The Art of Bonsai

The art of bonsai has an ancient history and it is difficult to pinpoint just when it began. The origins of bonsai can be traced back through the history of the development of bonsai in Japan and earlier in China.

As with other forms of art, bonsai would have been developed from activities which were based on practical needs.

The idea of planting a tree in a pot would not occur spontaneously in a fully formed manner. It would evolve over a period of time from the influence of other ideas associated with the cultivation of plants. In particular the growing of plants primarily for their beauty of colour or form, combined with lack of space in which to grow them would have been the genesis of bonsai.

The origins of cultivated gardens go back many hundreds of years, to the area known as the Fertile Crescent in what is present day Iraq. The first recorded occurrence of gardens grown for the pleasure they provided would appear to be the magnificent Hanging Gardens of Babylon. These gardens were reputed to have been built around 600BC by Nebuchadnezzar II, and are considered to be one of the Seven Wonders of the Ancient World.

The hanging gardens featured trees and other plants growing in containers. Large containers certainly, but the people of that time obviously had the knowledge and the skill to grow plants in a restricted space.

It would seem unlikely though, that they practiced bonsai gardening in a form that would in anyway resemble the art of bonsai as we know it today. The first reference to what we term bonsai occurred in China during the Tang Dynasty, (618 – 907). It shows however, that the ability to grow plants in containers was developed as an established practice over 2600 years ago, well before the Hanging gardens were built.

One theory concerning the development of bonsai clams that herbalists wishing to transport herbs, began growing them in containers for this purpose. This would not provide a very practical solution, given the means of transport in those times. To carry a number of small earthenware pots containing plants on a horse or donkey, or even in a cart, would be most difficult. The practice of first drying the leaves or roots required and carrying them in that form provides a far easier and more efficient method of transport, a method still used to the present day.

The first examples of trees and plants being grown in small containers have therefore come from China. The idea, introduced into Japan around 1195AD, and further developed and refined by the Japanese became the beautiful art of bonsai with which we are familiar today.

Top 20 Best Afghanistan War Documentaries

Thanks to advances in modern technology, the war in Afghanistan has been captured by journalists in quality we have never seen before in war documentaries, getting us closer to the action then ever before. I have always had trouble finding them in the past so I made a list of my personal top 20 favorite Afghanistan war documentaries.

These are arranged in no particular order:

  1. Ross Kemp in Afghanistan
  2. Ross Kemp Return to Afghanistan
  3. Taking on the Taliban
  4. Pathfinders: Into the Heart of Afghanistan
  5. Restrepo
  6. Fighting the Taliban
  7. Behind Taliban Lines
  8. Battlefield Afghanistan
  9. Commando: On the Front Line
  10. The Last Outpost
  11. 3 Commando Hunting the Taliban
  12. Bravos Deadly Mission
  13. Frontline Afghanistan
  14. Tip of the Spear
  15. Armadillo
  16. Meeting the Taliban
  17. Afghanistan: The Forgotten War
  18. 3 Bloody Summers
  19. Behind Enemy Lines
  20. Inside the Green Berets

There are so many documentaries out there its hard to narrow them down to 20 and there are new ones released all the time. For the first time ever we are watching high quality footage whilst the war still continues. Hopefully for peace’s sake it will end soon but in the meantime I’m sure there will be many more war documentaries released that get us even closer to the action.

One particular documentary that has been released recently is Restrepo. This is the first Afghanistan War Documentary to receive massive amounts of exposure and its good to see that there is enough of an interest out there. Although us civilians can never truly understand what war is like, thanks to documentaries like Restrepo we are bridging the gap a little bit.

Restrepo was filmed in 2007 in the mountainous region of the Korengal Valley and was considered the most dangerous posting in the military. Bordering Pakistan, Mujahedeen fighters were never in short supply. Men posted to the Korengal outpost ‘The KOP’ were in engaged in firefights daily, and were responsible for 70% of air ordnance used throughout Afghanistan in 2007. CNN dubbed the Korengal ‘the deadliest place on earth.’ Their task was to provide a security presence in the area so that a road could be built connecting local towns. An attempt at stimulating the local economy and to win the hearts and minds of the people.

Restrepo is a feature length documentary which allows you to immerse yourself in the Korengal as much as an outsider can, and gives you plenty of time to get to know the characters of Second Platoon. As you can imagine, the film is packed full of action. From an IED blast to A-10 gun runs it has it all. It has a beautiful blend of action, quiet times on the OP, humour and sombre reality. It doesn’t overwhelm you with emotion, or overstimulate you with action. Restrepo is a ride any war documentary enthusiast has to experience.

If I had to give my own personal top 5 I would have to include: Taking on the Taliban, Ross Kemp in Afghanistan, Bravos Deadly Mission, Armadillo and Restrepo.

I found these Afghanistan war documentaries at http://wardocumentaryfilms.com. It has an awesome archive of films. There is at least 50 Afghanistan war documentaries but it also has the Vietnam War, Iraq War, World War 2, World War 1, Korea, the American Civil War, video on military training, survival skills, and aviation

Stress – The Biggest Trigger Behind Type 2 Diabetes

The centuries-old concept states that diabetes mellifluous is usually caused by factors such as obesity, overall poor health, and genetic predisposition. Yet, there is a considerable rise in cases of type 2 diabetes in people who are healthy to the point of being athletic and do not have any family history of this disease. What the layman has missed and the scientists have worked on is the link between diabetes and another serious medical symptom – stress.

There are some researches to back up this claim. According to a study, which was conducted under the US Department of Defense, a majority of the soldiers who fought in Afghanistan and Iraq exhibited symptoms of poor health with conditions such as diabetes, obesity, and hypertension. The research concluded they were a result of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). Also, in a 2013 study, a statistically significant link was found between stress and diabetes. Ever since then, scientists are studying the connection more deeply.

How does Stress Cause Diabetes

Stress is similar to the feeling of being under attack. The attack could be either physical or mental. When a person feels threatened like that, they enter a condition called fight or flight. This is a natural defense mechanism against stressful situations that increase the secretion of various hormones in the body.

The purpose of this hormonal activity is to supply stored energy to the cells so they could work to get away from the danger. Usually, the stress is a short-term trigger and the hormonal shoot up goes down as the cause of the disturbance is removed. However, when the problem bothering someone is long term, insulin fails to transport the required energy into the cells. As a result, the extra sugar is released into the blood continuously triggering diabetes.

