguists still believe that there is a stratum layer of Indo-European somewhere in Sumerian. What do you make of their ethno-linguistic origins, and what relations may they have had with the IEs?
This is because of their use of sanskrit, an indo european writing style. There's without a doubt a connection with proto indo Europeans with the sumerians.
Thanks very much. Yes the great question of Sumerian origins. I dunno, probably they were just always around that area - maybe they were in the Persian Gulf before it flooded after the ice age and they moved up into the marshland before settling down. I think there's a new DNA study going to published soon that might have more information for us.
@@Datsyzerberg The Sumerians did not use Sanskrit. they used Cuneiform writing (which they invented) and spoke, perhaps unsurprisingly, Sumerian. Sumerian, both written and spoken, predates Sanskrit by at least 1000 years. In fact, Sumerian was likely extinct as a spoken language (replaced by Akkadian) 500 years before Sanskrit was even written down! Sumerian continued in use as a written theological, administrative and scientific language (much as we used Latin and Greek in the medieval era) up to the Common Era in some places, when cuneiform went out of use in favour of the easier to use alphabetic systems. Sumerian is a language isolate, that is not related to any other known languages. Rather, it is the only known language in its linguistic family tree; as they invented writing, none of their precursor or cousin tongues ever got written down, or had descendant languages, and thus are lost to history. So the Indo-Europeans likely had little influence on the Sumerians. There probably was contact, in the form of ideas, trading and technology, especially the use of the wheel and horses, perhaps some loan words associated with such things. There may have been later syncretic synthesis between certain mythologems in PIE and Sumerian religious belief; some believe the Enuma Elis creation myth of the much later (Semitic-speaking) Babylonians took certain aspects from Indo-European stories as well as Sumerian. You could even argue that our Western conception of the Judeo-Christian god is a synthesis between the Sumero-Semitic "Air-gods" (Ba'al, Enlil etc...) and the Indo-European 'Sky Father' (Dyeus Piter in Sanskrit, Jupiter in Latin, Zeus etc). But all this comes far later than the Sumerian Dynastic eras. At the time we are talking, the Sumerian's hey-day Pre-Akkadian Empire (pre-2300 BC), the Indo-Europeans were still spreading out over Eurasia and hadn't even reached India yet. This happened roughly 800 years later with the rise of the Vedic people circa 1500 BC. At 2300 BC, they were still in the Bactria-Margiana Archaeological Complex - and likely spoke an Indo-Iranian tongue in that region, with Sanskrit not having diverged yet.
30:14 The depiction of the king holding a club and standing victoriously over his slain enemies is very, very similar to the pharao Narmer of the famous Narmer Palette.
Thanks to Curiosity Stream for sponsoring the video. Go to curiositystream.com/DanDavis and enter the promo code ‘DanDavis’ for 25% off an annual plan.
And thank you very much for watching.
Please continue with history of Mespoptamia, ideally all the way to Assyrian or NeoBabilonian period. Cheers!
Please give your theory on why the coastline is 140km away today from the ruins of Ur which was on the shoreline, people have said its from sediment that has washed down the rivers but 140km of new land cannot be sediment surely.
Hi.
I left a comment on one of your very early videos about 3 weeks ago. It was on the Koryos and their culture. You go into detail that strikes me as unknowable in that video. I know you are a fiction writer, but I thought these videos were supposed to be more fact based. It left me very confused on how to receive the videos you place on this channel. I want to keep watching, but have hesitated since then, as I find this so confusing.
Can you please explain whether the videos on your channel should be taken as fiction or what?
All the historical sources are in the video descriptions.
What's that about 28 meters a year for 5000 years? Look how much the land surface has raised over that period too. Seems plausible.
Those clay bullets were still somewhat in use when I was deployed to Iraq in 2008. I was stationed in a Theater Internment Facility providing medical care to Iraqi detainees.
They would sometimes mix their tea with sand, make it into a ball, and leave it out in the sun to bake. Most of the time, they used them to lob messages back and forth between separate compounds, but they did occasionally use them as weapons, throwing them at us from time to time.
That's amazing. I guess in a land without stones to throw, men will make their own.
@@DanDavisHistory they were quite inventive. They were able to come up with some rather impressive ways to improvise weapons, and their levels of violence easily outstripped anything found in American prisons.
@@engmed4400 I wonder what the next millenia entails for that specific place with so much history.
@@dieglhix hurling shits made into balls prison style
They be keeping black me. Out but those statues and artifacts don’t lie in their gated museums! Yep! They know! So don’t ever hold ur head down like never!
I like how the story of David and Goliath is considered the ultimate story of defeating the odds, but no matter how big Goliath was a stone from a sling to the head was a killing blow. Literally a weapon of warfare
Real winner of that story is Goliath, was just a normal name. Now it means someone who is big and strong and good at fighting. That it takes having god on your side to beat him
I know right? David might as well have had a pistol. But for some reason people take it as an amazing victory that only God could have provided.
if you're wearing a helmet a hit from a sling wouldn't be necessarily fatal and the passage more shows how saul was unfit to rule as he should've fought the duel himself instead of electing a champion to fight on his behest
@@platypipope328 It isn't clear it was fatal. Maybe just disabling long enough for David to approach? Read literally David kills Goliath twice, once with the slingstone and once with his own sword.
Also, a King fighting an enemy champion is daft, you pick your own Champion, which is what Saul did. Him being unfit for this decision in particular is an extremely subjective religious perspective at best.
@@platypipope328 a lead sling bullet has been found to pierce bronze helmets rather reliably. Evidenced in both testimg and material culture finds.
Slings are deadly.
The idea that bullet design is at least 5000 years old is mindblowing to me
Halfway through I realized this video was 50 minutes long; it felt like 5! You really make these artifacts come alive and tell such rich but easy to follow stories!
N you get 3 ads every 10 min wtf🤦🏾♂️
@@jaylanw5415thats yt, not Dan.
About the capes with armor plating, this would be rather cumbersome but the added defensive bonuses (especially for skirmishers) for troops using hit and run tactics to not catch a sling stone to the back on the way out of range was huge. Japanese samurai wore a similar device that would catch air as the fled and inflate like a balloon, stopping arrows in the void created by the rush of air.
Now that is a cool concept!
@@ColdHawk Its in the game Total War Shogun. :0
That worked about .0002% of the time, with all other results being arrowed.
A common non-military reason to build city walls was to collect tolls.
Indeed, and for rulers to control the movement of their own city's population.
wall were first errected to divert traffic into a funnell for exactly whats been said tolls then defenses are added ancient glasgow is perfect pucture no walls but buildibf cnstructed to funnle traffic through the toll booths the adoinging building facing out wardws ment a wall protection came 2nd money 1st
a ziggarut isnt a wall
not just to controll your cities population but those coming in and to influence them think wall martbetc when your in its not obe way out and tp get out theres many turns
Funneling traffic does not require thick walls although these mega-chad pissing contestants hardly needed excuses to make it bigger.
I'm pretty sure he just goes by Carl now
I had to scroll for an annoying amount of time to find this comment.
@@highvelocitymouseassassina6646 🤔
@@highvelocitymouseassassina6646 there's some good videos in your Playlists
@Danny Anderson 😁
Chad
Thanks!
Thank you very much.
@@DanDavisHistory welcome 👍
Highly underrated channel. Dan’s story telling approach to history is so refreshing.
What are it's ratings?
@@Psychol-Snooper You can see how many views and likes the videos get, if you know anything at all about how the internet works.
@@jeremiasrobinson Neither of those things is a rating, if you know anything at all about how the word rating works. 🙃
@@Psychol-Snooper Yeah, I have a dictionary. You can't just claim the definition of a word is whatever you want it to. You are responding to the word "underrated" in the comments. Dictionaries exist, you should try using one, troll.
@@jeremiasrobinson You responded to my sincere request for clarification with a comment that was both illiterate and smug. When I reply mirroring your rudeness back at you... I'm a troll.
Why don't you look up the psychological definition of "defection" to see a mirror of your behavior. 🙃
experts on ancient combat and weaponry made extensive research into the equipment and fighting style of the retiarius. they found that the net was not very useful at all against a skilled armed fighter. it was there more for the style that the retiarius had to uphold (like all the other types of gladiators who all had their style which included elements that we of no practical use)
if net was used by the Sumerians and Akkadians, it was most likely to hunt unarmed civilians who were to become slaves. after all you don't want to damage the merchandise :)
Nobody else puts everything together like this.
Outstanding work!
So glad we have someone covering these incredibly important but much less well known periods.
These very early civilizations are endlessly fascinating.
It's quite amazing how little anything changed since these ancient days.
Very good content packed into a storyline that's condensed enough to avoid bogging down in mind numbing academic minutiae, but with the right amount for a decent understanding. The flow or cadence of the narrative is superb which makes Dan's videos so enjoyable to hear and learn.
Thank you.
You may have confused "narrative" with "narration".
