Ancient Lives Week 7: Ancient Bodies

Goals (Syllabus): to look at developing understandings of the human body, health and gender.
How were our basic bodily functions described? How were illnesses treated? How was the mind
explained? What was the function of magic? What was the role and understanding of gender?
How was sex and homosexuality looked upon? How were children looked upon and raised?
Weekly ReadingsMain Ideas
Foster (2011)- self-identity and cosmic identity
Main Idea: The concept of the individual/self/person may seem to be lacking in Ancient
Mesopotamia due to the lack of autobiographies, reflections, confessions; however,
Foster reveals a sense of self in various primary sources that is largely defined in
contrast to other humans and non-human beings (gods, demons, etc). For example,
humans are self-aware and have knowledge of death whereas beasts do not.
- The Person in Society: Ancient Mesopotamians held pride in family lineage and personal
reputation; the valued economic status and frequently referred to it in lieu of social status.
- The Physical Person: Ancient Mesopotamians largely didnt believe in any separation of
the soul and bodythey viewed the body as the essential person; in this way, there is
extensive evidence of an ideal, both in terms of the body and in terms of the mind. For
example, Babylonian scholars made elaborate lists of favorable and unfavorable physical
traits (height is good, thin hair means failure, idealized gender roles: an ideal man is tall,
has an authoritative voice, an ideal woman made a man more approachable, etc).
- The Inner, Feeling Person: Foster discusses the linguistics of emotions in this section; he
writes about the different words that refer to happiness and what this reveals about the
inner person in Ancient Mesopotamia. For example, the three Akkadian word choices
that refer to happiness covers the happiness from gratification, a thrilling happiness from
escaping threats, and a physical happiness from alcohol/sex.
- Person as Story and Well-lived Life- Ancient Mesopotamians, especially accomplished
people, tended to avoid thinking about childhood; educated people didnt sentimentalize
their childhoods. As usual, courtship and youthful desire were often subjects for
stories, songs and such.
o Mesopotamian literature acknowledged the transitory nature of materialism but in
daily life, even small material possessions were still very important (nothing has
changed lol)
- The Accomplished and Experienced Person: Accomplishment in court life (being wellversed in things like music, sports, etc) was different from accomplishment outside of
court life. In general, an accomplished person was someone who was eloquent (speaking
and writing) and understanding while stupidity was understood as irrationality and the
inability to foresee consequences.
- Is Death the Journeys End: Ancient Mesopotamians generally didnt believe in an
afterlife, but writing was seen as a doorway to survival after death
- Manifestations of the Self: Overall, signs of individuality and originality may be lacking
in formalistic cultural contexts (for whatever reason), but literature offers an abundance
of examples.

Oppenheim (1977)
Main Idea: Modern scholars do not have enough knowledge or evidence to say anything
conclusive about the relationship between man and deity; however, the study of prayers
can reveal a lot about Ancient Mesopotamian beliefs.
- The relationship between man and god was complex to say the leastOppenheim
discusses this in relation to names given to a person. Personal names relate one to a
specific deity (usually the deity of the land/city/etc), and ones title is often followed by
servant of [deity], often a different deity. So, we basically cant figure out much based
on this evidence
- When looking at prayers, Oppenheim talks about different spirits or souls (gods,
goddesses, angels, etc) that people referred to in prayers. These spirits were prayed to
for protection and blamed for misfortunes. The specifics are complex as alwaysthese
different spirits basically each have a specialized functionhowever, there are two
commonalities between them: (1) luck is important, (2) they are all related to demons and
the dead.
- An interesting juxtaposition presented in this reading is that between divine wisdom and
justice in planning, and the concept of luck vs. destiny. Belief in some sort of divine
justice renders ideas of luck and destiny irrelevantyou cant have both, and how did
the Ancient Mesopotamians deal with this contradiction? **COSMIC JUSTICE
Scurlock (2005) **epistemology, rationalism
Main Idea: Many modern scholars contrast terms like magic vs. medicine, natural
vs. supernatural; these terms are misleading because ancient scholars didnt use such
terminology. Scurlock talks about this in the context of medicine, ultimately concluding
that there doesnt need to be a dichotomy between the terms, and that Mesopotamian
medicine is neither irrational nor pre-rational
- Modern scholars often talk about 2 types medical professionsAsu (treated naturalcaused problems rationally; equivalent to pharmacist); Asipu (treated supernatural-caused
problems magically)
o This is problematic because there are often irrational treatments for natural-caused
problems and rational treatments to supernatural problems. Scurlock makes the
important point that our modern mindset is that magic and medicine are
incompatible, but in order to study Ancient Mesopotamian medicine, we have to
challenge this assumption.
- Scurlock spends the rest of his piece showing how logical diagnoses and treatments were
some examples:
o The first asipus began collecting treatments by observing different symptoms,
grouping them, and then categorizing them into certain sicknesses, syndromes,
etc.
o Treatments were developed in a trial-error fashion
o Hopeless cases were not treated.
- Overall, Scurlock concludes that contrary to the (ignorant) modern mindset, magic and
medicine ARE compatible. Magic isnt used as a substitute for medicine, it is used
simultaneously.