Stress in Diabetics

Stress alters the blood sugar levels for the worse in two ways:

1. The stressed out person stops taking care of their health. They might stop exercising, suffer from insomnia, and start smoking or begin using drugs or alcohol. Poor health maintenance can then trigger diabetes.

2. Direct alteration of blood glucose levels as explained earlier.

The science has accepted the link between the increasing cases of diabetes and the general discontent leading to increased levels of stress in the masses. Therefore, it is high time for us to pay attention to our mental well being in addition to controlling our diets and maintaining physical health. This is one of the most effective ways to fight off this dangerous disease.

The Sad Effects of Wars – Doing More Harm Than Good

The amount of migrations – people fleeing war from Iraq and Syria, and many other places – have reached a level too high for this world to contain, thereby creating a refugee crisis Mankind has ever encountered; women and their children have become casualties of a broken world system; the do-nothing group of incompetent leaders don’t seem to have a good handle of how to bring these unwanted wars – to an end.

They are too good at starting wars, not ending them. It is without a doubt that ancient man fought wars, but for good reason. Ancient man went to war to fight for his rights, land, against bad policy, etc., not murdering innocent children on a mass scale.

What I see happen puts incompetent world leaders inline with ISIS, where their selfish desires are placed above all else. I can only imagine how these people (world leaders) sleep at night, when so many children and women do not have a place to call home, let alone a descent meal to eat, each day.

Everything that separates modern man is indicative of bad policy, and can no longer be regarded as business as usual; this is as real as it is every responsible person’s nightmare. If you have children, then perhaps you have a genuine reason to speak out against war, unwanted wars that have brought so much suffering to the human race. These wars have brought the Middle East to a near-halt, and redrawn the world map.

Why? Why? Why? We are in 2016, 2,016 years away from the beginning of time, in the 21st century, for God’s sake, and still fighting unwanted wars? The foundation upon which our home, our world, is laid is beginning to crack… ever so slightly…

The world is a stronger and much better place to live when all four pillars of earth are strong and balanced, if one falters, it makes the entire world weak and vulnerable to unpleasant circumstances, and with too many loose ends. And when that is the case, there will be no battalion well equipped, well-trained to contain what is yet to come! Join me in saying no to war! Wars are not good for us wherever we come. We are the world! Show your support for immigrants from war-torn countries…

It is in the best interest of every responsible individual to help create an atmosphere we want – for our children and grandchildren.

The Fascinating History Of Backgammon

Backgammon has a long fascinating history of more than 5000 years, making it one of the oldest games in civilization. The earliest backgammon board, from an early version of the game, was found circa 3000 B.C. in the royal cemetery in Ur of the Chaldees in southern Mesopotamia(now called Iraq), the birthplace of Abraham.

The game has been played around the world and throughout recorded history. A form of the game was enjoyed by the Egyptian Pharoahs; boards dating from 1500 B.C. were found in King Tut’s tomb. Wall paintingsin many Egyptian tombs portray people playing the game, indicating that it was played by the common people as well as the Pharaohs. A thousand years later, the Greeks were playing a form of the game. Homer, Sophocles, and Plato mention the game in their works. In Rome, the game long remained one of the most popular among the patricians. Emperor Claudius reportedly wrote a book on backgammon.

The excavators of Pompeii found a backgammon table in the courtyard of almost every villa. Various early versions of the game were popular in Britain, dating from the Crusades. It has always been a favourite game of the English. It is believed that the current form of the game evolved in the tenth century. Backgammon has been played in the United States since the seventeenth century.

However, the doubling cube was only introduced to the game in the early 1920s by an anonymous genius. This greatly enhanced the quality of backgammon and increased its popularity in the United States. The game had another surge of interest in the 1970s, but has waned in popularity in recent years due primarily to the advent of video and computer games.

When backgammon is played with the right people and strategy, it can be a very fascinating and addictive game for everybody. Hopefully, interest in this ancient game will increase in the near future. Perhaps, if more people discover the real game of backgammon, it will regain the popularity that it deserves.

For more information on the playing backgammon online, learning backgammon rules or getting backgammon board, please visit the following website: Backgammon Guide

The Pope And The President – A Glimpse Of The Future

For those who observed it closely, the recent perfunctory meeting of Pope Benedict XVI and President Bush at the Vatican offered a glimpse at what future relations between the United States and the Holy See will be like. In most respects, it appeared to be a typical rendezvous between two heads of state. The pontiff welcomed Bush cordially, setting the tone for a relaxed thirty-five minute discussion that was nearly as cordial. The two dignitaries discussed areas of mutual interest and concern including religious freedom, human rights, and the deteriorating political and economic situation in Africa and the Middle East. When they had finished talking, the Pope and president followed the usual diplomatic custom of exchanging gifts: Bush offered Benedict a walking stick carved with the Ten Commandments, while Benedict presented Bush with an engraving of St. Peter’s Basilica and a gold medallion representing his pontificate.

But the very typical nature of this meeting between two such different leaders ought to make observers suspicious. Indeed, when I read articles from various media outlets describing it, I immediately had a sense that it was an attractive veneer, a mere formality lacking substance. This is not to question the sincerity of either President Bush or Pope Benedict; I believe that both men have tried to do their best given their respective abilities and circumstances. Rather, it was evident that underneath their civility, occasional pleasant humor, and agreement on fundamental moral issues, a cauldron of definite mutual uneasiness-generated by the fire of major disagreement-was simmering.

To most people around the world, it is well known that Pope Benedict and President Bush have taken opposing stands on a wide range of matters. Benedict has firmly opposed the war in Iraq which Bush has insisted on continuing. Benedict has called for universal nuclear disarmament, while Bush has maintained the importance of strengthening his nation’s arsenal. Benedict has called for aid to the Palestinian people, while Bush has refused such aid citing allegations that the Hamas government has been involved in terrorism. Benedict has stressed the importance of international law, multilateralism, and the United Nations in conducting international affairs, whereas Bush has insisted that the United States must take whatever actions necessary to preserve its own security and that of Israel. Benedict has warned against the perversion of free-market capitalism-especially on its global scale-into a vehicle for unlimited selfishness, while Bush has consistently implied that all leaders who regulate their national economies or who completely oppose the entrance of this laissez-faire system into their countries are enemies of the United States.

