Can chess machines provide such good games as human adversaries? Before you make any opening moves to buy one, John White runs through manufacturers’ gambits in his evaluation of the range of microchess opponents.

There are far more casual chess players than serious ones. Britain’s chess clubs can muster only a few thousand players whereas the BBC’s Master Game claims an estimated audience of some 1.5 million viewers. The distinction between the casual and serious chess player divides the most recently-released chess computers into two classes.

Firstly, there are the relatively-unsophisticated and inexpensive models aimed at a large market — particularly at beginners. No matter how good chess machines may become in the future, there will always be a market for those capable of providing a reasonable level of play for beginners.

Secondly, there are the well-designed, strong-playing and expensive models. To enlarge the potential market for these costly machines, manufacturers tend to keep adding gimmicks to encourage well-heeled, lesser players to buy them. Sadly, there have been no significant improvements in the chess-playing standards of the better machines during the last year.

A welcome development has been the increase in the number of chess programs available in software — tape, disc or ROM — for domestic microcomputers. Outstanding among these is the new Sargon II which is available for Tandy TRS-80, Video Genie and Apple. The older Sargon I can still be bought for TRS-80 and Nascom.

The famous Microchess is also now available for Pet and Apple in the 2.0 version, and this 8K program now includes a few book openings. Another excellent introduction is Gambiet 80, a 10K program for TRS-80 which, at £20, is both fast and very strong — it did well in the 1981 Microcomputer Chess Championship.

Other announcements include “Chess”, £8.50, Kansas City Software, which is claimed to be faster and stronger than Microchess, for TRS-80 and Video Genie, and “Chess” for the Sharp MZ-80 — a program best suited to beginners.

My main criticism of all these programs is their often-incomprehensible graphics. I should like to see only moves displayed and the memory saved used to improve the program or to add more book openings.

These days, all the programs in software or in machines offer castling, en passant, pawn promotion, the option of playing black or white and the ability to establish a position and watch the computer react.

Yet, not all possess the important facility of random selection between moves of equal merit, a feature which makes each game different, and not all possess book-opening knowledge which is essential against some openings.

Manufacturers place increasing reliance on games between two chess computers to establish the superiority of one type. As long as the machines are not capable of inventive play — that is, as long as they continue to make their moves by re-shuffling their pieces into “better” positions according to their programs — these results will not be of relevance to the ordinary chess player.

The only true test of the machines’ strength, at present, is its play against an inventive human opponent. I have generally ignored all levels or response times which exceed an average of five minutes since this represents the absolute maximum that any human should be expected to wait for a move — tournament standard is 2.5 minutes a move.

The well-tried Chess Challenger 7 and Voice Challenger — which can now be found in some stationers’ branches — have been upgraded by the addition of a sensory board to give respectively the Chess Challenger 8 and Sensory Voice Challenger.

The sensory boards register movement of the pieces by pressure and by lights. Thus, to move your piece from d2 to d4 requires you to press the edge of the piece firmly on square d2, a small light glows, and then on d4. Both lights go out and the computer-thinking light goes on.

The computer then lights up the square of the piece it wishes to move. You press down on that square, causing the square to which the piece is to be moved to light. Pressing the piece on this squar causes both lights to go out. The sensory board is very effective and a definite improvement on the original models.

The Sensory 8 has an extra intermediate level compared to the older Challenger 7 which usefully fills a gap between a comparatively weak, but fast level and a stronger, but too-slow level. It is rumoured that the 8′s program is slightly stronger than the 7′s, but I have not been able to confirm this. The Sensory 8 also possesses a useful library of book openings in its 32K ROM.

The Sensory Voice Challenger offers the voice of its predecessor, but it is now possible to turn the voice down, as well as off altogether. In addition, it can take a player stepwise through 64 pre-programmed games played by grandmasters.

After each move shown by the computer on behalf of the grandmaster, the player is asked for his move. The computer tells you whether you were right or wrong — one hopes that the grandmaster, whom the player is trying to emulate, is always right. These two features are of doubtful value — unless you are blind — and the voice adds considerably to the cost. I wonder how long Fidelity will persevere with it, in the face of almost universal criticism?

Much more useful is a clock display, which is not available on the Sensory 8, that shows the time elapsed for each player and a comprehensive book opening library of 64 openings of widely-variable depth.

Both of the Sensory Challengers offer a random choice between moves which are assessed of near-equal strength, and both can be operated by mains or batteries. Note, however, that at the highest levels, batteries may run out before a game is complete. Printers will also be available to provide permanent records of the game, at a cost of around £170.

The Sensory Voice Challenger is one of the strongest machines on the U.K. market at £280. The Sensory 8, at £130, is almost as strong and represents outstanding value for money — strongly recommended.

The older Challenger 7 and Voice Challenger are still available at reduced prices, respectively £90 and £220. A new model, partly-designed by the Spracklens of Sargon fame, is in the pipeline and will be launched when stocks of the Z-80 microprocessors are exhausted.

The first British chess computer is Intelligent Chess, marketed by Optim games and part-designed by International Master Levy and World Chess Federation (West Europe Section) President, O’Connell. Considerable attention has been paid to user facilities. No chess board is supplied, but the game is displayed on the user’s TV set — in colour, if you have a colour set.

A cassette deck is built-in enabling games to be preserved for posterity together with a voice-over commentary for which a microphone is also provided. Alternatively, you can buy cassettes which teach the use of the machine — luckily there is also a manual to tell you how to use the cassette — and to teach the game or the openings, or demonstrate games by famous grandmasters.

The computer has 13 playing levels, with a further four levels for analysis. The setting of the level affects the time spent on a move. A timer is set which decreases to zero at which point the move is displayed. Meanwhile, the machine constantly Hashes the move it is considering.

This means that the machine spends the same time thinking regardless of the complexity of the game — an advantage in the end-game where moves can be examined in greater depth, but not so in mid-game.

Many other chess machines share this method of setting levels, but notable exceptions are the Chess Challenger series and Sargon series of programs which all moves to a fixed depth, regardless of the state of play, unless captures are involved.

Intelligent Chess is based on the 6502 microprocessor and provides 64K ROM and 16K RAM. The 16K RAM is needed for storage of 120 positions through which it is possible to back-step in case your blunder was not only fatal, but also very subtle.

The machine offers a widely-varied and interesting selection of book openings and as well as the usual chess facilities, can also detect draws by repetition of moves or by playing 50 moves without a piece being taken or a pawn moved: the Super System III is the only other machine which does this.

There is no random facility for selection between moves of equal merit; instead, the players can ask the machine to display its next best move, or the next, or the next, and then play on from there.

The display on a colour television is superb, with black and white pieces on sky-blue and pale-green squares — very appealing. When making a move, the piece being moved flashes to and from the target square until enter is pressed. The same occurs when the machine makes its reply.

This to-and-fro occurs three times, presumably to draw the user’s attention, but I found it rather tiresome when the computer was making its own move. The board can also be used as a display for a game between two human players, where no illegal moves will be accepted.

At a price of £300, Intelligent Chess must stand comparison with the best of the other available machines. I have timed the following levels: level 3, one minute; level 6, three minutes; level 9, six minutes, so that it is no faster than most of the competition.

The standard of play is very good, but not, I feel, quite as strong as the Sargon 2.5 or any of the Chess Challenger series with their equal response times up to five minutes. Since it is the most versatile of these machines, I suspect that it may prove to be the best-seller.

Opinions vary as to the standard of play of the Super System III — £155 for main unit; £107 for small black/white board display, £105 for printer. It offers no book openings and thus is muddled by my own favourite opening, the Queen’s Gambit – d2-d4; d7-d5; c2-c4 – where it takes a deep search to find that if you accept the gambit, you must not then defend the capture at all costs.

The machine also lacks a random facility to choose between moves of equal merit. However, certain features indicate that a great deal of thought has been put into the machine. For example, it is capable of making arrangements to double its rooks along a file and, after castling on the queen’s side, it will often take a further move to tuck its king further behind its pawn screen — a pleasing touch.

Overall, Super System III is clearly one of the better machines, especially at longer response times — good for postal chess — and many club players love it. Personally, I prefer the Sensory 8 which has a clear advantage in the opening because of its library of book openings. I consider the strength of SSIII’s play in the middle game to be similar to that of Intelligent Chess — perhaps not surprising, since Philidor Software had a hand in the design of both.

The Sargon 2.5 chess machine, £280, remains the strongest and fastest on the domestic market. It is being superseded by an improved chess cartridge called Morphy at a price of £80 which is discounted to previous owners. Because of Morphy, the Sargon 2.5 chess machine can, therefore, be obtained from some sources at about £200.

The concept is modular: the chess program is on a cartridge which can be replaced by improved versions as they become available — or by other games cartridges — while keeping the main unit.

With a rechargeable battery pack, random selection between moves of equal merit and a reasonable selection of book openings, this machine unquestionably has all that the serious chess player could ask for. Special mention must be made of the unit’s ability to retain an uncompleted game in its memory even after switch-off, ready to start again at a more convenient time.

Although the program, which is packed into only 8K ROM and 1K RAM, is not markedly superior to other good machines in mid-game, and its store of book openings is inferior to, say, the Sensory Voice Challenger’s, its speed of response is outstanding and its end-game is superior to that of any other commercially-available machine. To do this evaluation function must be very well designed. Normally, the end-game is the weakest part of any chess computer’s game.

The identical 2.5 program is also available in the Auto-Response Board which additionally has a touch-sensitive board for moving the pieces, similar to that described for the Sensory Challengers. The Auto Response Board also possesses a slightly superior library of book openings. Beautifully finished in wood, this machine is the nearest yet to perfection — at a price — £700.

Sargon 2.5, like the older Boris which has the same manufacturer, occasionally flashes one of about 60 messages across its display, related to the state of the game. These add nothing to its chess-playing ability and the Auto-Response Board does without them. After a time they become boring, but it still amuses me to see the machine plead “I need help” when it evaluates its position as desperate.

Sargon 2.4 would be my recommendation for the serious player. However, club players should note that my estimate of its playing strength falls below the distributor’s claims. I cannot accept that its mid-game play, at top level — level 4 — is equivalent to a player rated at BCF 170.

The machine scored BCF 139 for complete games in the recent Evening Standard Chess Congress, but London players are notoriously over-rated and I would assess its rating overall at about 130 — which is also the equivalent of a rating which it achieved recently in the U.S.

The machines which follow are all best suited to beginners, and would be unlikely to seriously trouble most club players.

Tandy’s chess machine is custom-made in Hong Kong, and is clearly designed as a travelling companion with battery operation — mains is an optional extra — and miniature pegs for playing pieces. At £70, it provides eight levels of play from two seconds to three hours, no book openings and no random responses. Changing levels alter the depth of search and not the time allocated for thinking.

The Chess Traveller, £60, bears a superficial resemblance to the Tandy machine, and is again clearly designed as a travelling companion with battery operation and small pegs as playing pieces. There are seven levels of play and the machine also offers some book openings and random selection between moves — the cheapest in this survey to do so.

The Boris Diplomat contains the same program as the original Boris which is now withdrawn. The original Boris was outdated and overpriced by today’s standards at its former cost of £180. The Diplomat is better value at £70 and is again designed as a travelling companion with mains or battery operation and small pegs for playing pieces. The level of play is altered by setting a timer — up to 99 hours — and the machine also offers random selection between moves.

The Delta-1, £40, is marketed by Sci-SysW as a inexpensive alternative to the company’s more prestigious Super Sytem III machine. The level of play is altered by setting a timer, and the move being considered is constantly displayed, as is quite usual for this type. There are no book openings and no random responses.

Good value at the price for beginners and very attractively finished, but the manufacturer should do something about the weak response to an opening of e2-e4. The machine replies d7-d5 at all time settings up to five minutes.

Texas Instrument’s Videochess owes a great deal to the influence of British Master Levy, who served as a consultant. It is available only in ROM for the TI-99/4 home computer, at £45. The board is displayed on the computer’s monitor in full colour and the result is very pleasing.

There are three levels of play, and each level can be set to play in an aggressive, passive or normal mode. Unfortunately, it is rather hard to find in the shops now since the TI-99/4 has not been an unequivocal success and, as I write, several retailers are destocking at cut prices.

Since the program was written for the Texas Instruments microprocessor, the RMS-9900, I fear that Videochess may disappear. This would be a pity, since it is one of the better chess programs available in software.

The Atari chess cartridge at £45 is available for the Atari Videogames System. The display is lost while the machine “thinks” and the graphics are almost incomprehensible. There are no book openings.

Finally, readers considering buying any chess machine will be pleased to hear of their reliability. None of the machines I have tested has been defective — some straight out of the manufacturer’s original packing — no retailer I have spoken to has admitted to having received a single unit back for repair, and my faithful Challenger 7 has taken a tremendous keyboard battering without any defects at all.

Beginners’ games and prices

• Tandy Chess Machine, £70: eight levels, no book openings, no random responses. Designed to be portable.
• Chess Traveller, £60: seven levels, book openings, random responses. Designed to be portable.
• Boris Diplomat, £70: Timer set between 0 seconds and 99 hours. Random responses. Designed to be portable.
• Delta-1, £40: Timer set between 0 seconds and 99 hours. No book openings or random responses.
• Texas Instruments Videochess, £45 ROM for TI-99/4: three levels, three styles of play at each level. Full colour display.

Conclusions

• The Sargon 2.5 remains the strongest and fastest chess computer. The best buy for serious players, but the price may be somewhat high.
• Optim’s Intelligent Chess, £300, has a superb colour display with many useful user features, including taped tutorials on how to play the game. The standard of chess is good, too — but not as good as Sargon.
• The Super System III is still one of the better chess machines at £155. Forget the costly LCD board and printer — a chess board and paper and pen are much less expensive.
• The Sensory 8 Fidelity is excellent value at £130 — or without the sensory board as the Challenger 7 at £85 – with a strong program.
• The Auto-Response Board at £700 must be the best chess computer available, but the price is beyond most of us and represents poor value in pure chess terms.
• The Sargon program is available in its original version for TRS-80 and Nascom, and in the II version for TRS-80 and Apple microcomputers, at around £15-£30 depending on documentation and supplier. The best program in software of those surveyed.

Grandmaster or novice?
John White presents a chessrating analysis program in Basic. It has been designed to help you maximise your rating as a player.

As regular Chess players will know, the British Chess Federation organises a rating system for its league players over a season. The principle is that if you beat an opponent in the league you take his rating and add 50. If you lose you take his rating and subtract 50. If you draw the rating alone is taken.

The results obtained in this way over the season are averaged to give your rating for the new season. Similarly, your opponents take account of your rating and their results against you when determining their own new rating.

Ratings vary from 80 — knows the moves only — to more than 200 — national/international standard. An average club player would be rated at about 130-160. It is at once evident that it is theoretically possible to devise a strategy which would raise your rating, allowing for the fact that the better your opponent, the more likely you are to lose, while the worse he is, the more likely you are to win.

To take a trivial example, if a player rated at 100 plays a national player with a rating of 200 10 times, then, even though he will lose every game, his new rating will be:

(200 – 50) x 10/10 = 150

On the other hand, the good player’s new rating will now be:

(100 + 50) x 10/10 = 150

So, both players will appear of equal strength at the end of the season. Clearly, the good player is well advised to avoid an opponent of such low rating.

In practice, the teams in the leagues are organised in decreasing order of rating, so that players of more nearly equal strength play each other. The program shown in listing 1 explores the possibility of evolving a strategy of selecting your opponent, if possible, to maximise your own rating.

The outcome of a game involves a random element RND(1) = 0.0 to 0.999 which is biased according to the difference in rating between yourself and your opponent. The bias is positive if you have the higher rating, negative if you have the lower, If random element + bias is greater than 0.6, you win. If less than 0.4, you lose, otherwise the game is a draw. Thus for equally-rated players, with no applied bias, the chance is 40 percent for a win, 40 percent for a defeat and 20 percent for a draw for each player.

Ten games are played by your opponent at each level between ratings of 100 and 180, after you have entered your own rating if you do not have a rating, guess at 130 if you take chess reasonably seriously.

The crucial line is line 70, where the probability of winning or losing a game is considered to be directly proportional to the difference in rating, leading to the straight line graph of bias plotted against rating difference illustrated in figure 1. This is obviously an algorithm which can be disputed, and readers might also like to substitute line 70 by the following:

70 Z(J) = (R – X * 10) ^3/100000 + RND(1)

This provides the curved-line graph shown in figure 1, which intuitively seems to be more plausible: little effect when your opponent’s rating is close to yours, dramatically increasing as the difference widens.

The first version of line 70 is technically correct since ELO ratings which are related to BCF ratings by the simple formula

ELO = (BCF *8) + 600

are calculated so as to be linearly related to chess ability.

The program is written in Microsoft Basic and should not present any problems. Note that your opponent’s rating is given throughout as “10*X”, instead of simply as “X”. This is to save memory since otherwise the Dim statement of line 10 would require a total of 400 memory locations, of which only 18 would be used.

Since the program is a continuous loop, it will be necessary to exit with CTRL/C or a similar command. I believe that constantly having to answer the question: “Do you want to try again”? at the end of short program runs is pointless and time-wasting.

You should run through the program repeatedly to see what pattern emerges, and the results from each run should be compared to the previous one to test whether the results are reproducible.

Club players with whom I have spoken all seem to favour different methods to beat “the system”. How do your results compare to the following, mutually-incompatible statements.

• “To raise your rating, it is best to keep playing opponents who are slightly better”.
• “To raise your rating you should only play opponents much worse than yourself”.

Finally, officials of the British Chess Federation can relax — no simple means of cheating is accessible with this program. May I remind readers that the best way to improve your chess play if not your rating is to keep playing a slightly superior opponent.