@@casperbetz1949 give it a rest casper
It's not even my birthday but it sure as hell feels like it.
Ancient Mesopotamia is where my interest lies the most. I love history but esecially these times all the way up to the Bronze Age Collapse are so incredibely interesting!
Thanks for these amazing documentaries!
Thank you for watching.
Hope you do a video on the Assyrians. Their towering lamassu, depictions of mutilated foes in their art, alongside the gorgeous lion hunt scenes and even depictions of siege crafts. Incredibly evocative, awe inspiring stuff.
do you know where I can see those depictions of mutilated foes ?
@@Dan-sw8tg ابحث عن اشور بانيبال وتغلاث فلاستر
Dan Davis and Dan Cooper (Fall Of Civilization) are my go to when im thirsty for a historical stuff. Thanks Dan, keep up the good work!
Thanks from hearth, Dan! And oh i misspelled and ment Paul Cooper (not Dan Cooper) creator of the podcast 'Fall of Civilizations'.
hahahah I had a talk with one of my best friend in Denmark today. For the first time in years. And I mentioned him Fall of Civilization. Which I love. I listen to multiple times, especially the Sumerian age. Like Holy crap, those kind of people build the Pyramids? He had never heard of it. So he mentioned Dan Davis to me, which absolutely love listening to. I never heard of him. So here I am. And I started subscribing 10 second into the first episode I am watching. Re-watching. As I zoned out in my games a little too much the first listen. But it was so good, I had to listen to it again. We know each other too well, because we both love history, science, facts, philosophy. To think.
So now I am writing my new article. And I am so going to mention this.
Between Dan Davis, Fall of Civs, and Historymarche, I don’t think I trust a historian that isn’t British
Thank you so much for your hard work, Dan. Your videos are especially relevant for the quotes you give from ancient texts, like this one 0:13 "From the city of Nipur an inscription on the pedestal of a statue erected by Sargon, says the following, 'Sargon, king of Akkad, overseer of Inanna, king of Kish, anointed of Anu, king of the land, governor of Enlil, he defeated the city of Uruk and tore down its walls. In the battle of Uruk he won, took Lugal Zaghezy, king of Uruk, in the course of the battle and led him in a collar to the gate of Enlil.'"
Bbbbb
I've been reading William Hamblin's Warfare in the Ancient Near East to 1600 BC. This video is excellent as a supplement to that book because not only does it refresh the earlier chapter it also brings in some outside knowledge.
Love this video Davis.
Thank you very much.
@Robert Rocca reject Robbie! 🤣🤣
I saw the Stele of the Vultures a few days ago at the Louvre. It's absolutely phenomenal. Highly recommend a trip to Paris just for the Mesopotamian section alone
sounds like a good trip, Pete
Looking great! It’s always a good day when Dan puts out another video!
Thank you very much, I appreciate that.
Just discovered this channel. 20 minutes in am subbed and I have two tabs open just waiting for me. Pity its a work night. I can't wait for Friday. Great channel and heart felt thanks
Hello, welcome to the channel. Thanks for watching, I hope you enjoy the other videos too.
Looking forward to this, this time in history is a favourite of mine, something about it feels very mythical.
I know what you mean.
I am almost speechless. This is so wonderful, thank you! So clear, so well presented, so based in primary sources but up to date with historiography. Truly, what a pleasure.
Dan I never got my alert bloody youtube, I can't believe you uploaded, fantastic I just love you're work the whole package, going to get my virtual headset and lie back and enjoy. Thanks Dan for sharing. 🇮🇪
Thanks Sean hope you enjoyed it.
Didn't think I'd care about another Sumer / Akkad video, but you nailed it
Thanks Sean.
Been studying this part of history & even it's mythology a ton lately, in preparation for my next episode. This is yet another sync encountered in my research. skål 💪🏽🐻
Nice!
@@DanDavisHistory thank you
Does consciousnesses create reality ?
is it mythology or real life
@@lastbestplace8112 real mythology based on real life
I personally feel that it's likely that the Steele of Vultures is depicting an actual formation. Firstly throughout history whenever artists are depicting Phalanx/Spear Wall like formations they tend to do it in this way, by having loads of overlapping spears, we see this both in purely artistic depictions and in military manuals and that's probably just because it's a simple way to depict that formation. Secondly a spear wall type formation is just a really simple and easy formation to come up with while also being incredibly effective, there's a reason why this formation has been independently invented and reinvented several times throughout history, it's easy to train soldiers to be effective in this formation and it's easy to come up with. It's just sorta the natural thing to do if you have a bunch of dudes with spears and shields to think "what if we lined them all up with their spears pointing towards the enemy and the shields overlapping", even children playing with wooden weapons tend to come up with this idea as well even though they have little exposure to history.
