Looted history: Worst world cultural dissaster of the past 500 years

[G_j]

http://www.planetaportoalegre.net/publique/cgi/public/cgilua.exe/web/templates/htm/1P4OP/view.htm?editionsectionid=252&infoid=11204&user=reader

Looted history

A book of the intellectual Charlmets Johnson on the distruction of Iraq art and manuscripts, will describe the worst world cultural dissaster of the past 500 years. Here, the first essay


Chalmers Johnson, Imediata

In the months before he ordered the invasion of Iraq, George Bush and his senior officials spoke of preserving Iraq's "patrimony" for the Iraqi people. At a time when talking about Iraqi oil was taboo, what he meant by patrimony was exactly that -- Iraqi oil. In their "joint statement on Iraq's future" of April 8, 2003, George Bush and Tony Blair declared, "We reaffirm our commitment to protect Iraq's natural resources, as the patrimony of the people of Iraq, which should be used only for their benefit."<1> In this they were true to their word. Among the few places American soldiers actually did guard during and in the wake of their invasion were oil fields and the Oil Ministry in Baghdad. But the real Iraqi patrimony, that invaluable human inheritance of thousands of years, was another matter. At a time when American pundits were warning of a future "clash of civilizations," our occupation forces were letting perhaps the greatest of all human patrimonies be looted and smashed.

There have been many dispiriting sights on TV since George Bush launched his ill-starred war on Iraq -- the pictures from Abu Ghraib, Fallujah laid waste, American soldiers kicking down the doors of private homes and pointing assault rifles at women and children. But few have reverberated historically like the looting of Baghdad's museum -- or been forgotten more quickly in this country.

Teaching the Iraqis about the Untidiness of History

In archaeological circles, Iraq is known as "the cradle of civilization," with a record of culture going back more than 7,000 years. William R. Polk, the founder of the Center for Middle Eastern Studies at the University of Chicago, says, "It was there, in what the Greeks called Mesopotamia, that life as we know it today began: there people first began to speculate on philosophy and religion, developed concepts of international trade, made ideas of beauty into tangible forms, and, above all developed the skill of writing."<2> No other places in the Bible except for Israel have more history and prophecy associated with them than Babylonia, Shinar (Sumer), and Mesopotamia -- different names for the territory that the British around the time of World War I began to call "Iraq," using the old Arab term for the lands of the former Turkish enclave of Mesopotamia (in Greek: "between the rivers").<3> Most of the early books of Genesis are set in Iraq (see, for instance, Genesis 10:10, 11:31; also Daniel 1-4; II Kings 24).

..more..

[formerrepuke]

1. It's bad- but the destruction of the Aztec and Inca civilizations was

probably much worse.

[kevsand]

3. It depends on how you measure it.

The Aztec and Inca civilizations were living cultures at the time of their demise, so the toll was personal as well as historical. There have obviously been enormous losses of life in Iraq, as well, but the loss of the historical artifacts there is distinct from the civilian casualties in a way that is different from what happened in the new world.

Is one worse than the other? I'm not sure I'm comfortable making such a calculation. The Mesopotamian heritage is the oldest that we still had available, and its loss is therefore particularly painful, but the cultures on this side of the pond were world class civilizations in their own right, also.

I just guess that I'd hoped that we had advanced slightly in the last five hundred years beyond the mind set of the conquistadors. We should know better...

[damntexdem]

7. So Iraqi civilization wasn't ongoing?

And the focus here is on loss of cultural heritage. In Iraq, that goes back 7000 years, and continues up to today.

If you want to compare body counts and destruction of societies, we'd only have to go back a few years, 60 at most.

And by the way, in that war 60 years ago, Eisenhower had a special unit to protect cultural property, headquartered at his headquarters, active throughout his European campaign. Or most recently, the U.S. military had such units in Bosnia and Kosovo. Somehow, Dubya's military not only left that out but also forgot to simply guard museums, libraries, and other venues for cultural artifacts.

[kevsand]

9. That's not what I meant to say.

In fact, I think we're probably basically agreeing here. The fact that the emphasis is on cultural heritage is exactly what makes this slightly different from the Spanish conquest.

Of course, Iraqi civilization is ongoing, but how much in common does Saddam's Baghdad really have with Ur, or Nineveh, or even Babylon? Yes, it's a continuum, but the farthest ends of the timeline would recognize little more than universal constants in each other, I suspect.

All of this probably just re-emphasizes my point about the difficulty of making such comparisons, and I begin to regret attempting to analyze even the difficulties...

[glitch]

2. Thanks for posting.

This is going to be another really good book from Chalmers, I can't wait until it's published.

[TWiley]

4. Republicans are thieves, but we can thank the

Christian fundamentalists for sending the US military to war in the first place. Without their support, there may not have been a war.

Jesus is now an accomplice to GOP crime

[Lars39]

5. I still want to know if any troops are being used to protect

missionary asses, and if so, how many have died.