However, these differences are not impossible to reconcile. After all, both the US president and His Holiness have arrived at these views on the basis of the same moral concepts. What they differ on is in understanding and correct application of those ideas. For example, President Bush supports the Iraq war as a means of combating terrorism and ultimately ensuring the freedom of the Iraqi people; Pope Benedict opposes the same war as being severely destructive to the Iraqi people and nation, a violation of international law, and a futile attempt to rein in “Islamic” terrorism. Similarly, Benedict has emphasized the urgency of economic development aid for Africa and other poverty-stricken regions as a duty of justice that will further world peace, whereas Bush has placed military spending for national security far ahead of foreign aid on the ground that the duty to protect his own people from terrorism comes before helping foreigners out. Both leaders acknowledge the concepts of freedom, justice, the rule of law, security, solidarity, and peace; their disagreements revolve around the issue of how to implement those concepts-as well as the even stickier question of how to keep them all in proper balance.

A chief goal of Pope Benedict XVI’s pontificate is unity-but not a superficial kind of unity in which serious disagreements are forced below the surface. Rather, the Pope is helping to build worldwide unity of internal convictions and external objectives on the basis of the true, fundamental moral values that all peoples hold in common. His gentle personality and towering intellectual status render him amply suited to this challenging task.

Meanwhile, the overriding goal of President Bush’s administration is to eradicate the international “Islamic” terrorist movement. The president has striven for unity among the nations of the world in confronting this menace with a “War on Terrorism”, but instead his policies have led to a worsening of divisions in the international community and a global quadrupling of the terrorism rate since 2001.

Differing levels of personal respect arising from the actions and policies of both the president and the Pope also contributed to the uneasy atmosphere of their tête-à-tête. The pontiff is well aware that Bush has been accused of and is responsible for hundreds of war crimes in Afghanistan and Iraq, from cluster-bombing innocent villages to torturing and abusing prisoners to dropping missiles on mosques and hospitals to assassinating scores of journalists. Though President Bush has unequivocally invoked the extreme circumstances of a “War on Terrorism” to justify these acts, Pope Benedict has been just as unequivocal in his condemnation of them. At the same time, Bush seems to hold an enormous respect for, as well as attraction to, the Successor of Saint Peter. At a press conference after the meeting, the American head of state said he was “in awe” at the Holy Father, whom he described as “a very smart, loving man”. Furthermore, prior to the meeting, Bush had expressed his decision not to argue with the pontiff, telling reporters he would be in a “listening mode”-a rare attitude for this particular president to adopt.

All of these factors combined to shape the high-level diplomatic exchange. Discussing the G-8 summit he had just attended, Bush remarked that it was “successful”. Pope Benedict replied, “Successful? You had some decisions? It’s not so easy.” The dignitaries were referring to the summit of leaders of the eight powerful nations-the US, Canada, Germany, the United Kingdom, France, Russia, China, and Japan-held in Germany the previous week. The assembly had failed to reach agreement on a plan to reduce world poverty, at least in some measure because of opposition from the United States. Then the Pope stated that it was important for the good of humanity that such meetings produce decisions. In his own gentle way, the Pope was disagreeing with the president that the summit was successful and exhorting him to compromise where possible for the benefit of the world as a whole.

Moving on to discuss the worsening problem of world poverty, Bush and Benedict agreed that more aid is needed, especially to Africa. Bush mentioned that the US is doubling its global commitment to fight AIDS from $15 to $30 billion. Nevertheless, in many other areas the US has either cut foreign aid or continues to dole out far less than what the poorest countries need to survive and develop. The leaders recalled with particular concern the humanitarian crisis in Sudan’s Darfur region, where for four years the state-sponsored Janjaweed terrorists of an oil-hungry regime have been systematically murdering and displacing the black population. Less than two weeks before his visit with the Pope, Bush announced that the US would apply targeted economic sanctions to the government of Omar al-Bashir in an effort to halt the violence. The Vatican, the African Union, the UN, and grassroots organizations around the world including the Save Darfur Coalition in the United States have all urged the stationing of a multilateral peacekeeping force in Sudan, but the US has maintained a cool attitude toward this proposal.

Another item on the office-bearers’ agenda was the desperate position of Christians in Iraq and the Holy Land. In Iraq, “Muslim” terrorists have kidnapped a number of Christian residents, even killing a priest-journalist-Father Ragheed Aziz Ganni-on June 3. Efforts to rebuild the country have been impeded by escalating terrorism and corruption. War and sectarian violence between coalition troops and Muslims have conspired with endemic poverty to put enormous pressure on Iraq’s Christian minority. Since the war started in 2003, most Iraqi Christians-700,000 to date-have reluctantly fled the country. The situation of the even more ancient Holy Land Christian community is less dire than that in Iraq but no less worrying for the long term. Caught in the middle of a lengthy struggle between Jews and Muslims for political, economic and military control of the region, and lacking sufficient aid from the outside world, Christians have been slowly fleeing the Palestinian Territories and Israel for more peaceful and secure countries. Pope Benedict is deeply and rightly concerned that these Biblical lands will someday be depleted of living witnesses to Christ. While President Bush assured the pontiff that he shared these concerns, he did not specify what he was doing or could do about the situation either during their meeting or in the presidential press conference which followed.

Benedict expressed to Bush his often-stated hope for “regional” and “negotiated” solutions to the many conflicts now wrenching the Middle East. This was a key point on which the leaders have continually disagreed. The Vatican did not mention President Bush’s response to this statement or what discussion, if any, occurred on this topic. Nevertheless, it is well known that Bush has relied heavily on the use of force, fearing that diplomatic engagement gives terrorists an edge in the struggle.

Finally, according to a Vatican statement released soon afterward, the meeting included “an examination of moral and religious questions, including those related to human rights and religious freedom, the defense and promotion of life, marriage and the family, education of new generations and sustainable development.”

The issue on which Benedict and Bush have experienced least disagreement is the right to life of every human being. In fact, the Holy See’s Secretary of State Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone went out of his way to praise the president for his stance on abortion as well as his “positive initiatives in favor of the defense of life from conception”, presumably referring to his tireless efforts to prevent embryonic stem-cell research involving the destruction of human embryos. It seems that Bush’s clear opposition to the court-ordered euthanasia of the brain-damaged woman Terri Schiavo in 2005 might also have been remarked, since that controversy happened after Bush’s last visit with a Pope in 2004, but the Vatican did not mention this.

It is encouraging that Pope Benedict XVI and President Bush agree on the most fundamental human right of all. At the same time, it is unfortunate that they disagree on almost everything else. It is obvious that the uneasiness of their meeting was a result of time constraints forcing them to shove these important disagreements below the surface. Nonetheless, the two representatives could improve relations significantly if both of them were eager enough to do so. On virtually every foreign policy issue, Pope Benedict’s position has been markedly distinct from that of the United States-and drawn severe criticism from American neoconservatives.