It might not have been anything as advanced as say the Phalanx, which was a much more complex formation than just having dudes with spears line up. But it seems highly likely that the Sumerians had probably invented some basic military formations like a spear wall if they had been conducting warfare on any kind of scale. It's basically unheard of for armies to fight completely uncoordinated if they have any significant experience or come from any kind of organized state.
On the other hand I think it is going too far to conclude that they had standardized equipment based on the similarity in this Steele. That seems more like artistic shorthand to me plus it probably looked more impressive to have them all be fairly well equipped. It's just significantly easier to depict a bunch of completely identical dudes rather than giving them all individual gear, plus the artist very likely did not see the battle for themselves and were just told what happened and thus probably didn't know what the soldiers were actually wearing. They were probably just told something along the lines of "this many spearmen were present" and just drew that. Again looking at other historical depictions of battles it's rare that artists actually depict the gear accurately, often it's depicted as fairly identical even in battles where we know for a fact the armies didn't have standardized equipment such as on the Bayeux Tapestry, where both sides seem to be wearing roughly the same gear with only a few differences in colors and weapons. In general in historical depictions of battles they only displayed differences in equipment when it mattered to them, such as showing the banner or emblem of a specific lord/king, so in medieval depictions of battles you can often see a lot of banners because the monk drawing it wanted us to know who was there but they all wear basically the same armor. This is mostly just because artists were rarely present for the battles they were depicting and so just depicted whatever they thought a soldier looked like, you can usually glean some general info about equipment from this such as which weapons were the most common (in this case spears but in the Bayeux Tapestry there's a lot of swords) and what the armor of that period generally looked like, this Steele clearly shows helmets in a very specific pointed shape so that was probably a common design for helmets in this period because these are things the artist probably did know. The shape of the shield also seems notable, it seems really square which is a rare shape for shields to have, the only other square shields we really know of are the Roman scutum. Essentially when trying to glean information from artistic depictions of warfare you have to consider what exactly the artist might have known, if you know anything about modern warfare you'd know just how inaccurately movies and games portray that, but like some details from them are correct such as tanks existing and their general shape, the same would have been the case for historic art about warfare. There are general biases that tend to stay true throughout history such as a tendency to always depict everyone as wearing the best and most impressive armor and having the best gear, that's a bias that holds true to this day with how games and movies love to focus on hyper advanced weapons and special ops soldiers.
Also as a sidenote those helmets were probably almost definitely bronze because leather armor isn't really a thing. It's probably a case of either the soldiers wore bronze helmets or they wore a woolen cap.
"leather armor isn't really a thing" this is a common misconception based on the fact that archaeological artifacts of leather armor don't often preserve into the modern day. Many fencing manuals mention armor of boiled leather being used as a cheap alternative to more proper options, specifically gauntlets/arm bracers. Chances are that nobody was running around in a cuirass of leather but there are also examples of "coat of plates" style armor with the plates riveted onto the underside of the armor that might have appeared as such to a contemporary observer. I do agree though that the helmets worn were more likely bronze than leather. I don't really see even boiled leather serving much good for head protection on it's own.
I have always seen the Sumerian army depicted in stele described as a phalanx or less often as a shieldwall so it's interesting to see that such descriptions are open to interpretation. I wonder how well trained a Sumerian force would've been in combat. Considering the numerous accounts of their defeats by mountain tribes it would seem that perhaps it wasn't as well trained or motivated as a name like 'phalanx' (which tends to conjure up images of Alexander's army) would have people believe. On another note, I was lucky enough to see the Standard of Ur and the golden helmet in the British museum a few years back. Amazing artefacts.
I also wonder, despite being the earliest civilization, why Sumer hasn't really penetrated the public consciousness much. I can't think of any representation of Sumer in pop culture - not in novels, comics, films, TV, or games, unless it's a passing mention - they never take centre stage.
Another excellent and informative video too.
Alexander and «the persians» actually fought for the same idea.
Sumer is too ancient and they have no famous monuments that still stand to this very day
They probably sucked azz at fighting and relied on bows for all their killing power. Because their bronze melee weapons and wicker armor probably sucked so much that committing to a melee kill meant getting mortally wounded yourself. So I bet they just formed two rabbles in front each other hollered at each other while shooting arrows. And when one line falters you commit to sending in your garbage infantry armed with shanks. Coming from that precedent you can see why chariots would be effective
Well in what context where those defeats? Will future historians learning of our defeats in afghanistan and vietnam count the american military as weak?
