Pseudo-history, and related issues

[Eleatic Guest]

Where we do have sources (Babylonia, Egypt), we witness adaptation, but no withering away. You may be right, but I would love to see more evidence.

Well, come to think of it, in my view at least the evidence for Babylonia is pretty straightforward. While the ancient Mesopotamian tradition appeared as late as the 6th century BC as vigorous as ever, cuneiform and Elamite had all died out by the 4th century BC. And what is more revealing, Mesopotamia ceased under the Persians to be that exporter of culture, technology and ideas it had been for millenia. If there were cultural impulses, there were coming at the time from the west, not the east which remained materially rich, but without any persuasive power.

I am not sure how much the Persians are to be blamed for that process. After all they were but a thin ruling class which itself borrowed most heavily from Ancient Near Eastern traditions. But the break in the region's history with Alexander is too obvious. When he came, he met an array of former glorious cultures already in the demise, otherwise Hellenism could not have been so successful.

I believe the ultimate (anthropological) reason was that with the loss of political independence and self-determination, the subject people also lost the will to shape their destiny and to continue their traditions.