o Scurlock compares magic to the placebo effect

Week 7 Texts
Writing from women of various backgrounds show that women had a great deal of
influence in their families.
Big Ideas and things to think about:
One thing that resonates in this weeks readings is the need to reconcile our study of
ancient civilizations with our modern, western perception and categorization of things
(medicine, technology, individuality, etc). As always, we can conclude that context is
extremely important, especially when it comes to understanding beliefs. This is especially
relevant when considering the intersection between religion, medicine and magic (science
vs. religion).
Food for thought:
o How do idealized gender roles in Ancient Mesopotamia compare to modern
gender stereotypes?
o How have the standards of beauty and intelligence evolved throughout human
history? What do they depend on?
o How can we reconcile magic and medicine in the treatment of illnesses?
o What is the role of religion and belief in the daily life of Ancient Mesopotamians,
and how is this manifested in this weeks study of medicine and psychology?
Week 1
Cognition, primitive human, migration, urban power
Week 2
Larsen- writing cant be divided into history and pre-history
Levi-Strauss- cultures that used writing last a long time; how is power
tied to writing?
History vs. Prehistory; language/communication and power;
heracy/education; writing as limiting (because history is oral); oral vs. written
Week 3
Centralized states;
Yaffy: evolution of factoid neo-evolutionary idea that society
progressed linearly from bands to tribes to states etcthis is an
oversimplification and caused historians to be bias in how they did research
Gojko: City-state as focal unit; factoid, neo-evolutionist thought,
Key terms: factoid, historical development, centrality of city-state
Week 4- trade
Larsen: 3 super-states (empires) collapses causing a network of local
dynasties with shifing alliances but all connected since all amyrites;
everything is unstable but also very open for a lot of traveling, especially by

both traders and armies; most people in Mesopotamia (most men) would
have travelled quite a bit. MOBILITY unity despite political fragmentation
Mieroop: the city; attitudes towards the city, city as place
Mesopotamians loved; where gods lived; city represents order;
Key terms: urbanism/gods; city&power; agriculture tradition; self vs
others
Week 6
Royal power; propaganda; power collectives/ruling elites- connections
to increase royal power;
Week 8
Death as inevitable, no hope after death; defining religion
Week 9
Modernist lens vs primitive lens- lukewarm, lists (helps us see
thought process)
Terms: dichotomy- modernist vs primitive; hot vs coldlukewarm;
absolute vs finite knowledge
Week 10
Art, aesthetics; winter and Larsen (comparing context in which we view
art now and how that influences how we view ancient Mesopotamian artcontext influences our interpretation; that gives us either an obscure or clear
lens); athletics and game- entertainment; physicality and royal power;
games and social status; modernist vs ancient views of art;
Week 11
Freedom; justice; slavery; social inequality; tradeoff between inequality
and freedom
Von- argue against the view that there was no freedom in near east
due to monarchy; main points that freedom depended on social class; slaves
but more of a function of social inequality and debt; talks about laws that
show all of that
Week 12
Evolution of trust (social interaction); social reciprocity; cooperation;
self-interest; individual vs community evolution of this;