Yet the Holy See deserves credit for its impartial drive toward unity and peace for all humankind. In a world where morality has been artificially divided into two incoherent camps-one emphasizing love of God without adequate concern for neighbor, the other emphasizing love of neighbor without reference to God-the Pope wishes to highlight the coherence of loving both God and our neighbor, which together constitute the entire moral law, as the basis for unity and peace among peoples. His magnificent encyclical Deus Caritas Est (God Is Love) was written to convey this pertinent message.

While President Bush may be sincere, his advisers have filled his brain with the colossal deception that “Islamic” terrorism is an act of war and can only be defeated through all-out war. The extremist mindset produced by this neoconservative deception is uncompromising; it warns that Bush cannot negotiate with anti-American leaders or address the grievances of terrorists lest he jeopardize American security. Unfounded fear lies at the bottom of such notions. According to the pontiff, the only thing that can break down the walls of mutual hostility and fear is a courageous unconditional love, at the heart of which lies concern for the good of the other-yes, even love of and concern for our actual and potential terrorist enemies. Listening to them, accepting the legitimacy of their problems and addressing them honestly would be a sure sign of this loving concern that would move terrorists to abandon their cruel and blasphemous violence “in the name of God”.

Bush’s advisers have also assured him that the rapid, unlimited growth of big business characterizing the post-Cold War world is favorable to all peoples in general and should be permitted to continue freely. However, this smooth lie was fabricated by Western entrepreneurs themselves to justify their massive concentration of global wealth and the resultant growing gap between rich and poor. The real reason for the Iraq war was to satisfy the petroleum lust of Western mega-corporations. Furthermore, the underlying reason for the “War on Terrorism” is to protect and enable the unjust gains of these big businesses in the Middle East, Southeast Asia, and elsewhere around the world. The Pope has reiterated that for the common good, the globalization system must be subject to regulation.

When President Bush and Pope Benedict stood side by side in the Vatican facing dozens of cameras and reporters, observers might have been tempted to characterize Bush as the leader displaying greater courage and more determination to confront evil. They might have detected Bush’s discomfort with being in the presence of a man whom some have called a cowardly “appeaser” of terrorists. But clearly it takes more courage to interpose oneself between terrorists and the American government and urge both, in the name of Jesus, to stop the violence. It requires particular courage for the Pope, who lacks the protection of a modern military force, to stand up for the whole truth about the moral law and God’s love when both sides are willing and able to slaughter and destroy for their own part of the truth.

As a primarily religious leader who is nevertheless an inescapably political figure in our modern time, the Pope has a vital role to play. He has become a mediator in an increasingly polarized world since the end of the Cold War and especially since the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001. During the run up to the Iraq war, Pope John Paul II called for Iraq’s full compliance with UN inspectors while urging the US and Great Britain to avoid the route of war. Pope Benedict’s two-year-long efforts on behalf of the people of Darfur may have helped shame the US government into slapping an embargo on the genocidal regime. In April of this year, Pope Benedict dissipated a territorial row between British naval officers and Iran in the Persian Gulf.

Pope Benedict XVI and President George Bush are the two most visible and powerful leaders on earth. The Pope is the religious and spiritual head of the Catholic Church, the wondrous institution established by Jesus Christ to bring salvation to all peoples. The American president is the political head of a geographically extensive country whose moral, cultural, economic, political, and military influence on the world has been monumental. Thus when these two dignitaries decide to come together, it is a significant event. However, it is to be wondered how many more times the president of the United States will accept invitations to meet with the Pope given the gradually more conflicting paths the US and the Holy See are taking. American policies are driven by the selfish interests of a few multimillionaire and billionaire moguls; Vatican policies are driven by unselfish concern for the good of all of earth’s inhabitants. If continuously pursued, these two policies-and the world leaders carrying them out-must collide at some point.

Did this thirty-five minute official meeting accomplish anything? Time will tell. It certainly gave us all an ample opportunity for reflection. Unfortunately, President Bush cannot see outside the box of his neoconservative logic to grasp the beautiful, coherent, reasonable, and realistic vision of Pope Benedict XVI. The president need not be a Catholic to understand the Pope’s rationale because it is not specifically a Catholic argument; it is based on the moral principles that all peoples recognize. Will the Bush administration and its allies “return to the path of reason”, lay down their arms, and commit to the good of all peoples, as the Vicar of Christ has asked, or will they allow the unstable conditions of growing poverty, festering grievances, mounting terrorism, insatiable greed, and unchecked militarism to worsen past the point of no return?

The extremist neoconservative ideology is a great pseudo-religious deception which has ensnared significant numbers of people, including President Bush. For this reason, we should expect relations between the American presidency and the papacy to deteriorate further in the years ahead. Certain wealthy, influential neoconservatives in the US, who stand for values diametrically opposite to those of the Catholic Church, are determined to make the world safe for unfettered big business, the petroleum industry, lawless warmongering, and war profiteering under the guise of-and at the expense of-freedom, justice, security, democracy, and peace. With the omnipresent excuse of national security, these major businesspeople and politicians will do whatever is necessary to achieve their dark goals. If that means corrupting the president and increasing military spending beyond its present ridiculous level, they will do it. At some moment in the future, the United States may make its evil aims clear by severing diplomatic relations with the Vatican. While Bush has inadvertently ignited and helped to fuel world tensions, subsequent presidents will openly denounce the Holy See and claim for themselves the sole moral authority to determine right from wrong. The Catholic Pope versus the President of the United States may well emerge as the defining struggle of the twenty-first century.

Thobe – Arabic Clothing for Men and Women

When it comes to Arabian dresses for men we visualize them in long, loose full length dresses that look like robes or tunics usually white in color. These ankle length garments with long sleeves are called Thobes. Dishdasha, Kandura or Suriyah are other names used for this dress in different regions of the world. The word Thobe is an Arabic word which means ‘a garment’. It is also spelled as thawb. It is a favorite traditional Arab dress which imparts a unique identity to the men of the Arab states in the Persian Gulf. People in East Africa also dress up in thobes. Thobes are a favourite throughout the Middle East.

Thobes shaped as long tunics can be worn in different lengths – short ones represent modesty whereas long thobes are a symbol of royalty, high social status and prosperity. The favorite fabric used for a thobe is cotton; however, woolen material is also used in cold weather. Thobes are made in polyester, georgette or any lightweight fabric. Thobes made from lighter fabric are considered casual and are usually worn as dresses for everyday use in the comfortable environment of ones home.