Where these defeats due to extended guerrilla warfare at the limits of their empire?
@@georgethompson1460 Great point.
The ancient Sumer is so fascinating! I hope you do more videos about them. Your format is amazing!
Bloody great video Bro!
Thank you
Thanks bro! Appreciate it. Thanks for watching.
I am excited about the extended geographical range of this channel's content!
This FAKE history was exposed by Joseph Halevy("The Problem with the Sumerians") in the 19th Century. You cannot use the bible to substantiate history. Just because they removed Egypt from Africa, manufacture fake Babylonian tablets (another Piltdown man) and come up with the "Dead Sea Scrolls", you cannot change the fact that their are Pyramids in Central and South America, when the whole of Europe thought the world was flat in 1492AD. As a result, we can logically deduce that the Greek "Philosophers" are also Fake, using predicate logic. LOL. Good try though!
@@GuyRBrewer109 Get a f'n life. I didn't make any claims about anything at all in my comment, much less about any of the gibberish you seem to be responding to.
Always looking forward to your take on the many aspects of Bronze Age history. As always i was not disappointed. Great work, please keep it up!
Ah yes, I’ve been patiently waiting for you next video, I can’t wait to watch!
Very good summary. I'd add that a further advantage of city walls is that it introduces entry points to the polity which can then be used as customs posts for import/export duty, and thus can, over time, help fund themselves.
And helping rulers control the movements of their own people too.
I really like how you analyze and interpret ancient artifacts instead of showing a bunch of re-enactments or little dots moving around a map. I hope other history channels might take a cue from you in the future.
48:07 What a beautiful image of Shemitic fighting.
Not sure those are Semites.
Almost an hour long! Will have to wait until tonight.
This is one of the best history channels on the site, definitely my favorite
Thank you so much 🙏
Yay, my favorite Bronze Age region!
I was hoping you would make a video about this.
Though I have watched many videos about it, few go as deep as yours.
Thank you! Excellent. If you narrate this, your voice is also excellent, very engaging with authority.
Truly great.
I didn't think you would talk about mesopotamia.
I am glad you did.
Cheers.
@@DanDavisHistory
Yes, indeed.
New Dan Davis video?
Yessss!
It's about one of my favorite topics in history?
Yessss !!!
Let out an audible "yesssss" when I saw this was out
Excellent work man. I have learned so much from your channel.
Love these videos. Would really enjoy one about Nuragic culture, Gigantija, Neolithic Orkney/Hebrides, etc. There's so much to cover out there but you go into such a depth that I always learn something new. Thanks for making these!
YES!!!! Finally, the topic has been done justice. Thank you!
I really like the theory of James C Scott that these ancient cities, because of diseases, lost population, so they required extra population to keep them going. This meant that conquering people to get slaves was required for these cities/empires to survive.
Awesome video Dan Davis! Really enjoying it so far, 13 minutes in!
27:40 if you have ever been in the infantry, youd know how much leadership sees themselves as big men who have total control of the battlefield taking credit for anything succesful.
When in reality its the dudes in formation making things happen. Some things never change.
Please don't compare modern day infantry to ancient one. Unlike modern day infantry ancient foot men fought in high consternation formations{they can note if he was being Cowardly or weak} . The men expected their leader to fight and look epic doing it
@@MohamedRamadan-qi4hl "there is nothing new under the Sun"... saith the preacher..
Infantry still fights in formations, only this time maneuvrability and utilization of cover and concealment is used more and just as in any era, discipline, skill and courage dictates which formations break or dispose of the opposition.
There are men of renown and combat prowess even in modern infantry.. some in leadership but not all as depicted here.
How will we ever know the truth from propaganda. Im not sure. I dont know much about history but I know enough of my own experiences.
@@ninertactics dead wrong. in modern warfare due to the immense power of modern day fire power. Modern day infantry don't work in tightly packed formations as that would be suicide. Rather they are very spread out and the high leadership don't fight with them. That is the opposite of how it always worked basically just 300 years ago. All of your leadership were always with you on the battlefield and due to how tightly packed all of you are you can easily notice how they are doing and if they are being brave or not
@@MohamedRamadan-qi4hl like I said, infantry still uses formations , maneuvrability , cover and concealment are emphasized and used now more often, I dont know why Im repeating but here it is.
It does make sense without radios then to have leaders close for command and control but a fireteam leader for example doesnt get too involved in a firefight as his main duty would be to dictate where his guys concentrate fire and security of flanks, getting too sucked in combat could spell disaster for a team. Chaos of combat and fog of war are still big factors on the ground level. If nobody takes a step back and maintain situational awareness then its usually seen as fault of bad leadership. I wonder how succesful can that be versus a force that maintains awareness.
Like I said ,I can only speak of what I know of.
This video is some serious quality stuff. Congrats!
Dan your videos are great! Thanks you for creating such informative and interesting content.
Thank you.
Dan, you did it again. Amazing. Thank you.
Only recently I found out that Sumerian was a language isolate, like Etruscan and Basque.
But how did they end up there?
Speculation:
During the glacial maximum the Persian Gulf was mostly dry land and their ancestors lives there along the extended Euphrates River. When our current interglacial began the sea levels rose and over millenia the Sumerians moved further and further upriver to their final areas until the sea levels stabilised.
They could not move further upriver due to people already there, mostly Semitic speakers.
They didn't go to the surrounding hills and mountains since their culture had evolved to live along rivers and plains.
They weren't the only language isolate in the region. The Elamites inhabited southwestern Iran from the beginning of the Uruk period until their conquest by the Achmaenid Persians in 539 BC. They spoke a language that appears to also be unrelated to any other.
Incredible video, brother
Thank you so much for your work
This is amazing Dan, thank you for your work!
Great narration and content. Really enjoyed this. Rare subject wonderfully done.
For the most part this seems to be an overlooked topic. Great choice and well done as usual.
This FAKE history was exposed by Joseph Halevy("The Problem with the Sumerians") in the 19th Century. You cannot use the bible to substantiate history. Just because they removed Egypt from Africa, manufacture fake Babylonian tablets (another Piltdown man) and come up with the "Dead Sea Scrolls", you cannot change the fact that their are Pyramids in Central and South America, when the whole of Europe thought the world was flat in 1492AD. As a result, we can logically deduce that the Greek "Philosophers" are also Fake, using predicate logic. LOL. Good try though!
How tf did I miss an hour long video from Mr Davis?!? Love your novels, looking forward to the video!
I can't get enough of your lectures. Keep up the great work!
Based on this first example I have to rate you as one of the very best presenters of history in the RUclips universe. Thank you. Keep up the good work and the very best of luck to you.
Appreciate it, thank you.
Thanks
Man this gotta be one of your best works. The structure and pacing as we arch across millenia leading up to Sargon and the pay-off 👌👌
You do have "profesional documentary writer" on your resume besides "professional book author", right?
Thank you very much indeed, I really appreciate it.
In Sumerian texts a lot of rebellions in cities occurred, so we cannot say it was a Uruk expansionist/territory grab. Could be that someone took an ally city and Uruk went and took it back.
Excellent work as always!
Thank you.
Why is RUclips only just now showing me this channel?! Right up my alley - liked and subscribed 😎
I would like to thank you for your time consuming effort to bring us a wealth of information and knowledge. All of videos are very entertaining and well delivered. So glad to found your channel. 👍👍💯❤
Just found your vids and my first thought it that your voice makes everything you say sound legit.. I am cautiously excited for a new youtube history channel!
I just got Irving finkel's "the first ghosts" book and now Dan uploads about Mesopotamian warfare.
I think shamash is trying tell me something....
I think Shamash is trying to tell you something - put on your sunscreen!
Loved the reference to Kenneth Clark at 9:14
It's always a good day when Dan Davis History uploads new content 🤘😍🤘
Outstanding work, as always.
Thank you.
Great video, some of my research focuses on this (recently published a paper on copper/bronze weapons from the Early Dynastic and Akkadian periods at the site of Khafajah in the Diyala region), my Phd supervisor Clemens Reichel excavated at Tell Hamoukar. You covered the topic really well! There are some fantastic Akkadian artifacts you could have discussed; the Sargon victory stele, the Naram-Sin stele, the Nasiriyah stele and others that depict Akkadian soldiers and warfare.
Also the FACT that they were black😉😉
@@EduardoGarcia-if2kv oh God please don't
@@EduardoGarcia-if2kv They absolutely weren't lmao
I agree with you that the Uruk expansion was violent that is generally credited...
I was captivated by this video. Perhaps if the Near East becomes a series, a good follow-up would be the Assyria, since they formed what was likely the largest ancient professional army complete with the first cavalry units and advanced siege tactics. Or perhaps the Mitanni, who actually had a respectable empire with their armies being led by a chariot aristocracy, the Maryannu.
