Point Lost in Details

Of any reading that we have had in this class, I think that these first chapters of The Age of Empires by Francis Joannes were by far the most difficult to extract meaning from, particularly the second chapter. The text is overwhelmed with the names of places, people, and groups, many of which play an unimportant role in the point that is being made and are mentioned only once or twice. To add to the confusion, names of rulers are repeated, are long and unwieldily, or bare much in common with other names. While the reading was difficult and frustrating for me, I do not mean to completely dismiss Joannes, who presents all of the details, presumably for an audience that is looking for them; however it is certainly possible that this wealth of data could have been presented in a more readily understood manner.

To pick a chapter nearly at random, the only full paragraph on page 30 contains 17 distinct proper nouns, corresponding to places, people, groups, and states. For an average sized paragraph this is far too much information to take in and properly retain, and the point of the paragraph, something to do with Assyria’s access to the Mediterranean, is cluttered and all but lost. Among these 17, 5 states are mentioned which, at least in the text surrounding the paragraph, are never mentioned again. Unfortunately, it is not immediately apparent which states will go on to play an important role later, and it is impossible to decide which states or people should be remembered for future reference.

Names of leaders are also difficult to follow, though not necessarily at the fault of Joannes. Sometimes we see two rulers with the same name, for example Shalmaneser III and Shalmaneser IV. Other times we see names that are far too long to remember, such as king Marduk-zakir-shumi, or Merodachbaladan II. Though Joannes obviously cannot control the names of the people, and does a good job of offering full detail, it remains a problem that it is very difficult to understand what he is saying. I think that a better job could have been done of outlining the most important details and the major themes in order to provide a continuity that does not get lost in the details.