Men in Arabian Gulf, Iraq, Jordan and other Muslim countries wear a thobe in their own distinctive style. These full-length garments offer versatility to Muslim men. A thobe or dishdasha can be made from embroidered or printed fabric too. Most popular is some sparkling embroidery around the neck and cuffs. Formal thobes can have sequined details to make the dress look special and formal. A very formal form of a thobe is called “bisht” which is worn by men of status and wealth on very essentially formal occasions such as a wedding, Eid or other important ceremonies. A “bisht” usually is made in Syria, Jordan and Iraq and is a popular dress in these regions.

Thobe styles can be distinguished from their designs and cuts. Men’s head gears worn with thobes also vary from region to region and they indicate style and individuality. Men in Morocco wear shorter sleeves that make their thobe look like an ankle length T-shirt. They call it a gandora. The neckline is also more open and their breast pocket is embroidered. Kuwaiti thobes have a one button collar and are a slim fit. Omanis wear a Mussar as head gear with a dishdasha. Their thobe has no collar and is often colorful. Bahraini Kandura has a soft shirt collar and is loose fitting. It has shirt pockets just like ordinary shirts. Men in Qatar prefer shiny and fine fabric for their thobes. Their dress has a long tassel and a shirt pocket. Men in the UAE do not wear a kandura with a collar but they appreciate some fine embroidery on the sleeves of their dress. Saudis often wear a checkered head gear with a thobe. Their garments are well fitting with a buttoned collar and formal shirt sleeves designed to have cufflinks. Hence Arab men from different regions wear thobes in different styles.

The word thobe does not only refer to men’s wear; it is also used for some similar traditional dress for Palestinian women. Women’s thobe is made of fine georgette, silk or chiffon and is worn in fresh and bright colors. It brings to mind a large flared full length garment which is heavily embroidered at the front and has a billowing back. It is also named as a “Khaleeji dress” and is worn on traditional ceremonies. A thobe, worn by a man or a woman, is considered a distinguishing garment from the Arab world where it either represents comfort, royalty, and status or elegance, taste and style.

The Ummah at War With Itself

The ummah is at war with itself. What other way is there to describe the brutal bloodletting by Muslims of Muslims in Syria, Iraq, Libya, Yemen, Afghanistan, Turkey, and, of course, Pakistan.

To be fair, the ummah has not mattered for a long time to the governments or peoples of Muslim lands. State-to-state relations among Muslim countries have been astonishingly independent of religious identity. They have depended instead upon perceived self-interest, domestic politics and the whims of rulers. Just look at the evidence.

Pakistan was created on a religious premise. But, in the days of Suez Crisis of 1956, Pakistan’s position was nebulous. It refused to side with Gamal Abdel Nasser after he nationalized the Suez Canal and threw out the British. On the other hand, India was active in the Non-Aligned-Movement, fully pro-Arab, and loud in support of liberating Palestine. To show gratitude, King Saud bin Abdul Aziz paid a state visit to India and declared that Indian Muslims were being treated well. There was outrage across Pakistan. Newspapers exploded in anger when Jawaharlal Nehru, on his return visit to Riyadh, was greeted by the king and with street banners in Riyadh bearing the slogan rasul-ul-salam (messenger of peace).

Dawn’s editorial of Dec 1, 1956, bitterly castigated the Arabs and “Nasser’s hatred of Pakistan, and love of Bharat and its Nehru”. It went on to suggest that such sensate bias and blind prejudice “may well be examined by psychiatrists”. In other words, the Arab world’s greatest hero of the moment was denounced as crazy.

Today, Pakistan has disputes with both its Muslim neighbors, Afghanistan and Iran. Iran occasionally lobs artillery shells over to Pakistan, as does Afghanistan. Pakistan has reciprocated with its artillery, while PAF jets brought down an Iranian drone last month. Ironically, Pakistan has excellent relations with one of its neighbors – China, a communist state that has banned the beard and burqa in its only Muslim-dominated province. India has good relations with both Iran and Afghanistan. And, India’s trade with China far exceeds Pakistan’s trade with China.

It is not just Pakistan. The Muslim monarchies of Saudi Arabia and Qatar, both Wahabi, are practically at war with each other now. Teeny tiny Qatar, say the Saudis, is acting too big for its boots and cannot conduct its own foreign policy. Qatar has dismissed the Saudi-UAE demand to close down Al Jazeera, the Arab world’s only independent news source. In response, all Qataris and their families, as well as 15,000 dancing Qatari camels, have been expelled from Saudi Arabia.

Last year, Saudi Arabia’s highest civilian award was conferred upon Hindu Fundamentalist Narendra Modi by King Salman. The Saudi king left Kashmir and pellet guns unmentioned.

Saudi Arab’s war on Yemen shows the emptiness of the ummah notion. Directed against one of the world’s poorest Muslim countries, it has so far killed 7,600 and wounded 42,000 Muslims. Most casualties have resulted from air strikes of the Saudi-led multinational coalition. Pakistan has shown little concern. I have yet to see a single TV news report or evening talk show discussing the Yemen war.

Ending Israeli occupation of Palestine was once the ummah’s grandest cause that cut through the Shia-Sunni divide. But now, Saudi Arabia is fast nearing rapprochement with Israel. Both countries see Iran as the greater enemy. After the failed Arab Spring, Sisi’s Egypt and the Gulf’s monarchies fear Iran as an insurrectionary power and prefer to work with Israel. Palestine is unmentioned.

Where does this leave the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC), whose job is to bring together and represent the ummah? Based in Saudi Arabia, it has 57 member states and calls itself “the collective voice of the Muslim world.” The OIC has had nothing to say about wars that have consumed Syria, Iraq, Libya, or Yemen. Nor is it relevant to any other conflict between Muslim states or that within them. It has yet to give a single cent to desperate refugees who, instead, must rely on the West.

Pakistan bought into the OIC fantasy early on. But the euphoria of the 1974 Lahore meeting organized by ZAB has gone with the wind. What is left is the magnificent flag-adorned building on the Constitution Avenue in Islamabad that serves as Comstech, the highest scientific body of the OIC, for which Pakistan pays the lion’s share of its operating expenses.