Listing 1
Note: variables shown on screen:
OPP R = opponent’s rating
Final R = your final rating playing against opponent’s rating
W = number of wins by you against your opponent’s rating
D = number of draws by you against your opponent’s rating
L = number of defeats by you against your opponent’s rating

5 REM Chess Rating by J.F. White
10 DIM A(20), R(20)
20 INPUT “YOUR RATING =”; R
30 R3=0
35 PRINT “Opp R W D L Final R”
40 FOR X=10 TO 18
45 R(X) = 0: A(X) = 0
50 W=0: D=0: L=0
60 FOR J=1 T0 10
70 Z(J) = (R-X*10)/100 + RND (1)
80 IF Z(J) > 0.6 THEN W=W+1: GOTO 110
90 IF Z(J) R3 THEN R3 = R(X): A(X) = X*10
150 PRINT X*10; TAB(6); W; TAB(9); D; TAB(12); L; TAB(15); R(X)
160 NEXT X
170 PRINT “Your best new rating was”; R3; “against opponents(s) “
180 FOR P = 10 TO 18
190 IF R(P) = R3 THEN PRINT A(P)
200 NEXT F
210 GOTO 20
220 END

Home
Contents and Editorial for this issue of Your Computer

The underground Palace of Sargon

In the prähistorischen times Sargon, a Hightech Took of the Vornordic people waged war with Reptiloids that were based in Antarctica, the war which became that with Reptiloids gebeëindigd underground was floated [under India], whereas Nephilim established their own civilisation under Mongolia. Nephilim and Reptiloids developed further technology allowing them to reach beyond ground. The species war of the planet went further, and was carried to the Moon, Mars, and eventually to the Astral Plane [ASTRE] in the war. Humanoids established a colony in Rigel Orion while Reptiloids established an empire based on the planet Typhon [Alpha Draconis]. Draconians attacked Rigal still various Nephilim escaped in the Sirius-A, Vega Lyra and Procyon while others returned in the colloid system of Sol [splendid moons].

The Trojan Horse of Procyon

The Draco-supported empire of Orion ” Impious Six” [6 controlled Dracos of the star systems] attacked the systems of Lyra and devastated 3 peaces, initially [ubivayushch] above 50 million Lyrans and more as “war” continued. Refugees avoided to Taygeta of Pleiades and Andromeda of Zenatae. Onging war between Orion and Sirius [for the Rigelian references] continued for centuries. Draco-supported Reptiloids of Orionite [tall 'greens' and short 'greys'] established the Trojan Horse Agreement of Procyon after the unsuccessful invasion of that system, subverting their society as long as the transfer wasn’t taken away from within . Several Procyonese freedom fighters avoided [obeninyayutsya] the command upward with others including Andromeda of Zenatae, Taygeta of Pleiades, and Tau of Ceti.

Herr Blasphemo, Head of Thule Society Gnóstica

Sirians and Orions continued their battle above determining who would control 21 peaces in this immediate star section. Both sides occasionally had imperialistic designs, the only difference being which form would predominate, Nephilim or Reptiloid. The Sirians and the Orionites fought for the control and/or the Egyptian selection of the act. Sirian Nephilim beat the Orions and  the Gnóstico cult of the Impacts of the Queue [later to spawn the House of the Field of Grant, the Society of the East Egyptian Free Bricklayers, Gnóstica Society of Thule, and the Bavarian Illuminati] toward to the exterior and it lead underground, where they manufactured the cults of Gizeh and of Kamagol II.

Agatho Daimon, Sign of the Serpent Cult

Sirians kept the bricklaying basis against united reverse strengths in World War II when Jesuit-based Orionites reversed and stopped the strengths of the Axis. The underground nets under the Himalayagebergte were divided between the Reptiloid factors which they ran inside of Patalas [important bhoga-Vita] and the functioning Nephilim factors which they put inside of running functioning Agharti [hoofd[Shambhala, put--Little]. Nazis allied themselves with Patalans and the group of Kamagol-Ii were when the Americans united themselves with Aghartians and the bijkantoor-based Western persons of the same in secundair-stad; at their base in “Telos” below Mt. Shasta, California. Same old Sirian/Orion fought which, the country of the planet used as a country of the platform. The “Old cult of serpents” lived inside Babylon chambers of the East started from the appropriation what was linked from Egyptische Free Bricklayers and categorized the other blockade.

Jesuit Society of Clermont’s “Seal of Sol” Signet

The forces of the central line lost [temporarily] World War II, however the Jesuits continued their infiltration in course of the bricklaying lodgings that had started inside in 1776 with the establishment of the Bavarian Illuminati for Jesuit Adam Weishaupt and Scottish Rite thus called the College of the Jesuit of Clermont in France. When this happened in the land the Orionites worked implacàvel to “hack” the electronic colectividade of AShRH that lig worlds of the together member through the psionic transceiver of subspace implants. The colectividade for computer was infiltrated successfully by the forces of Orion, that started to use the propaganda and the manipulation psycho-spirits to turn the AShRH collective for its agenda, masquerading as “Masters of Ascension”. One 9 ft. Reptiloid nominated Hatonn dissimulated “defection” from the group of Kamagol-Draco-Orions and captivated into a position of ‘master scribe’ for the colectividade of AShRH, however, their participation continued with the Draco-Orion supported “PNK- ULTRA” from their bases under Antárctico Continent and New Mexico suggest that they really are double agents, and certainly share of the same anti-semitic agenda of their “Nazi” allies under Antárctico Continent.

Jesuit Mothership of Kamagol

The forces of the central line escaped from the Antárctico Continent, Argentina, and same the North America, infiltrating the military-industrial, intelligence, psychiatric chemical product, of petro- and other levels, creating one fascist corpocrasy that  started to extract with siphoned trillions of dollars “below the tubes” in their industrial empire to militate, where the advanced ones continued to the Nazi with the forces of Draco-Orion. The E.U govt. equally they fell in the foreign trap of the treated one. A war of intelligence estoira entered the forces of Orion-Kamagol-Jesuit-Nazi that were operated in the NSA’s agencies of the AQUARIUS and the MAJIs, and anti-gray factors of the military functioning inside of the NAVY’ s COM-12 and agencies of the QABALA.

Luciferian Druid Wizard Overlords

The CIA, the MJ-12 and the DON were used as agencies of the mediator for the factors of Orion and as ” moles” with which to accede to the remaining patriotic factors of the Armed Forces, and to start to gain “war” of intelligence; with the contrary infiltration of the Navy and “assassinations” of the suicide; as this of Admiral Boorda and another one of the Navy that resisted “New world Order” [that it is a common contribution between harsh Luciferians, and the human wizards based finally under the plateau of Gizeh].

Related Articles

• Lead Like Ignatius (blogs.forbes.com)

Exodus 1:11

The Biblical text reads:  Accordingly, they put gang-foremen in charge of them to oppress them with forced labor; and they built storage cities for Pharaoh, Pithom and Raamses.

Meanwhile, Papyrus Anastasi VI from the late Nineteenth Dynasty (Egypt, end of the 13th century BCE) contains a letter which appears to report the passage of Asiatic tribes into the pastures of the Nile Delta.

“We have finished letting the Bedouin(1) tribes of Edom pass the Fortress of Mer-ne-Ptah Hotep-hir-Maat — life, prosperity, health! — which is in Tjeku(2), to the pools of Per-Atum(3)…to keep them alive and to keep their cattle alive, through the great ka of Pharaoh — life, prosperity, health! — the good sun of every land…”

Notes: (1) Egyptian shasu, or shepherd; (2) probably a name for a region, the “land of Goshen”; (3) probably the Biblical Pithom.

So while the Bible speaks of forced labor, the Egyptian letter reports allowing the passage of Edomite shepherds into the Nile Delta to keep themselves and their herds alive.  No telling if the same time frame should  be assumed, although conventional Biblical scholarship does suggest a highly similar time frame.

Exodus 2:3

The Biblical text reads: When she could no longer hide him, she got a papyrus basket for him, and sealed it with bitumen and pitch.  She put the child into it and placed it among the reeds at the bank of the Nile.

Meanwhile, the legendary birth of the Mesopotamian King Sargon (23rd century BCE) reads in part:

My mother, the high priestess, conceived me, in secret she bore me.  She set me in a basket of rushes, with bitumen she sealed my lid. She cast me into the river which rose not over me. The river bore me up and carried me to Akki, the drawer of water. Akki, the drawer of water lifted me out as he dipped his ewer. Akki, the drawer of water, took me as his son and reared me.

I note simply that parts of these stories resemble each other.  Its interesting that the Sargon story concerns the legendary birth of a king, and the Moses story concerns the legendary birth of a slave.

In other words, it’s not really very interesting to me to ask if the Moses story is true.  It’s interesting to consider the dynamics of a religious culture that (at least for a time apparently) eschewed the political culture of the kings of Mesopotamia and Egypt, and opted instead for the direct rule of their God by casting themselves in the role of the vulnerable, the enslaved, the oppressed.