This FAKE history was exposed by Joseph Halevy("The Problem with the Sumerians") in the 19th Century. You cannot use the bible to substantiate history. Just because they removed Egypt from Africa, manufacture fake Babylonian tablets (another Piltdown man) and come up with the "Dead Sea Scrolls", you cannot change the fact that their are Pyramids in Central and South America, when the whole of Europe thought the world was flat in 1492AD. As a result, we can logically deduce that the Greek "Philosophers" are also Fake, using predicate logic. LOL. Good try though!
thanks a ton dan. effing love this stuff. gives me porpoise.
Watching videos like this always makes me wonder what they'll say about this period of time in another 5000 years. We think their weapons were primitive and useless when in reality they were probably extremely deadly in the right hands.
They were primitive, but who has ever claimed they were useless?
amazing video it in depth drive into what was happening in Ancient Mesopotamia and how city states developed into empires.
I'm really glad you mentioned that the army number is a round number in the sexigesimal system. So many people forget that numbers had sacred roles in Sumerian culture and were not literal most of the time.
The Standard ofUr is in the British Museum, seeing the real thing is quite spectacular.
Video suggestion= the history of freedom (or more precisely the lack thereof) in ancient society. I recently saw another RUclipsr describing most people in ancient Mesopotamia as “essentially slaves”. How much of their own lives did people in various ancient cultures control? Thanks again for the channel!
Just as a question if you live in the West: how free do you think *we* are? And how do *you* define free?
Full disclosure, my definition is "no forced sinning, spiritual and social".
@@justinkennedy3004 you raise excellent points. In comparing freedom we can work at positive and negative freedom. In the west. You have the freedom to do many things. But many of those things you do not have the ability to do. for example you can experience great freedom personally as a business owner. But not everyone in America can own a business. Conversely the freedom of one is often based on the disadvantage of another.
5,400 is a lot of Royal Guards. Excellent video. Thanks!
Can you make a Video about the Medes? Or about the Urartians. Your work is appreciated! Greetings from Switzerland ✌️
Thanks Dan, took up the Curiosity Stream deal too, nice1
Great video, Dan! Always looking forward to new releases.
Godbless you man, love your videos
Thank you 🙏
One of my favourite periods in history. I’ve always loved RTS games such as Age Of Empires and Game of War. These people lived it
Age of Empires was my jam growing up
Excellent!!!!
Thanks Marty, glad you liked it.
@@DanDavisHistory i was stationed at Tikrit during the war. Zecharia Sitchin created a grave disservice to the ancient history of this beautiful country!
What I love about this type of study is you can have all these digs and scriptures and evidence and still at the end of the day it’s still “as we know for now” new things can always pop up and come to light that completely contradicts original thought. It’s fascinating!
Outstanding day! New content from Dan. Keep up the good work! Thank you for all your hard work; I can only imagine how much time it takes to make your excellent, educational presentations.
Thank you, very kind of you.
Very interesting video Dan! Thank you!
Thank you.
Perhaps the Standard of Ur is an actual war chest. The caped soldiers of the king looks to me to be a representation of rank as in General, Captain & Sargent of men as each has a different number or arrangement of dots on the same area . I Think of the wagons as an early armored division, the tank of the day.
That’s an interesting interpretation. Maybe there weren’t any footsoldiers portrayed, and everyone depicted on that artifact was some form of officer. The capes were then an insignia of rank, similar to the plumes on the helmets of Roman centurions. The “tanks” may have been for the upper elite/nobles, or even just specialists who knew how to operate them, like in WWI
Never heard of the "single boss per shield" concept for that illustration before!
But it does make sense, the number of heads match the number of bosses in the top row, and there are the same number of spears as bosses
But looking at it again... There are two hands on each spear, which does not match the boss gripped shield hypothesis very well...
It could perhaps be a representation of tower shields slung across the backs of the soldiers, like we se in bronze age greek art. And that is why we cant see them in the lower picture, as they are on their backs, and we are seeing them showing of their spears and axes rather than in phalanx formation.
Or maybe it is a sort of front and side flattened perspecive (similar to the one of the war wagon below where the reins are resting on piece on the side that would make sense to interpret as facing forward) and it is a combined formation of spearmen and shield bearers. One could interpret the two front heads as carrying the axes sticking out in front of the first shields. And so perhaps, the heads we see are sheildbearers at the front and the spear/pikemen reaching in between the shields. (In which case the boss theory is kind of back again, two heads and two axes sharing one rectancle with 6 spears and 6 bosses).
Hello! I found your videos recently, and have really been enjoying them. I’m glad to see people making videos and writing fiction about the Bronze Age, it’s a truly fascinating time.
I was wondering about your opinion on the difference between archeological cultures and ethnographic cultures? As I understand it, archeologists tend to be pretty cautious about combining the two. Their reasoning (again, as I understand it) is that there are a number of cultures today and in the historical record that would present a very similar material record or archeological culture, but we know from existing evidence that their ethnographic culture was very different (ie ((pulling this out of my ass a bit, just as an example)) modern Vermont and the Deep South (EDIT: or even two parts of the same large modern city) might produce a very similar archeological material record but have very different cultures).
I do agree with what you say in some of your videos about weaponry - the likelihood of these finds being ceremonial or ritual objects, as archeologists suggest in lieu of definitive evidence of their purpose, seems pretty low to me as well. Do you think that the same logic you’d apply to the clubs applies to the distinction archeologists usually make between archeological and ethnographic cultures?
Superb documentary, many thanks.
I love Sargon's videos
Based
Linen found in the clay bullets : For that much to be found on all the clay bullets, cannot logically be deduced to be a sling pouch, as there is not enough pressure applied to get that from a well worn pouch. But-- if a linen were used while drying and molding a bullet in mass numbers and necessary friction and compressing the water out of the clay bullet being molded = much more probable and more realistic.
Grateful & thrilled that you’re touching on this region’s history! Such a treat! Outstanding and engaging work as always, Mr. Davis; cheers
P.S. I have read that at one time, Sumerian’s classification as Indo-European was considered rock-solid. Obviously that’s not the case nowadays; however, some linguists still believe that there is a stratum layer of Indo-European somewhere in Sumerian. What do you make of their ethno-linguistic origins, and what relations may they have had with the IEs?
This is because of their use of sanskrit, an indo european writing style. There's without a doubt a connection with proto indo Europeans with the sumerians.
Thanks very much. Yes the great question of Sumerian origins. I dunno, probably they were just always around that area - maybe they were in the Persian Gulf before it flooded after the ice age and they moved up into the marshland before settling down. I think there's a new DNA study going to published soon that might have more information for us.
@@DanDavisHistory I'd bet money any dna will show relation to eastern Europe west of turkey.
Could be Nostratic.
@@Datsyzerberg The Sumerians did not use Sanskrit. they used Cuneiform writing (which they invented) and spoke, perhaps unsurprisingly, Sumerian. Sumerian, both written and spoken, predates Sanskrit by at least 1000 years. In fact, Sumerian was likely extinct as a spoken language (replaced by Akkadian) 500 years before Sanskrit was even written down! Sumerian continued in use as a written theological, administrative and scientific language (much as we used Latin and Greek in the medieval era) up to the Common Era in some places, when cuneiform went out of use in favour of the easier to use alphabetic systems.
Sumerian is a language isolate, that is not related to any other known languages. Rather, it is the only known language in its linguistic family tree; as they invented writing, none of their precursor or cousin tongues ever got written down, or had descendant languages, and thus are lost to history.
So the Indo-Europeans likely had little influence on the Sumerians. There probably was contact, in the form of ideas, trading and technology, especially the use of the wheel and horses, perhaps some loan words associated with such things. There may have been later syncretic synthesis between certain mythologems in PIE and Sumerian religious belief; some believe the Enuma Elis creation myth of the much later (Semitic-speaking) Babylonians took certain aspects from Indo-European stories as well as Sumerian. You could even argue that our Western conception of the Judeo-Christian god is a synthesis between the Sumero-Semitic "Air-gods" (Ba'al, Enlil etc...) and the Indo-European 'Sky Father' (Dyeus Piter in Sanskrit, Jupiter in Latin, Zeus etc).
But all this comes far later than the Sumerian Dynastic eras. At the time we are talking, the Sumerian's hey-day Pre-Akkadian Empire (pre-2300 BC), the Indo-Europeans were still spreading out over Eurasia and hadn't even reached India yet. This happened roughly 800 years later with the rise of the Vedic people circa 1500 BC. At 2300 BC, they were still in the Bactria-Margiana Archaeological Complex - and likely spoke an Indo-Iranian tongue in that region, with Sanskrit not having diverged yet.
30:14 The depiction of the king holding a club and standing victoriously over his slain enemies is very, very similar to the pharao Narmer of the famous Narmer Palette.
Thats actually sad thats only how far back human history is known. Man has been around for over 250,000 years.
They have apparently found a 400,000 year old structure in Africa