You're viewing a single thread.
IIRC "books" were a medieval-period invention. Before the common era, everythign would have been scrolls or tablets. The first codices wouldn't have existed until about 100BCE in Rome. So, assuming that this is (roughly) what a cuneiform tablet was saying, I wonder what the actual work used for 'book' was, and what more accurate translation there would be, if we had the relevant cultural understanding?
But, more so than that - the earliest proto-novel that we know of is The Tale of Genji, that dates to roughly the 11th century
BCE (Edit: this is a typo; it is definitely CE, not BCE). Which makes the question of what kind of 'books' this is supposed to refer to even more interesting.Or--alternatively--is it just a shitpost?
TL;DR: it's probably not Assyrian at least, and it's likely either a mistranslation of something or a complete fabrication
I found this on skeptics stack exchange. Supposedly, it's a hoax/urban legend that goes back way before the internet. (The entire stack exchange page on this topic is fun to read, btw)
The quote originally came from Prof. George T.W. Patrick of University of Iowa, who translated an ancient stone tablet into modern English and published in "Popular Science Monthly", May 1913. The full text of the original can be found online at archive.org: https://archive.org/details/popularsciencemo82newy, page 493.
One writer found this same quote in a slightly earlier source dating to 1908.
Yet another writer noted that there was no Chaldea but ...
... there was a stele of a King Naram-Sin of Akkad which has been exhibited in the Istanbul Archaeological Museum since 1892. The inscription on this stele is fragmentary and has nothing to do with degeneration.
The Tale of Gengi is for 11th century CE, not BCE.
I'm pretty sure this tablet is fake, but I do remember how similar people in those times were to us when I read the translated tablets from that period. One that I remember most was talking about a parent who tried to bribe a teacher to give his son better grades.
Don't forget the Egyptian tablet recording work absences from 1250 BCE. Not much has changed.
Yes, you are entirely correct, that was a typo on my part.
I'm curious though, why callt that the earliest? Going by the dictionary definition of a novel (A fictitious tale or narrative, longer than a short story, having some degree of complexity and development of characters; it is usually organized as a time sequence of events, and is commonly intended to exhibit the operation of the passions, and often of love), there are several ancient works that I'd think would fall into that category (or do epic poems not count?). I just checked Wikipedia and I see there's a whole article on Ancient Greek novels.
Even going by those, you're looking at over 2600 years of temporal distance.
Assyria didn't exist in 2800 BCE, either.
I wanted to give it credit and think "maybe it was from the region that would become Assyria," but, sadly, it's just the Internet lying.
earliest proto-novel that we know of is The Tale of Genji, that dates to roughly the 11th century
What makes it a proto novel compared to Greek or Indian mythology texts?
It's both fictional, and known to be fictional. Mythology texts are more like the bible; they're believed to be true.
That's an interesting point.
Mainly the characterization and psychological depiction
maybe it's "writing scrolls", but this meme just swapped in the word book.. it's just the idea that instead of actually going out and achieving something new, people are satisfied with being commentators on the important events of the past..
Even if that's correct--which it would likely be, since a literal translation wouldn't be meaningful to a modern audience--the corollary problem is that the very idea of writing stories that were stories, versus oral myths/religion, or more purely informative, didn't really exist at this time. I don't think that we even have evidence that theatrical entertainment existed 2800 BCE; the golden age of Greek plays was around 700 BCE, which is a solid 2000 years later than this was purported to have been written.