Works Cited

Childs, Brevard S. (1974). The Book of Exodus: a critical, theological commentary. The Old Testament Library. Louisville: Westminster press.

Pritchard, J. B. (1969). Ancient Near Eastern texts: Relating to the Old Testament. Princeton, N.J: Princeton University Press.

Sargon was king of Kish, a small city-state in the Sumerian Empire. The Sumerian empire is located in ancient Mesopotamia. Sargon wanted to be king of all the city states in the Babylonian Empire. This is how he accomplished just that.

In the Sumerian Empire, they relied on two water supplies (the Euphrates and Tigris rivers) to supply their water.  So Sargon got an idea.  He thought if he cut off the water flow from both rivers they would have to come to him so they could get water.  Then Sargon was at work.  He started building dams in the Euphrates and Tigris rivers.  Guess what, his plan worked!  People started to come to him.  Within a mater of time, He became ruler of all of the Babylonian Empire.  His rule did not last long though.  With roughly five decades.  People started to rebel against the empire.  Within a matter of time, he was no longer king.

This is a passage from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sargon_of_Akkad:

A Neo-Assyrian text from the seventh century BC purporting to be Sargon’s autobiography asserts that the great king was the illegitimate son of a priestess. In the Neo-Assyrian account Sargon’s birth and his early childhood are described this:

In 705 BC, Sargon died in a battle against the Cimmerians, who were later to destroy the kingdoms of Urartu and Phrygia before moving even further west. Sargon was avenged by his son Sennacherib (Sin-ahhe-eriba,) at about  705 – 681 BC. by his son, sending an army to wipe out all of the Cimmerians. by: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sargon_of_Akkad:

I don’t know about you but from the picture above,  I think Sargon had a painful death. Sargon is the one who is fully yellow in picture who is about to get stabbed.  As you see in the picture above, Sargon did not have an easy life.

I know what most of you are thinking, “Sargon was so mean for cutting off their water supply.”  What would you do if you had the chance to be ruler of all of the Sumerian Empire?  I bet you would do the same thing.  I know that I would!

INFORMATION ABOUT WHERE ALL THIS TOOK PLACE:

If you don’t know where Mesopotamia is, it is in the continent of Africa.  It is in Egypt.  It is close to the Euphrates, Tigris, and Nile rivers.

If you want background information about Sargon, go to the website below.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sargon_of_Akkad

OCTOBER 22, 2009 HOLIDAYS AND FESTIVALS
INTERNATIONAL DAY OF ACTION AGAINST POLICE BRUTALITY FEAST OF FOOLS.

ALSO ON OCTOBER 22 IN HISTORY…
1878 — Anti-Socialist Law passed in Germany.
1887 — Greenwich Village revolutionist John Reed born, Portland, Oregon.
1897 — World’s first car dealership opens, London, England.
1913 — Action photographer Robert Capa born, Budapest, Austria–Hungary.
1918 — Flu epidemic claims one fourth of all Americans, killing half a million.
1962 — Missile crisis develops over Soviet warheads in Fidel Castro’s Cuba.
2007 — Assyrian Iraqi beatnik poet Sargon Boulus dies, Berlin, Germany.

Excerpted from The 2009 Autonomedia Calendar of Jubilee Saints: Radical Heroes for the New Millennium by James Koehnline and the Autonomedia Collective

NEW YORK, NY – A real-life vampire has come out of the coffin to educate the public on vampire lifestyle!

Actress Seregon O’Dassey is feartured in a new series called “Vampires Revealed”. The show takes a look at the lives of three people who follow the vampire lifestyle.

O’Dassey has appeared in number of independent horror films, but it is her vampire confessions that are getting her attention.

O’Dassey is a part of the New York City vampire scene, which consists of a number of houses or orders. These houses make up a type of government, which has levels of varying power. Those who do not participate in court systems are called ‘ronin’, the Japanese term for masterless samurai.

The actress is coming out before Halloween because she wants to dispel with the usual stereotypes. Those in the scene have regular every-day lives, working as lawyers, nurses and accountants!

“We don’t go around attacking people and biting their necks, and we don’t sleep in coffins. We might have them in our houses—I know people who do—but they’re just for decoration, and we don’t live the way people think we do. I believe they’ll be interested to find out that despite how they view us, they really just have no idea.”

For instance, O’Dassey doesn’t constantly drink blood. Instead, she does it only two or three times a month, and only with her long-term boyfriend. “You have to know the person, trust the person.”

And she recommends only tasting a few drops, as blood is actually a laxative!

While she has kept her second life somewhat secret due to trying to have a mainstream acting career, she says any close friends or family already know and have accepted it. O’Dassey explains, “There’s a really good interview with my mom, which will probably make you chuckle a little because she says she always thought I was a little weird. But my mom’s my best friend, she always has been.”

To find out more, catch “Vampires Revealed” on Comcast On Demand’s Paranormal TV channel all this month.

Esto parece razonable, pero lo que se conoce de Sargón viene casi por completo de las leyendas escritas cientos de años después de su muerte. Hay muy pocos registros de la época de la vida de Sargón. La leyenda de la infancia de Sargón, de cómo fue colocado en una canasta y enviado en un río, proviene de dos tablillas cuneiformes de 7mo siglo AC (de la biblioteca del rey asirio Asurbanipal, que reinó desde 668 hasta 627 a. C.), escrito cientos de años después de que el libro del Éxodo fuese escrito. Si alguien quiere sostener que un relato se ha tomado de otro, tendría que ser al revés: la leyenda de Sargón parece haber tomado del relato del Éxodo de Moisés.

www.apologista.blogdiario.com

www.retornoalparaiso.blogspot.com

www.yeshuahamashiaj.org

www. elvangeliodelreino.org

En tiempos antiguos al comienzo de la construcción de un edificio, era costumbre asesinar a una persona como “sacrificio para los cimientos”, pensaban que el espíritu del muerto protegería a la nueva construcción. Cuando los chinos fundían una campana, la costumbre decretaba el sacrificio de por lo menos una doncella con el propósito de mejorar el tono de la campana, así la doncella era arrojada viva al metal fundido; este pueblo también tenía la costumbre de sepultar en las murallas a los albañiles que habían muerto al construirla. Un rey de Palestina cuando se construyó los muros de Jericó, “echó” el cimiento sobre su primogénito Abiram y puso en las puertas a su hijo menor Segub, este padre no sólo sacrificó a sus dos hijos vivos en los cimientos y puertas de la ciudad, sino que su acción fue consideraba conforme a la palabra del Señor. Moisés había prohibido los sacrificios de los cimientos, pero después de su muerte se volvió a practicar estos ritos. La reminiscencia de estos ritos a desembocado actualmente en un ceremonia simbólica de enterrar algún objeto o prendas en la piedra angular de las nuevas construcciones. Con el tiempo el hijo primogénito era destinado al exilio después de crecer en lugar de ser sacrificado. 

Moisés había enseñado a los judíos que todos los hijos primogénitos pertenecían al Señor, y que, en lugar de su sacrificio tal cual se acostumbraba entre las naciones paganas, ese hijo primogénito podría vivir, siempre y cuando sus padres lo redimieran mediante el pago de cinco siclos a un sacerdote autorizado.

Al pasar el tiempo concibieron la idea de ofrendar una parte del cuerpo humano para reemplazar el sacrificio humano completo, consideraron que la mutilación física era un substituto aceptable, así ofrendaban, cabello, uñas, la sangre y dedos de las manos y los pies, posteriormente se cambió la costumbre de cortar dedos por atarlos. El rito de la circuncisión en los hombres fue una consecuencia del sacrificio parcial, a las mujeres se abrían orificios en el lóbulo de las orejas; de hecho, en muchas tribus africanas aún se practica el rito de agujerear la nariz y los labios. Los eunucos fueron una forma de sacrificio parcial, afeitarse la cabeza fue de la misma manera una forma de devoción religiosa. Las antiguas fraternidades estaban basadas en el rito de beber sangre. Con el pasar del tiempo, hemos avanzado de comer carne humana a hacerlo de manera simbólica en el sacramento de pan y vino en la comunión. Aún hoy, muchos dependen de la sangre para la salvación, pero de manera meramente figurativa y simbólica.

Once again, on a basis of previous knowledge and appearance, what do you think?

Appearance:

• He has a funny hat. Wait… is that a hat? I have no idea.
• All representations of him are made in rock or metal, so you can tell he’s a pretty solid guy. Click.
• The first person I’ve judged to have facial hair. That’s good marks.

And on account of him being dead for 4224 years, that’s all I have for appearance. I’m gonna milk him of achievements and unachievements. Mostly from wikipedia. Here goes nothing.

Achievements:

• The story of his life is called the “Sargon Legend,” which is pretty much pimping.
• Overthrew this guy in the city-state of Kish after he became the guy’s cup-bearer. That was apparently significant back then, and better than man-fanner, grape-bowl-holder, etc. But I’m not quite sure how it was better than liquid-pourer. If I was a cup-bearer, I wouldn’t want to start handing people random cups, granted that would be fun, standing out in the streets, giving passers-by cups. But enough of that.
• He made the first empire in history to ever exist ever. That’s pretty impressive.
• He had a cool name.

Why did I choose this guy? Anyway, unachievements:

• He may be some bible guy named Nimrod. Yes. Nimrod.
• He has a great-great-great grandchild named Dudu.

And that’s all I have to say. This is a tough decision… I’m gonna have to make him…

But just on the verge of awesome.

Isaiah 20:1  “In the year that Tartan came to Ashdod, when Sargon the king of Assyria sent him, and he fought against Ashdod and took it,”

Victor Place, Botta’s successor, discovered 14 inscribed barrel cylinders with historical records.  In Sargons records was a description of his defeat of Ashdod, as was mentioned in the verse:

“Azuri, king of Ashdod, also planned in his heart not to pay tribute, and among the kings of his neighborhood disseminated hatred of Assyria.  On account of the evil he had done I cut off his lordship over the people of his land.  In the anger of my hear, the mass of my army I did not muster.  I did not assemble my whole camp  With only my usual bodyguard I marched against Ashdod; I besieged it, and I conquered it.  I took as spoil his gods, his wife, his songs, his daughters, his possessions, the treasures of his palace, together with the people of his land.”

I find it very interesting how “unreliable” and “false” the Scriptures are, yet the very existence of Sargon was unknown except from the Bible, and low and behold, he was real.  Don’t be so quick to pass judgement on the Scriptures!

Ziggoura

Panthéon sumérien

Les Sumériens présentaient l’Univers, appelé An-ki (Ciel-Terre), sous la forme d’une demi-sphère.

La terre, présentée sous la forme d’un disque plat entouré par la mer, constituait la base de l’Univers.

La partie inférieure renfermait les enfers.

La partie située entre la voûte du ciel et la terre était occupée par un troisième élément appelé lil (vent, air, souffle).

L’Univers flottait dans un océan cosmique infini.

L’Univers est, à l’origine, la Mer primitive qui produira la Montagne cosmique composée du ciel et de la terre encore réunis.

Le dieu de l’air Enlil naîtra de l’union du ciel, le dieu An et principe mâle, avec Ki, la terre. L’enfant désunira le ciel de la terre.

Son père An emportera le ciel.

Enlil emportera la terre, sa mère.

La création de l’Univers, des êtres et des végétaux, est le fruit de l’union d’Enlil et de la terre. Les quatre dieux cosmiques principaux, le Ciel, la Terre, l’Air, et l’Eau engendreront d’autres dieux.

Ces derniers se partageront notamment le gouvernement des corps célestes, le soleil, la lune et les planètes, ainsi que des forces atmosphériques le vent, l’orage et la tempête.

D’autres seront affectés à des lieux géographiques tels les rivières, les montagnes, les états et les villes, ou à certains outils de la vie quotidienne.
Le roi de Sumer devra épouser, le jour de l’An de chaque année, l’une des prêtresses d’Inanna, la déesse de l’amour et de la procréation, afin d’assurer la fertilité des terres et la fécondité des femelles.

Le dieu suprême, qui gouverne le panthéon sumérien, sera assisté des dieux créateurs, des sept autres dieux suprêmes qui “décrétaient les destins” et des cinquante “grands dieux”.

Les Sumériens les représenteront sous la forme humaine et les feront vivre comme des mortels, “la montagne du ciel et la terre, là où se lève le soleil”.

C’est-à-dire , une montagne , à l’est , qui sert de lien entre le monde du ciel et le monde sur la terre

Les Sumériens du IIIème millénaire avant Jésus-Christ distingueront des centaines de dieux aux cotés des quatre dieux créateurs principaux : An, Enlil, Enki et la déesse Ninhursag.
Ils apparaissent dans les catalogues compilés dans les écoles et dans les listes d’offrandes et de sacrifices.

Chacun d’eux sera spécialisé dans une fonction et préposé à une mission.

Chaque ville vénèrera sa divinité, Ningirsu à Tello, Nannar-Sin à Ur, Babbar à Larsa et Sippar, Enki à Eridu.

Chaque roi et prince aura son dieu tutélaire.

Les Sumériens attribueront la marche de l’Univers à des forces impersonnelles, à des lois et règlements divins, désignés par le mot “me”.

La liste de ces forces, compilée sur une tablette sumérienne, cite pêle-mêle la souveraineté et le trône royal, le pouvoir, la divinité, la vérité, la descente aux enfers, le déluge, les rapports sexuels, la prostitution, les joies du coeur, le mensonge, la bonté, la justice, la sagesse, la paix, le conseil et le jugement.

Enuma Elish

L’Enûma Elish (Lorsque là-haut …”) fut écrit à Babylone vers le début du XIIè siècle avant notre ère, et est constitué de plus de mille vers répartis sur sept tablettes.

L’Epopée de la Création raconte les origines de l’Univers.

Les grands dieux sont opposés dans deux conflits face à leurs ancêtres les forces du chaos. Dans un premier temps, c’est Apsû, le maître des eaux souterraines, qui menace de détruire ses rejetons trop irrespectueux à son égard.

Mais la ruse d’Ea permet l’élimination de Apsû.

Les dieux sont sauvés pour le moment.

Mais soudain se présente une nouvelle menace, Tiamat, la mer primordiale, mère de tous les dieux.

Voulant venger la mort de son mari, Apsû, maître des eaux sousterraines, causée par ceux-ci (et Ea en particulier), elle avait crée une armée de créatures terrifiantes dans le but de les anéantir, avec l’aide de son nouvel allié Kingu.

Ea, toujours prêt à profiter d’une occasion favorable, présenta son fils comme la personne providentielle, le sauveur des dieux.

Il montra à ceux-ci qu’il leur fallait lui faire confiance, et en faire leur champion pour lutter contre leur mère.

Ce fut chose faite au cours d’un grand banquet organisé par Ea, qui fit élire Marduk comme maître de tous les dieux.

Après cela, le dieu de Babylone se rendit sur les lieux du combat.

Après une bataille terrible aux multiples péripéties, il réussit à défaire l’armée de Tiamat, avec les armes célestes dont il était muni.

Il vint ensuite à bout de la mère des dieux, et se servit de sa dépouille pour créer le Monde : il suspendit la première moitié du cadavre pour créer le Ciel (an), au dessus de la seconde moitié qui forma la Terre (ki) émergée de l’Apsû, la mer primordiale.

Il devint ainsi le maître des dieux et de tout le monde.

Ceux-ci élevèrent en un temple en son honneur sur les lieux mêmes du combat, là où il créa le Monde.

Ce temple devait être non seulement celui de Marduk, mais aussi celui de tous les dieux, érigé au “centre du monde”.

Ce temple fut nommé l’Esagil (“Maison à la tête élevée”), et tout autour se développa la ville sainte de Babylone.

Marduk créa ensuite l’Homme, pour permettre aux divinités de ne pas travailler, laissant cette lourde charge incomber à ces “substituts”.

Il fait cela à partir du sang de Kingu, qui est exécuté.

L’Homme est donc crée pour travailler pour les dieux ses maîtres, ce qui reste fidèle à la morale mésopotamienne.

L’Enûma Elish fait donc de Babylone et de son dieu les maîtres du monde.

La ville étant considérée comme le premier lieu à émerger de l’Apsû, est perçue comme le centre du Monde, représenté par l’Esagil, le temple de tous les dieux, et la ziggurat Etemenanki, la “Maison du Fondement du Ciel et de la Terre”.

La descente aux enfers

Ce mythe sumérien raconte comment la déesse Inanna, déjà déesse et reine du Ciel, a décidé de se rendre maître des enfers, où réside sa soeur et ennemie jurée Ereshkigal.

Elle décide pour cela de s’y rendre, mais prend quelques précautions avant.

Elle avertit son conseiller Ninshubur de ses intentions, et lui dit que si elle n’est pas de retour après trois jours et trois nuits, il doit aller prévenir Enlil, puis, si ce dernier n’accorde aucune aide, Nanna, et, enfin, en dernier recours, Enki.

Une fois cela fait, elle se rend au pays sans-retour.

Une fois aux protes de l’enfer, elle invente un prétexte pour pouvoir rencontrer sa soeur.

Mais celle-ci, avertie par son portier, pressent le danger.

Aussi, elle feint d’accepter et fait pénétrer Inanna dans son royaume, en la faisant passer sept portes.

A chacune d’elles, on lui enlève un bijou ou un vêtement, de sorte qu’elle se présente nue devant Ereshkigal.

Celle-ci appelle alors les Annunaki, les Sept Juges des Enfers, qui lui jettent le “regard de mort”, qui la tue.

Puis sa soeur fait pendre son cadavre à un clou.

Ne la voyant pas revenir, Ninshubur se rend chez Enlil à Nippur.

Mais ce dernier refuse d’aider Inanna, obligeant le vizir de celle-ci à se rendre à Ur, chez Nammu, qui a la même attitude.

Ninshubur se rend donc comme dit à Eridu, chez Enki, qui lui , accorde son aide à sa soeur.

Il confectionne deux êtres asexués, le Kurgarru, auquel il confie la “nourriture de vie”, et le Kalaturru, auquel il confie le “breuvage de vie”.

Il les envoie aux enfers, où ils se disent chargé de ramener le corps d’Inanna au ciel. Ereshkigal accepte, et ces derniers ramènent la déesse à la vie avec la nourriture et la boisson confiés par Enki/Ea.

Mais, si cette dernière veut sortir des enfers, elle doit trouver quelqu’un pour la remplacer. Aussi, elle remonte sur terre, accompagnée de démons envoyés par les dieux des enfers pour la surveiller, pour trouver la victime.

Elle se rend d’abord à Umma et à Bad-tibira, où les divinités tutélaires de ces villes se prosternent devant elle, échappant ainsi à la mort.

Elle visite ensuite Kullab, où réside son époux Dumuzi, qui lui l’accueille sur son trône, dans ses plus beaux vêtements.

Alors Inanna, furieuse de le voir aussi peu respectueux, dit aux démons de s’emparer de lui, et de l’emmener aux enfers à sa place.

Il est donc envoyé au pays sans-retour.

Cependant, sa soeur Geshtinanna intercède en sa faveur, et émeut Inanna, qui réclame sa libération.

Mais Ereshkigal ne cède qu’à la condition qu’il passe une moitié de l’année sur terre auprès de son amante, Geshtinanna le remplaçant aux enfers, avant de retourner dans l’autre

monde le reste de l’année.

A remarquer que sa sœur est aussi son amante , coutume ordinaire chez les atlantes

Etana

Selon la liste royale sumérienne, après le Déluge, la, royauté revint à Kish.

Le douzième roi est Etana, un berger, celui qui monta au ciel, celui qui consolida toutes les terres et son règne aurait été de 1 500 ans.

Les sceaux et les cylindres de cette période représentent un homme enlevé par un aigle, ce qui semble bien illustrer la légende.

Il est nommé dans l’Épopée de Gilgamesh parmi les personnages résidant en enfer et que voit Enkidu lors de sa descente dans l’autre monde .

Le mythe d’Etana nous est parvenu grâce à de nombreux fragments de tablettes paléobabyloniennes (Suse, Tell Harmal), médioassyriennes (Assur), et de la bibliothèque d’Assur-banipal à Ninive.

Si l’on en croit la tradition, son auteur serait Lu-Nanna, un sage ayant vécu sous le règne de Shulgi

Malgré le nombre de tablettes retrouvées, on n est pas encore parvenu à restituer le texte dans son ensemble

Tel qu’il se présente actuellement, il est découpé en trois parties bien distinctes.

Dans la première partie , les dieux dessinèrent la ville, il s’agit sans doute de Kish , les Anunnaki fixèrent les destins, les fêtes furent établies, mais il fallait trouver un roi, personnage en quête de qui se mit Inanna/Ishtar.

Une grande lacune ne permet pas de savoir la suite de cette quête, àlaquelle participe Enlil.

Dans la deuxième partie , on voit un aigle et un serpent qui décident de s’associer.

Ils jurent par les Enfers de rester toujours amis, appelant les pires malédictions sur celui qui transgresserait le traité.

Chacun à tour de rôle apporte de la nourriture dans l’ombre d’un peuplier sur une montagne où ils se sont installés et où ils ont établi chacun des petits.

Lorsque les petits aiglons sont devenus grands, l’aigle en son coeur conçut de mauvaises pensées…

Il décida de manger les petits de son allié

Il s’ouvre de cette soudaine fringale à ses enfants et leur dit que pour échapper à la colère du serpent il montera dans les cieux

Le plus jeune des petits, le plus intelligent, dit ces mots à l’aigle son père : Mon père, ne les mange pas : le filet de shamat te capturerait et te tiendraient captif

Mais l’aigle-ogre est têtu et, n’écoutant pas le sage conseil de son fils, mange les petits du serpent.

Plaintes et pleurs du serpent auprès de Amash, qui, en punition, jette l’aigle dans un trou d’où il ne peut sortir, de sorte qu’il est destiné à mourir de faim.

Apparaît alors Étana, qui rappelle à Amash qu’il l’a honoré, en foi de quoi il lui demande de lui donner la plante d’enfantement ,  parce que son épouse reste stérile.

Le dieu l’envoie alors vers le trou, où l’aigle est relégué, afin qu’il lui donne cette plante.

La troisième partie évoque la rencontre d’Étana et de l’aigle, qui accepte le marché selon lequel, semble-t-il, il devra emporter Étana dans le ciel pour y trouver la plante.

L’aigle invite Étana à se placer sur sa poitrine , a ouvrir les bras le long de ses ailes puis il prend son vol.

Il est évident que l’on entre dans un avion par la poitrine et non par le dos !

A l’altitude de deux doubles lieues ( 8.000 mètres ) , l’ aigle dit a Etana :

Regarde mon ami comment est le pays , ce n’est plus qu une colline !

A trois doubles lieues ( 12.000 mètres ) l’ aigle dit à Etana :

Regarde mon ami comment est le pays , la mer est devenue comme une rigole autour d’un lopin de jardinier !

Ils continuent de s’élever dans les cieux, passent la porte d’Anu, d’Enlil et d’Éa.

Puis, Étana semble vouloir redescendre, sans doute par crainte, mais l’aigle veut continuer de monter jusqu’au ciel d’Ishtar la souveraine qui garde la plante d’enfantement.

L’aigle pose alors d’une manière répétitive la question de savoir comment est le pays, en bas, devenu un jardin, la vaste mer étant comme un baquet, puis le pays n’est plus visible.

Etana refuse ensuite d’être emporté plus haut encore par l’aigle, qui, finalement, lui obéit et le fait promptement descendre sur terre

Ainsi, le héros semble avoir échoué dans sa tentative de montée au ciel, et peut-être la conclusion en tirait-elle la morale : l’homme ne peut accéder au domaine des dieux

L’Épopée de Gilgamesh

Gilgamesh était souverain de la ville sumérienne d’Uruk.

Sous son règne, trois millénaires environ avant Jésus-Christ, les Urukiens s’emparèrent des cités voisines, et gouvernaient toute la région de leur cité état

Le texte le plus complet de cette épopée provient de la bibliothèque constituée par le roi Assurbanipal, peu avant la destruction de Ninive, au VIIe siècle avant notre ère.

Roi tyrannique, Gilgamesh accapare les jeunes filles pour ses plaisirs, décime la jeunesse dans ses guerres, exténue les plus âgés dans la construction des murailles qui entourent Uruk.

Tant et si bien que le peuple en appelle aux dieux, qui créent Enkidu, l’homme d’argile, l’homme des bois, afin qu’il serve d’exutoire à l’énergie débordante du souverain , car Gilgamesh consommait aussi bien les jeunes hommes que les jeunes femmes

Une courtisane est alors chargée d’initier Enkidu et de l’introduire à Uruk, où il défie Gilgamesh qui venait exiger son droit de cuissage auprès d’une jeune mariée.

À l’issue du combat fabuleux qui les oppose, Enkidu est vaincu, et les anciens ennemis se jurent une amitié éternelle.

Gilgamesh et lui partent pour la Forêt des Cèdres et affrontent Huwawa, le féroce gardien des arbres.

Protégés par la déesse Ninsun, la mère de Gilgamesh, par Shamash, le dieu du soleil, aidés dans leur mission par la tempête, ils abattent le géant.

De retour à Uruk, Gilgamesh repousse les avances de la grande déesse Ishtar qui est tombée amoureuse de lui

Offensée, la déesse obtient de son père qu’il lance un Taureau Céleste contre les deux guerriers pour sa vengeance.

Mais les deux amis tuent le monstre, arrachent son coeur pour l’offrir au dieu du soleil et Enkidu jette sa cuisse au visage d’lshtar.

Courroucés, les dieux décrètent la mort de l’un des deux champions , beaucoup plus fachés à cause du meurtre d’Huwawa, la mort du Taureau Céleste, et la violence faite aux cèdres sacrés, que par l’affront subit par Ishtar.

Enkidu est frappé d’un mal fatal, et les lamentations de Gilgamesh sur la dépouille de son ami sont les moments les plus déchirants du poème.

Gilgamesh, hanté par la mort d’Enkidu, décide alors de parcourir le monde en quête de l’immortalité.

Il rencontre Utnapishtim, le héros rescapé du déluge, qui réside à l’autre bout du monde, dans le Jardin du Soleil.