Comstech is charged with promoting science within the ummah. This is a futile and misplaced effort because science does not have a religion. Add to this the abysmal quality of science in Muslim countries (with Turkey and Iran only partly excluded). Prime minister Suhrawardy once famously remarked, “zero plus zero plus zero is after all still zero”. While he said this of the Arab bloc during the Suez crisis, it’s still truer about scientific cooperation.

It is time to give the OIC a decent burial and end the fantasy that Comstech can serve as the center of Muslim science. Among the benefits, Comstech’s staff could be put to good use promoting science in Pakistan with the building turned into a public science library or science Exploratorium where Pakistani children could be introduced to the wonders of science.

If Muslim states have paid no attention to the ummah, non-state actors have paid even less. They have slaughtered tens of thousands of co-religionists. The Afghan Taliban and the Pakistani Taliban are like two wings of the same bird. One kills Afghan Muslims, the other kills Pakistani Muslims. One finds shelter in Pakistan, the other in Afghanistan. The militant IS group seems to be everywhere and kills with even less concern. There is no sign any of them will fade away soon.

There is a way for Muslim states and peoples to move forward. This will require creating strong democratic institutions based on equal rights for all citizens, encouraging the participation of women in public life, and respecting equally all Muslim sects as well as other religions, providing space and freedom to individuals and education for all based on science and reason.

The Five Main Elements of Civilization

Although the elements of civilization and the emergence of civilization have been studied extensively, I never gave the topic much thought. That is, until I was tasked with finding at least five elements that are characteristics of a civilization that make it different from non-civilized peoples. Initially, this seemed like a daunting task, but upon viewing the video “Iraq: The Cradle of Civilization” (Wood) and reading the assigned portion of “Western Civilization: Ideas, Politics, and Society, 1” (Perry), it was apparent that there are a number of distinct elements which characterize every civilization. Namely, large population centers in cities, writing, ceremonial buildings, or ritual centers, continuity, and the arts. Each of these characteristics of civilization works synergistically, making civilized societies stand out in stark contrast from those non-civilized societies which preceded them. A brief overview of some of these vital components will demonstrate their importance.

Firstly, large population centers in cities are one of the elements of civilization. The word civilization, itself, can be most easily expressed as life in cities. The area of Suma, or Mesopotamia, in southern Iraq, was birthplace of the first city, Uruch (Ur). The vast lands, made fertile by the constant flow of life from the Tigris and Euphrates Rivers were the ideal place to farm and sustain the hordes of people drawn to this city. Naturally, people congregated in increasing numbers to this prototype city.

Secondly, writing is another one of the elements of civilizations. In fact, some would argue that writing was invented in Uruch. The obvious advantage of which, was the ability to transmit and pass down to posterity important cultural, spiritual truths and stories. Though the oral legend of the people of this era is well documented, the story of this people was now being preserved and disseminated through the written word.

Equally important were the ceremonial buildings and ritual centers which peppered the landscape of Ur. Shrines, alters, and temples served a central role in ancient civilization, as they also do today. Tied to the religious and cultural fabric of the society was ritualistic worship and ceremonies. These ritual centers were considered holy places and like the fertile land itself, served as a people magnet.

Continuity is another characteristic of civilization. Unlike nomadic peoples, civil societies, by definition were sedentary societies. Of course, people and ideas flowed in and out of the first civilizations, but there was the element of perpetual inhabitants. No doubt, ownership and private property rights were natural products of this continuity as people opted to settle in the cities.

Lastly, the arts are another one of the essential elements of civilization. As legend has it, the arts were sent down by Enki, the God of Wisdom, through the Goddess Innana, known today as Ishtar. Decorative arts, pottery, jewelry, ‘fancy’ clothing and ritual ornaments were increasingly popular commodities during this time. As the people’s standard of living improved in the first cities, there was more time (relatively speaking) for the leisure indulgences that the arts afforded.

Clearly, there are other non-negotiable elements of civilization; laws, government, social (class) systems, etc. As is evident, prominent among these characteristics are large population centers in cities, writing, ritual centers, continuity, and the arts. In contrast, non-civilized societies are wanting in all of these aspects.

The Important Influence of Baghdad on the Development of Western Medicine

Some would say that we are living in interesting times, particularly as another US-Iraq confrontation at this stage seems almost inevitable. Such is the present power of the United States that only a few voices in the rest of the world suggest that the United Nations should be the only party to be involved in any future decisions about the coming conflict. Nobody in the West is brave enough any longer to take a moral stance against the imposed economic sanctions, which by now have killed more than 1.6 million Iraqis, mostly children, according to the UN’s own statistics.

On the eve of the Eid-Al-Fiter (the most widely observed Islamic festival marking the end of the fasting month of Ramadan), the well-respected Qatar-based Arabic news network Aljazeera reported that in the past three months (from September to November 2001), more than 31 thousand Iraqis (including 21 thousand children under the age of 5) died due to the UN-imposed economic sanctions against Iraq, a figure even higher than the 1999 UNICEF estimate of an average 5200 Iraqi child deaths per month. This comes at the same time as warnings from Iraqi physicians about an escalating crisis of increased cancer cases in the southern part of the country. The report adds that the fear of having babies with birth defects is so great that many pregnant women choose to have abortions. I myself must accept some blame for not reorting this, having recently turning down an opportunity to visit the suffering patients in the hospitals in Baghdad in the interests of personal safety.

So what brought us to the point of the precipice, this point where two belligerent nations want to draw swords against each other in the region once known as the cradle of civilisation. This was the land of the Sumerians, the Assyrians, and the Babylonians where advanced civilizations flourished long before that of Egypt, Greece, and Rome. This Garden of Eden, this land of Abraham, where the Hanging Gardens on the River Euphrates were once considered amongst the Seven Wonders of the World and where the origins of our medicine once flourished. There is little doubt that any historian would say that the Mongol invasion of Mesopotamia was one of the turning points in the history of this region. Its long shadow and memory has left formidable imprints that are still discernible in thought formation of Iraqi political leaders right into this century. The destruction of many centuries of learning, being ruled for a period by barbarians, Ottoman Turks and later the British has left a lasting stamp on these proud people who want to protect their recently found freedom.

I would like to take time for a moment to consider life in this part of the world before the sack of Baghdad by the Mongols. I would like to identify the influence of the Baghdad School of Medicine on the medicine we practise today in the Western world. This influence has been neglected and unjustifiably overpassed by scholars in the West and this article is written to allow us for a while to acknowledge that fact and try and restore this missing part of our history. We must remember that medicine, as we know it today did not develop overnight and this knowledge over the centuries has been handed from one country to the other. Between the ancient civilizations of Egyptians, Greek, Roman, and the Renaissance era in Europe, there was a gap, commonly called “the dark ages”, during which the flames of the knowledge of medicine was hosted, not by the West, but by the Arabs or Moslems.

