The Destruction of Cities: Babylon

WARSAW (Reuters) - Poland's defense Ministry has denied charges that Polish troops in Iraq had damaged the site of ancient Babylon, one of the world's most famous archaeological treasures, while using it as a military base.

"Neither Polish troops, nor any other troops under Polish command, ever carried out any projects violating historical monuments or causing their devastation," defense Ministry spokesman Colonel Piotr Pertek said on Sunday. "Our soldiers never engaged in any efforts to strengthen the security of Camp Babylon without consulting Iraq's monument preservation authorities."

The statement followed a British Museum report alleging that U.S. and Polish troops had caused "substantial damage" to the ancient city during their combined 21-month occupation of the site. Scotsman

Was it damaged? Possibly. Regrettable? Certainly. But... the facts of life are that you can't preserve anything forever. Babylon, the former site of one of the reputed seven wonders of the ancient world - the hanging gardens of Babylon - isn't immune to occupying armies, plagues of Texas locusts, erosion, or infidels.

During the reign of Sennacherib, Babylon underwent a constant state of revolt, which was only suppressed by the complete destruction of the capital. In 689 BC its walls, temples and palaces were razed to the ground and the rubbish thrown into the Arakhtu the canal which bordered the earlier Babylon on the south. (Wikipedia entry)

Babylon has been occupied by Cyrus the Great, Alexander the Great, and defaced by Saddam Hussein - he had his name inscribed on bricks on the site, as well as having part of it rebuilt. (Which itself horrified archaeologists.)

Oddly, I ought to feel outraged about this, and I don't - yet. I remember being furious at the destruction caused by the Taliban of ancient sites in Afghanistan; in Cambodia, where ancient temples were destroyed by the Khmer Rouge; the destruction of Belgrade during the 1990's, and the purposeful and deliberate bombing of the Stari Most Bridge in Mostar, and I was outraged at the U.S's failure to plan for, and prevent looting in Iraq when we started this war. But this? Incidental damage of armies? No outrage. Now, if the Polish and U.S. armies were being accused of driving their tanks down the ancient streets, and deliberately plowing down walls or deliberately destroying the Gates of Ishtar, then I'd be pissed, and will be calling for their heads on silver platters. I guess we'll see.

Could the Polish and U.S. armies have done more damage than was done by the "excavations" that were done by archaeologists up through the 1930's, or the armies of Alexander? Cities - even archaeological ones - are evolving things. Not living, but evolving to the politics, religion, and people around them. They rise, they fall, and sometimes they're defaced or destroyed.

Dr. Darko Radovic postulates that the cities of Yugoslavia, "were attacked and destroyed because they were cities, because they embodied the pluralist, cosmopolitan, inclusive culture that ridiculed the narrow particularism and xenophobia of nationalistic exclusiveness." If that holds true for the destruction of armies world-wide, and it makes sense that it does, then our armies in the middle east need to take heed. Commanders in the field need to educate and control, and not allow their troops to destroy ancient sites in lieu of destroying the "enemy." It just doesn't help, and tends to piss off the people.