On retrouve le jardin des immortels dont nous avons déjà parlé dans le chapitre des asiates et qui se situent aux mont Kun Lun

Utnapishtim révèle à Gilgamesh que les dieux se sont adjugé la vie éternelle et qu’aux hommes, ils ont réservé la mort.

Il conte ensuite le récit du déluge , et démontre à Gilgamesh que si les hommes ne peuvent dominer le sommeil, ils sont encore moins les maîtres de leurs jours.

Néanmoins, Utnapishtim, apitoyé, apprend à Gilgamesh l’existence de l’herbe de Jouvence  

Le héros parvient à s’emparer de la plante qui restitue la jeunesse mais, harassé de fatigue, il se la laisse dérober par un serpent.

Gilgamesh est enfin de retour dans son royaume, conscient d’avoir perdu l’éternité.

Il a appris que les temples et les jardins qui cernent sa ville sont les seules formes d’immortalité auxquelles il puisse prétendre.

Et lorsqu’il s’éteint, les Urukiens pleurent sa perte.

Mais Gilgamesh ne s’était pas trompé: au XXe siècle, des archéologues ont mis à jour les vestiges des murailles d’Uruk, et d’autres ont découvert, à plusieurs milliers de kilomètres de là, à Sutton Hoo, sur les côtes de la mer du Nord, un bijou gravé à l’effigie du roi de Sumer en train d’étrangler deux lions.

Sargon d’Akkad

La mère de Sargon , une grande prêtresse , le mit au monde en secret et le déposa dans une corbeille entourée de bitume qu’elle jeta dans le fleuve

La corbeille avec le bébé dériva jusqu’à ce qu’un puiseur d’eau, nommé Aqqi, le trouve, l’adopte, l’élève et lui enseigne son métier de jardinier.

Ca ne vous rappelles pas quelque chose ? ………

Devenu le serviteur d’Ur-Zabada, le roi de Kish, il parvint au rang d’échanson.

Un jour il se révolta contre son bienfaiteur, le détrôna et marcha sur URUK où régnait le très-puissant LUGALZAGESI.

Après avoir conquis la ville par surprise, il fit détruire ses remparts et parvint durant la bataille à capturer le grand roi.

Sargon fit enfermer Lugalzagesi dans un carcan et le transporta jusqu’au temple d’Enlil à NIPPUR, la capitale spirituelle de la Mésopotamie.

En se faisant introniser à Nippur, Sargon le sémite mésopotamien devint le premier roi de la dynastie d’Akkad.

Il se construisit un véritable empire qui allait déborder bien au-delà des frontières.

Même en se déclarant le ” OINT d’Anum ” et le vicaire d’Enlil, Sargon respecta les convictions religieuses des nombreux temples sumériens.

Après avoir conquis UR, il y installa sa fille Enheduanna comme grande prêtresse du dieu-lune : NANNA.

Puis il s’empara des cités de Lagash et d’Umma, et attaqua les villes du Haut-Pays de Mésopotamie pour soumettre les trois grandes villes : ” Ebla, Iamarti et Mari ” qui durent désormais lui verser un important tribut annuel.

L’ambition de Sargon ne s’arrêta pas là, il engagea son armée dans deux campagnes en Elam (Perse/Iran) pour soumettre les deux principautés d’Awan et de Warahshe (son allié).

Les villes furent pillées mais non détruites.

Sargon vassalisa les deux chefs et reçut leur soumission.

Puis il entra dans SUSE, le chef lieu de l’ELAM qu’il transforma en ” capitale de l’Elam ” tout en laissant le pouvoir à son ancien vice-roi.

Grâce aux nombreux esclaves qu’il avait ramené de ses lointaines campagnes, Sargon fit élargir et entretenir d’innombrables canaux d’irrigation pour cultiver les céréales.

Entre Kish et Babilim (la future Babylone), il fit surgir de terre sa “nouvelle capitale royale AGADE” avec son immense palais et ses doubles remparts de fortifications.

Comme cette ville se situe sur l’ancien tracé de l’Euphrate, il fit agrandir le port afin de pouvoir y accueillir tous les navires de l’époque, puis il institua un système de contrôle permanent en établissant des postes de contrôle et de transmission de cavalerie tous les 50 km. Chaque poste était surveillé et géré par un officier royal.

Selon la légende qui raconte ses exploits il aurait amené son armée en Crête, à Chypre et même dans la lointaine Anatolie.

Sargon qui fut roi pendant cinquante six ans se disait le protégé de la déesse Ishtar, ce qui ne l’empêcha, malgré son âge avancé, de défendre avec acharnement son trône tant convoité , contre des révoltes incessantes

When Hezekiah became king of Judah in 715 B.C., Assyria was the dominant power in the Ancient Near East. During his reign, all of Hezekiah’s actions, his political and economic reforms, and his alliances with Egypt were preparation for his revolt against Assyria.

The siege of Samaria began under the Assyrian king Shalmaneser V (726-722). However, he died just before the city was conquered. The conquest of the Northern Kingdom was finished by Sargon II. When Sargon became king in 722, he incorporated Samaria into the Assyrian empire. He deported 27,290 citizens of the Northern Kingdom to Assyria.

Under Ahaz, Judah had become a protectorate of Assyria and paid tribute to their overlord every year. During the reign of Sargon, Judah continued as a satellite state of Assyria and Hezekiah continued paying the yearly tribute.

When Sargon became king, many nations controlled by Assyria revolted against the empire. Sargon’s attention was required somewhere else, leaving Palestine free to recover somewhat politically. Babylon, under Merodach-baladan (2 Kings 20:12, Isaiah 39:1) revolted against Assyria (720 B.C.).

With the help of the Elamites, Babylon broke free from Assyrian control for twelve years. Urartu, the Assyrian enemy to the north, revolted in 719 B.C. Phrygia, a city in Asia Minor, and Carchemish, a Hittite city in North Syria, revolted against Assyria at this time. Sargon invaded Asia Minor and deported most of the population to other parts of the empire. The Medes, a group of people from the Iranian plateau, revolted in 715 B.C.

Because of political instability in his empire, Sargon was unable to embark on any significant campaign into Palestine for several years following the fall of Samaria in 722 B.C. In 716 B.C. Piankhi, an Ethiopian king, became king of Egypt. Piankhi’s policy was to unify Egypt and to extend Egypt’s control to Asia. With the presence of Egypt in Asia, Assyrian vassals in Palestine turned to Egypt for help against Assyria.

Several of the Philistine cities revolted against Assyria in 714 B.C. in what is commonly known as the Ashdod Rebellion. Ashdod withheld its tribute and other Philistine towns also rebelled. Egypt had political interests in this rebellion. According to Assyrian documents, Judah, Edom, and Moab were invited to participate in the rebellion.

Hezekiah was tempted to join the alliance and may have discussed this possibility with Egypt since Isaiah says that Egypt sent ambassadors in what the prophet sarcastically called “vessels of papyrus” (Isaiah 18:1-2). Both the desire for political freedom from Assyria and the requirement of paying the annual tribute to Assyria were strong motivating factors that almost prompted Hezekiah to join this rebellion.

The prophet Isaiah strongly opposed the revolt against Assyria (see Isaiah 20:1-4). According to the text, Isaiah walked around naked and barefoot to demonstrate what would happen to Egypt and Ethiopia and the foolishness of trusting in them for help. Although the text is silent on Hezekiah’s decision, it is clear that he listened to Isaiah’s words and did not participate in the revolt for when Sargon crushed the revolt, Judah did not suffer any reprisal from Assyria.

After Sargon’s decisive demonstration of force, Hezekiah made no other overt act of rebellion against Assyria. As long as Sargon ruled, Judah remained a vassal and paid the annual tribute to Assyria. However, while Hezekiah continued paying the annual tribute, he quietly began his preparations for revolt.

These preparations for a possible revolt included a concerted effort to arm Judah, to prepare for war, and to plan against a siege of Jerusalem. As discussed in a previous post, Hezekiah prepared for his revolt against Assyria by making weapons and setting combat commanders over the people, by preparing storehouses for the harvest, stalls for the animals, by rebuilding the broken walls of Jerusalem, by strengthening the Millo, and by making a water tunnel to bring water into Jerusalem.

In 705 the opportunity for rebellion against Assyria became a possibility. Sargon was killed in a battle and his death motivated several of the vassal nations to revolt against Assyrian domination. When Sennacherib, Sargon’s son, ascended the throne, he immediately took steps to deal with vassal rebellion against his kingdom. Merodach-baladan had revolted against Assyria and regained his throne in Babylon. With Elamite help, Merodach-baladan fought against Assyria until 702 when Sennacherib was able to subdue Babylon. At the same time Sennacherib was fighting against Babylon, rebellion broke out in the west and it was into this situation that Judah was eventually drawn.

It was in the midst of this political upheaval that Merodach-baladan sent messengers to Hezekiah to congratulate him for recovering from his illness (2 Kings 20: 12-19; Isaiah 39:1-8). It is possible that the real purpose of the Babylonian embassy was to gain Judah’s assistance in the Babylonian struggle against the Assyrian stronghold.