The nomenclature, “the dark ages” reflects the civilization in Europe between the 7th and 13th centuries, but by no means it expresses the state of affairs in the Arab world or the Islamic Empire at that time. By the ninth century, Islamic medical practice began to advance beyond the talisman and the people of Mesopotamia became avid for the wisdom of Galen, Hippocrates, and Paul of Aegina. By the tenth century, their zeal and enthusiasm for learning resulted in all essential Greek medical writings being translated into Arabic in Baghdad. The Islamic Empire continued to grow and extended its influence from the Atlantic Ocean on the West to the borders of China on the East. Arabic became the International Language of learning and diplomacy and the centre of medical knowledge and activity shifted eastward as Baghdad emerged as the capital of the scientific world.

This era also saw the introduction of hospitals with wards, the introduction of medical terminology and the regulation of medical students who by now had to pass rigorous examinations. Baghdad General Hospital soon became the envy of the Islamic world and incorporated innovations, many of which still sound modern by today’s standards. The hospital used fountains to cool the air near the wards of those afflicted with fever; it was the first hospital to have a ward exclusively devoted to the mentally ill. The Baghdad School brought a refreshing spirit of dispassionate clarity into psychiatry, which was free from the demonological theories that swept over the Christian world. It is known that Najab ud din Muhammad, a contemporary of Razi, carefully compiled observation on actual patients made up the most complete classification of mental diseases theretofore known. He described agitated depression, obsessional neurosis, Nafkhae Malikholia (combined priapism and sexual impotence). Kutrib (a form of persecutory psychosis), Dual-Kulb (a form of mania). At night, the pain of the restless in Baghdad General Hospital was soothed by soft music and storytelling. I still remember the open courtyard of the Ibn ‘al Bitar still being used in this fashion, just before the Gulf War, by the patient’s relatives at night as I strolled back from my night rounds.

There were also social policies introduced by the governing regime to Baghdad General Hospital, which assured that the prince and pauper received identical attention and the destitute received five gold pieces upon discharge to sustain them during convalescence. We must remember that this was at a time when the streets of Paris and London were still paved with mud and open sewers. Baghdad General Hospital was amongst the first to introduce separate wards for male and female patients and these were staffed by attendants of both sexes. This medical centre of excellence contained both a library and a pharmacy and it is known that medical staff attended outreach clinics to attend to the disabled or the disadvantaged who lived in remote areas.

Baghdad also introduced regulations to maintain quality control on drugs, they advocated that pharmacists became licensed, and legal measures were taken to prevent doctors from owning or holding stock in a pharmacy. Methods of extracting and preparing medicines were brought to a high art in Mesopotamia and techniques of distillation, crystallization, solution, sublimation, reduction and calcination became essential processes of pharmacy and chemistry. With the help of these techniques, the Saydalanis (pharmacists) introduced new drugs such as camphor, senna, sandalwood, rhubarb, musk, myrrh, cassia, tamarind, nutmeg, alum, aloes, cloves, coconut, nuxvomica, cubebs, aconite, ambergris, and mercury to the world. The important role of the Baghdad School and others in developing modern pharmacy is memorialized in the significant number of current pharmaceutical and chemical terms derived from Arabic: drug, alkali, alcohol, aldehydes, alembic, and elixir among others, not to mention syrups and juleps.

In 636 A.D., the Muslims conquered the Persian City of Jundi-Shapur, and after this period, Islamic medical schools mostly developed on the Jundi-Shapur pattern. In the late seventh century, only Baghdad and Jundi-Shapur had separate schools for studying basic sciences. In Baghdad Medical School, doctors learned anatomy by dissecting apes, skeletal studies and didactics while other schools only taught anatomy through illustrations and lectures. During the eight century, the study of medicinal herbs and pharmacognosy was added to the basic training and a number of hospitals in Baghdad maintained barbel gardens as a source of drugs for the patients and a means of instruction for the students.

Surgery was also included in the Baghdad curriculum many surgical procedures such as amputation, excision of varicose veins and haemorrhoids were required knowledge. Orthopaedics was also widely taught in Baghdad and doctors routinely used plaster of Paris for casts in the reduction of fractures. Interestingly, this method of treating fractures was only rediscovered in the West in 1852. Ophthalmology was practiced in Baghdad, but it was not taught as part of the curriculum in medical schools, rather an apprenticeship to an eye doctor was the preferred way of specialisation. The ophthalmologists of Baghdad exhibited a high degree of proficiency and it should be remembered that medical words such as retina and cataract are of Arabic origin. lbn al Haytham (965-1039 A.D.) wrote the Optical Thesaurus from which such worthies as Roger Bacon, Leonardo da Vinci and Johannes Kepler drew theories for their own writings.

In his Thesaurus he showed that light falls on the retina in the same manner as it falls on a surface in a darkened room through a small aperture, thus conclusively proving that vision happens when light rays pass from objects towards the eye and not from the eye towards the objects as thought by the Greeks. He presents experiments for testing the angles of incidence and reflection, and a theoretical proposal for magnifying lens (made in Italy three centuries later). He also taught that the image made on the retina is conveyed along the optic nerve to the brain. Razi was the first to recognize the reaction of the pupil to light and Ibn Sina was the first to describe the exact number of extrinsic muscles of the eyeball, namely six. The greatest contribution of Islamic medicine in practical ophthalmology was in the matter of cataract. The most significant development in the extraction of cataract was developed by Ammar bin Ali of Mosul, who introduced a hollow metallic needle through the sclerotic and extracted the lens by suction. Europe rediscovered this in the nineteenth century.

In 931 A.D. Caliph Al-Muqtadir learned that a patient in Baghdad had died as the result of a physician’s error and he ordered his chief physician, Sinan-ibn Thabit bin Qurrah to regulate all those who practiced medicine in Mesopotamia. In the first year of the decree, more than 860 doctors were examined in Baghdad alone. This led to the introduction of new examinations and a Licensing Board was established under a government official called Muhtasib. European medical schools followed the Baghdad pattern and even in the early nineteenth century, students at the Sorbonne could not graduate without reading Ibn Sina’s Qanun (Cannon).

During this period, Al-Razi moved to Baghdad where he became the Chief Physician of the Baghdad Hospital and the Court-Physician of the Caliph. He published several medical books, which were translated into Latin, French, Italian, Hebrew, and Greek including the differentiating between smallpox and measles, two diseases that were hitherto thought to be one single disease. It is also written that when he was asked to choose a site for a new hospital in Baghdad, he deduced which was the most hygienic area by observing where the fresh pieces of meat he had hung in various parts of the city decomposed least quickly.

He also published a book called “Al-Murshid, in which he described the different types of fever including continuous, relapsing, and hectic. He stated that fever can be a symptom of a disease or a disease in itself. He introduced mercury as a therapeutic drug for the first time in history, which was later adopted in Europe. Al-Razi is attributed to be the first to use animal gut for sutures. He is credited with many contributions, which include being the first to describe true distillation, corrosive sublimate, arsenic, copper sulphate, iron sulphate, saltpetre, and borax in the treatment of disease. He introduced mercury compounds as purgatives (after testing them on monkeys); mercurial ointments and lead ointment.”

His interest in urology focused on problems involving urination, venereal disease, renal abscess, and renal and vesical calculi. He described hay fever or allergic rhinitis. He stressed the continued medical education of the physician advising him to record his own observations and encouraging him to meet with other physicians to discuss medical problems. The new Al-Adudi hospital in Baghdad was built in 981 A.D. and had interns, residents, and 24 consultants. An Abbasid minister, Ali ibn Isa, requested the court physician, Sinan ibn Thabit, to organise regular visiting of prisons by medical officers.

Many other Islamic physicians and surgeons of the period influenced the Baghdad School. In 930 A.D., Al-Zahrawi was born in Al-Zahra, a suburb of Cordova and later attended the University of Cordova, which had a long tradition of excellence. At that time, Cordova had a population of one million. Al-Zahrawi became an eminent surgeon being appointed as the Court-Physician of King Abdel-Rahman III. He was to influence the Baghdad School of Medicine through his four books, one of which “Al-Tastif Liman Ajiz’an Al-Ta’lif’ is still considered the best medieval surgical encyclopaedia and was used in medical schools in Europe until the 17th century. Al-Zahrawi described the ligature of arteries long before Ambrose Pare and he also used cautery to control bleeding. Interestingly, he also used wax and alcohol to stop bleeding from the skull during cranial surgery long before Sir Victor Horsley used it to effect in the late eighteen hundreds. His preparation made up of seven parts beeswax and one part almond oil is still known today as Horsley’s Wax.

Al-Zahrawi was also the first to in history to use cotton (Arabic word) in surgical dressings in the control of haemorrhage, as padding in the splinting of fractures, teach the lithotomy position for vaginal operations, to describe and use alcohol as a surgical preparation. He distinguished between goitre and cancer of the thyroid and explained his invention of a cauterizing iron, which he also used to control bleeding. His description of varicose veins stripping, even after ten centuries, is almost like modern surgery. In orthopaedic surgery he introduced what is called today Kocher’s method of reduction of shoulder dislocation and patelectomy, 1,000 years before Brooke reintroduced it in 1937. He described tracheotomy, orthodontia and described the different types of fracture before the introduction of X Rays.

In the rest of the Islamic world, the Iranian Ibn Sina (Avicenna 980-1037 A.D) suggested the communicable nature of tuberculosis long before the infectious nature of the pathogen was discovered. He was also the first to describe the use silk sutures for haemostasis and the first to use alcohol as an antiseptic. Ibn Sina originated the idea of the use of oral anaesthetics and he recognised opium as the most powerful mukhadir (an intoxicant or drug). He also used less powerful anaesthetics such as mandragora, poppy, hemlock, hyoscyamus, deadly nightshade (belladonna), lettuce seed, and snow or ice cold water. He introduced the soporific sponge, soaked with aromatics and narcotics, which was the precursor of modem anaesthesia. In his masterpiece Al-Quanun (Canon), he described complete studies of physiology, pathology, and hygiene.

However, the turning point in the great age of Islam’s contribution to medicine came when a confederation of nomadic tribes led by Genghis Khan, first conquered China, and then spread out to attack the rest of the Muslim Empire. By 1220, they had conquered Samarkand and Bukhara and by the mid-century, they had taken Russia, Central Europe, northern Iran, and the Caucuses. In 1258, Hulagu Khan invaded Baghdad and destroyed the ancient systems of irrigation with such extensive devastation that even today agricultural recovery in this nation is still incomplete. While in Baghdad, Hulagu made a pyramid of the skulls of Baghdad’s scholars, religious leaders, and poets, and he deliberately destroyed what remained of Iraq’s canal headworks. The medical knowledge of centuries was swept away and Mesopotamia became a neglected frontier province ruled from the Mongol capital of Tabriz in Iran.

In 1380, another Turko-Mongol confederation was organised by Tamerlane the Great, who claimed descent from Genghis Khan. They swept down on Baghdad again destroyed the hospitals and burnt the libraries with their irreplaceable works. It is said that the waters of the Tigris ran blue with the ink of the medical and scientific works destroyed by these barbarians. The result was to wipe out much of the priceless cultural, scientific, and medical legacy that Muslim scholars had been preserving and enlarging for some five hundred years. A minor scion of the Mamluk dynasty took refuge in Egypt and the ‘Abbasid caliphate continued the practice of medicine there late into the sixteenth century. In 1401, he sacked Baghdad and massacred many thousands of its inhabitants. Like Hulagu, Tamerlane had a penchant for building pyramids of skulls. His rule virtually extinguished Islamic dominance of medicine and Baghdad, long a centre of trade suffered severe economic depression. The medico-social innovations of the Baghdad scholars totally disintegrated.

To make matters worse, the southern province of Basra, which had been a key transit point for seaborne commerce was circumvented after the Portuguese discovered a shorter route around the Cape of Good Hope. Mesopotamia’s once-extensive irrigation system fell into disrepair, creating swamps and marshes at the edge of the delta. The rapid deterioration of settled agriculture led to the growth of tribally based pastoral nomadism. By the end of the Mongol period, the medical knowledge of the people of Mesopotamia had shifted from the urban-based Abbasid culture to the tribes of the river valleys, where it has remained well into the twentieth century.

Maybe, for a moment if we considered Baghdad’s great contribution to the world of Western medicine, we would not be so quick to see this nation as radically demonic and possibly even learn to respect the descendants of these original scholars who today still die suffering along the shores of the Tigris, sacrificed on yet another altar of human indifference.

Copyright (c) 2009 CMS

Freelance Web Designer | WordPress Developer | Hong Kong