In a very famous book, "Catcher in the Rye" by JD Salinger (the book that seems to have motivated the killing of John Lennon) the protagonist makes the point that digressions are usually more interesting than the subject. I believe this idea psychically scarred me;
contrary to my tongue in cheek representation of myself as having Alzheimer's: i do not. But I write on scholarly topics and my mind, full of facts and lascivious images, tends to drift.
So my apologies for my 2 OTs. I will attempt to stay on topic. To continue the thought; there is one line in the OT (Old Testament) not off topic. But maybe it is off topic) book of Samuel 1 that seems to refer to a particular Assyrian legend...
Can one go OT in an OT thread? Or is this OT to the second power?
The original inhabitants of the near east were the assyrians (I find no need to capitalize a defunct culture), ancient egypt (no capitalization for same reason) and hittite (the same). the armenoid migration created the semitic cultures which gave us the first historical literature; Gilgamesh. though the Vedas are arguably older, but I comment only on the more of less west.
Catcher in the rye was right. nothing like going off topic and having a place to do it.