Scholars are not in agreement with the purpose of the Babylonian visit. However, since Merodach-baladan was fighting against Sennacherib and Assyrian imperialism, it is possible that he wanted to enlist potential allies or at the very least promote diversionary rebellions to occupy Sennacherib’s attention which would then relieve Assyrian pressure from the Babylonian army.

According to the Deuteronomic historian, sometime after Sargon’s death in 705 B. C., Hezekiah withheld his tribute from Assyria: “He rebelled against the king of Assyria, and would not serve him” (2 Kings 18:7). This act of defiance was an open declaration of rebellion against Assyria.

Hezekiah took action against some of the Philistine cities that refused to join in the revolt (2 Kings 18:8). According to Sennacherib’s inscription, the people of Ekron deposed their king, who was loyal to the Assyrians, and delivered him to Hezekiah who kept him captive in Jerusalem.

Hezekiah sent an embassy to Egypt asking for help. Isaiah opposed this alliance with Egypt and called it “a covenant with death” (Isaiah 28:15). He warned against the revolt by declaring that an alliance with Egypt would bring disaster to Judah:

“Oh, rebellious children, says the LORD, who carry out a plan, but not mine; who make an alliance, but against my will, adding sin to sin; who set out to go down to Egypt without asking for my counsel, to take refuge in the protection of Pharaoh, and to seek shelter in the shadow of Egypt; Therefore the protection of Pharaoh shall become your shame, and the shelter in the shadow of Egypt your humiliation” (Isaiah 30:1-3 NRSV).

While Isaiah was successful in stopping Hezekiah from revolting against Sargon during the Ashdod Rebellion in 714 B.C., he was unsuccessful in stopping Hezekiah from revolting against Sennacherib. Scholars have suggested that Hezekiah’s revolt against Assyria came as a result of his illness. Since Hezekiah became very sick and was at the point of death (2 Kings 20:1), it is possible that he became too incapacitated to handle the duties of the kingdom and that his princes and nobles took the initiative to enter into this alliance with Egypt.

It is also possible that the anti-Assyrian faction in his government pressured him to revolt against Assyria and that he was the one who decided to establish the alliance with Egypt. Regardless of the motivation behind the alliance with Egypt, the decision to revolt had been made and there was nothing else to do but to prepare for the coming of Sennacherib and the siege of Jerusalem.

Other posts on Hezekiah:

1. Hezekiah , King of Judah

2. Hezekiah’s Religious Reforms

3. Hezekiah’s Political and Economic Reforms

Claude Mariottini
Professor of Old Testament
Northern Baptist Seminary

Tags: Assyria, Hezekiah, Sargon

var addthis_pub = ‘claude mariottini’;

Download a worksheet for further study

Prologue

Where we are:

When this takes place:

Chapter 14 likely takes place at the beginning of Hezekiah’s reign.

Key verse:

Isa. 14:27:  The Lord of Hosts Himself has planned it; therefore, who can stand in its way? It is His hand that is outstretched, so who can turn it back?

Quick summary:

Chapters 13-24 feature a series of divine oracles, or declarations, against the nations surrounding Israel. The great powers of Isaiah’s day, and days to come, that set themselves against the Lord of Hosts will be brought low; only the coming kingdom of the Messiah will endure the test of time.

Take note:

Many Bible commentators point with fascination to verses 12-15. Do these verses speak of a Babylonian king, or of Satan? Perhaps both. In what is known as the “law of double reference,” Isaiah may be showing us Satanic qualities in evil earthly leaders, just as other Old Testament prophets use godly leaders to foreshadow the coming Messiah. In any case, both Satan and evil rulers will be brought low.

Israel’s Return (Isa. 14:1-2)

Although judgment will fall on God’s rebellious people, the Lord will “choose Israel again” (v. 1). Their restoration is grounded in their election as God’s chosen people (see Ps. 102:13-22). God’s choosing of Israel – as well as Judah, Jerusalem, David and Solomon – is an important Old Testament theme, especially in 1 and 2 Chronicles and the Psalms.

The fact that non-Israelites (“the nations”) will join Israel also is an important teaching in Scripture (see, for example, Isa. 56:6; 60:10; 61:5). Israel’s role will be reversed. Rather than captives, they will be captors. And rather than exiles, they will reside safely in their homeland, a nation restored to international prominence as in the days of King David.

Israel’s Taunt against Babylon (Isa. 14:3-23)

Verses 3-21 record a song, or a taunt, that will be sung by people freed from the clutches of the king of Babylon. “The song’s overall message is that people will be amazed that this great king is cast down like the monarchs of other cities. People will rejoice in his demise for they had lived in fear of him” (John F. Walvoord, Roy B. Zuck, The Bible Knowledge Commentary : An Exposition of the Scriptures, S. 1:1061).

But who is this king of Babylon? Many commentators believe he is Satan, especially based on the description in verses 12-14. Tertullian (A.D. 160-230) and Gregory the Great (A.D. 540-604) were the first to offer this view, which is now widely accepted. In the New Testament, Jesus uses language similar to that of Isaiah’s to describe Satan (Luke 10:18). However, while verses 12-14, along with Ezek. 28:12-19, could describe Satan’s pride and subsequent downfall, the context of Isaiah 14 points squarely to an earthly king. It’s possible that Isaiah is employing the “law of double reference” in this passage, showing us Satanic qualities in evil earthly leaders, just as other Old Testament prophets use godly leaders to foreshadow the coming Messiah. In support of this view, let’s consider King Sennacherib.

Sennacherib rules Assyria from 705-681 B.C. By this time in history, Babylon is a vassal state under the authority of the Assyrian empire. For example, Tiglath-Pileser III, a predecessor of Sennacherib, crushes a Babylonian revolt and is crowned king of Babylon in 728 B.C. Though Nineveh is the capital of Assyria, Babylon becomes its cultural center and the Babylonian god Marduk is widely worshiped throughout the Assyrian empire. Assyria’s Sargon II (B.C. 722-705) and Sennacherib also call themselves kings of Babylon.

After Sargon dies in 705 B.C. and Sennacherib becomes king, there is much rebellion throughout the Assyrian empire, including Babylon. In 689 B.C., Sennacherib marches on Babylon to subdue the rebellion. He destroys the city and floods the ruins, although it is rebuilt years later. Sennacherib’s assassination in 681 B.C. (2 Kings 19:37) is welcome news to the surrounding nations, especially Judah.

The song-taunt of verses 3-23 features two dominant themes, according to D.A. Carson. “The broken oppressor is the first theme [vv. 4b-11]; his real epitaph is the unspeakable relief the world feels at his passing. God’s name for such thrusters is not ‘men of destiny’ but ‘he-goats’ (the literal meaning of the Hebrew word translated leaders [in verse] 9), a description almost as deflating as the pathetic state to which they are all seen to come…. The fallen morning star is the second theme [vv. 12-21], i.e. the tyrant’s fatal ambition rather than his oppression…. The idea of storming heaven … was certainly connected with Babylon (i.e. Babel; Gn. 11). One of its ironies is the idea that to be like the Most High (14) is to be self-exalted, whereas it is to be self-giving (cf. Phil. 2:5-11.). The ugliness as well as the brevity of the false glory is powerfully shown in vs 16-21″ (The New Bible Commentary: 21st Century Edition, Is 14:3).

Judgment on Assyria (Isa. 14:24-27)

Though Assyria ultimately would fall to Babylon in 605 B.C., this prophecy refers to the kingdom’s defeat on the “mountains” of Israel (v. 25), a reference to the work of the Angel of the Lord who destroys 185,000 Assyrians in 701 B.C. (see 2 Kings 19; Isa. 37:36-38).

Judgment on Philistia (Isa. 14:28-32)

These verses tell of a critical test of faith for Hezekiah. Judah’s King Ahaz, who was pro-Assyrian, is now dead. The Philistines approach his successor, Hezekiah, and propose an allied rebellion against the weakened Assyria. Such a plot is tempting to Hezekiah, and even if it weren’t, the Philistines are not a people to be offended at this time (see 2 Chron. 28:18-19). What should the king do? The Lord provides a three-fold response. First, the Assyrians are not finished (v. 29). Second, the Philistines are a doomed people (vv. 30b-31). And third, true warfare is in the hands of God (vv. 30a, 32). The bottom line: trust God, not human alliances or intrigue.

Final Thought

Gary V. Smith comments: “Every generation of leaders is called to acts of faith, to choose a path of utter dependence on God rather than alternatives that initially look more defensible. People are challenged not to do what may seem the most reasonable thing from a human perspective, but to do what God instructs them to do…. The circumstances may be a health crisis, the loss of a job, or an international political crisis, but the answer is always the same: trust in God for refuge. Most of the time people know what God would want them to do. The really difficult question is: Are they willing to follow God’s direction?” (New American Commentary: Isaiah 1-39, p. 326)

Copyright 2009 by Rob Phillips