[TWiley]

14. I read somewhere that "missionaries" were following the troops

during the early stages of the war. Their "mission" was to comfort, convert, and offer a variety of helps.

I would imagine that the troops would defend them if they happened to be near by. I think that most troops are probably guarding the oil fields though.

[damntexdem]

6. 500 years? Why not nearly 1500 years?

How about since the burning of the great Library at Alexandria?

And the destruction in Iraq is ongoing.

[AngryAmish]

8. Mongols did much worse

They did not like cities. So, they burned them to the ground. Sacking of Bagdad and killing the Calif was pretty bad.

Sack of Bombay by Tamerlane. Fall of Constantinople. Nazi looting.

All these things since burning of Alexandria Library by the Muslims.

[Kraklen]

10. muslims didn't burn the Library at Alexandria.

But yeah, the sacking of Baghdad by the Mongols (and Americans) was pretty bad.

[Kraklen]

11. wrong spot.

[AngryAmish]

13. Mogols did quite a number on China also

Millions of dead.

[G_j]

16. and China on Tibet

when 'we' will ever learn?

[Kraklen]

12. bit of hyperbole, I think.

WWII must have been worse for the sheer destruction of historical artifacts.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

15. There were actually attempts in WWII to avoid harming artifacts

Paris was declared an "open city" for that reason, as was Rome.

The Americans were persuaded not to bomb Kyoto, Nara, or Kanazawa, the three great cultural cities of Japan.

During the Blitz, Londoners risked their lives to guard cultural treasures by standing by ready to fight fires

I read a very dismaying story in the Japanese press. A Japanese reporter embedded with the American troops saw that they were approaching the site of ancient Babylon.

Now whatever you say about the pressures of the Japanese educational system, they get a thorough grounding in world history, so he was all excited.

However, none of the troops were the least bit interested. They'd never heard of Babylon except as part of the name of a TV series and had no idea what it was or why it was significant.

Send a bunch of ignoramuses over under the command of greedy, callous marauders, and it's a recipe for disaster.

[G_j]

17. Cultural Heritage, the Geneva Conventions, the Hague Conventions

excellent, complete overview:

http://www.ifar.org/heritage.htm


Art Loss In Iraq

PROTECTION OF CULTURAL HERITAGE IN TIME OF WAR AND ITS AFTERMATH

by JAMES A. R. NAFZIGER

James Nafziger is the Thomas B. Stoel Professor of Law and Director of International Programs, Willamette University College of Law. He chairs the Committee on Cultural Heritage Law of the International Law Association (ILA) and serves as President of the ILA's American Branch. He is also a member of IFAR's Law Advisory Council


<snip>
THE GENEVA CONVENTION IV OF 1949 AND PROTOCOL I


The Geneva Convention Relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War, 11 one of four agreements that still define thejus in bello, prohibits destruction of personal property, whether publicly or privately owned. In itself, the 1949 Convention therefore does little to strengthen the protective regime. But a 1977 protocol, that is, amendment to it (Protocol I to the Geneva Convention), prohibits acts of hostility against historic monuments, works of art, or places of worship that constitute the cultural or spiritual heritage of people and the use of such property for military efforts and prohibits direct reprisals against such property. Further, Geneva Convention IV and its Protocol I make it a "grave breach" to destroy clearly recognized and specially protected historic monuments, works of art, or places of worship. As a "grave breach" the offense constitutes a war crime, and thus an international crime subject to universal jurisdiction.



THE 1954 HAGUE CONVENTION


Increasing international pressure for an agreement that would specifically address the protection of cultural property during armed conflict resulted in negotiations that led to the 1954 Hague Convention. It attempts to broaden the scope of the 1899 and 1907 Hague Conventions by taking into account the events of World Wars I and II, by premising the law in the "cultural heritage of mankind," and by incorporating certain provisions of Geneva Convention IV to create a truly effective and comprehensive agreement on the protection of cultural property during hostilities, whether international or non-international (civil war). The Convention covers both movable and immovable property, which may bear a distinctive emblem. Parties must undertake preparations in time of peace against the foreseeable effects of armed conflict and prohibit:

any use of the cultural property in a manner that will likely expose it to destruction or damage in the event of an armed conflict;
the commission of any acts of hostility or reprisal against cultural property except for rea sons of military necessity; and
any form of theft, pillage, or misappropriation of cultural property.


To help enforce these provisions, parties agree to take steps to prosecute and impose sanctions upon offenders. The Convention also requires occupying states to help in safeguarding and preserving cultural property and provides for return of property seized during a conflict.


..much more...

[donco6]

18. China's Cultural Revolution was pretty horrendous.

How do you compare one to another?

But, yes, the loss of Mesopotamian artifacts was a terrible blow. Hopefully they were just sold and still exist somewhere. China's artifacts were destroyed in acts of support for the government.

[Gabi Hayes]

19. y'all are so far off it's not EVEN funny. here

[kentuck]

20. Worse than the Taliban destruction of the Buddhas ?

:shrug: