Atlanteans
westprog++
Gearóid Mac Cuinneagáin <Ger@r.d> wrote:
>http://www.guardianunlimited.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,3604,497953,00.html
..
>He went on: "They were the first, for instance, to make what we call
>'careful burials' and to leave offerings for the dead, surrounding
>their heads with red ochre to symbolise blood. You find remarkable
>similarity in these coastal burials from Iberia right up to Ireland
>and even to Denmark."
..
It may be a value judgement, but I wouldn't rate the use of red ochre
in tombs as being major competition for aqueducts and roads across Europe.
J/
SOTW: "Danny Boy" - Sinead O'Connor
"If the Republicans do not stand aside, then they must resist, and resistance
means just this civil war and armed opposition to what is undoubtedly...
the decision of the majority of the people"
Si
:
:Gearóid Mac Cuinneagáin <Ger@r.d> wrote:
:>http://www.guardianunlimited.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,3604,497953,00.html
:..
:>He went on: "They were the first, for instance, to make what we call
:>'careful burials' and to leave offerings for the dead, surrounding
:>their heads with red ochre to symbolise blood. You find remarkable
:>similarity in these coastal burials from Iberia right up to Ireland
:>and even to Denmark."
:..
:
:It may be a value judgement, but I wouldn't rate the use of red ochre
:in tombs as being major competition for aqueducts and roads across Europe.
:
:J/
Why do I feel a Monty Python Moment approaching... I mean what have the
Europeans ever done for us eh?
Atlantean theory is old hat. Covered it for Art history in the leaving cert
back in the 80's. Stylistic markers along the north Mediterranean and
western European coasts indicative of strong independent trade links blah
blah blah. Lack of markers in roman Art indicative of isolationism blah blah
blah. Strangely the same motifs appear in much South American native art.
You can see where this is going can't you?
Occams razor. Some part of the human brain appreciates geometric conundrums.
Fabricating these with a compass leads to an art motif of, guess what;
curves.
--
Si,
Bog Snorkler Extrordinaire
Surge
"Si" <simonicu...@nofeckinspammy-deja.com> wrote in message
news:991215981.5700.0...@news.demon.co.uk...
Fabricating them while off your radar on mushrooms helps too. So what about
all the stone age European sites in Newfoundland or around there ??
Si
:
:
:Fabricating them while off your radar on mushrooms helps too. So what about
:all the stone age European sites in Newfoundland or around there ??
:
:
News to me gov. The only pre-Columbian sites I know of putative European
origin in Newfoundland are the Viking "Vinland" settlements. Which post date
the classic Celtic/Atlantean era by a significant margin. Though I am no
expert in this field. I fully expect to have the shite kicked out of me now
by a member of the Newfoundland Tourist Board waving a la Tene shield,
sporting a fetching Viking helmet and wearing plaid shorts and sandals.
KateH
Black socks and sandals.............no, there's been some evidence of Celtic
explorers found way up there on the coast. Wasn't someone trying to prove
that the Irish "discovered" America? I forget now.
KateH
Pilar Quezzaire
: News to me gov. The only pre-Columbian sites I know of putative European
: origin in Newfoundland are the Viking "Vinland" settlements. Which post date
: the classic Celtic/Atlantean era by a significant margin. Though I am no
: expert in this field. I fully expect to have the shite kicked out of me now
: by a member of the Newfoundland Tourist Board waving a la Tene shield,
: sporting a fetching Viking helmet and wearing plaid shorts and sandals.
*shudder*
A serious answer:
I don't understand why concurrent developmwent is so surprising to
historians and laypeople alike. I also don't understand why the same
stupid markers for cultural advancement we use in the Avalon
Hill "Civilization" game are being used here. There are differing ways of
looking at what is "civilized".
What bothers me particularly about the use of architecture as a marker
(sorry folks, I'm an architectural historian) is that it's rarely factored
in that the the enormous projects we call signs of civilization used the
most barbaric of methods to make them happen. Slaves and war prisoners in
essence built the ancient world, at the cost of their lives in many cases.
In cases where wage laborers tended to make buildings (Egypt's workers
were largely low-wage earners) they lived incredibly short, dangerous, and
miserable lives in a social system that was hopelessly stratified.
Why is this considered "advanced" at all? Big, impressive, sure, but
advanced? Hardly.
Anyways, the he-said-she-said school of ancient history is a bit of a
waste of time. Every civilization was "advanced" in something.
--
Just Pilar
Si
[snip]
:Black socks and sandals.............no, there's been some evidence of
Celtic
:explorers found way up there on the coast. Wasn't someone trying to prove
:that the Irish "discovered" America? I forget now.
:KateH
That would be the Saint Brendan argument. I don't know the dates exactly but
would he not have been contemporary with the Vikings given that the rise of
the monasteries in Ireland coincided with the emergence of Vikings as a
northern European force? Either way Both are post-Celtic. Post Roman even.
After C4 ad. Oh history heads feel free to rip me to shreds on this.
Si
:A serious answer:
:What bothers me particularly about the use of architecture as a marker
:(sorry folks, I'm an architectural historian) is that it's rarely factored
:in that the the enormous projects we call signs of civilization used the
:most barbaric of methods to make them happen. Slaves and war prisoners in
:essence built the ancient world, at the cost of their lives in many cases.
:In cases where wage laborers tended to make buildings (Egypt's workers
:were largely low-wage earners) they lived incredibly short, dangerous, and
:miserable lives in a social system that was hopelessly stratified.
:
A serious rejoinder:
To be a pedant I wasn't talking about Architecture specifically which tends
to be more coloured by local conditions and is rarely transportable and
tradable. The Atlantean argument stems mainly from a study of the artefacts
such as pottery and jewellery which does seem to have many similarities and
motifs in common (and even more that are not which are often ignored).
:Why is this considered "advanced" at all? Big, impressive, sure, but
:advanced? Hardly.
It is arguable that ancient grand projects are less indicative of a "High"
civilisation than of a high degree of social organisation. Although I don't
think two are mutually exclusive. Many of the grand projects required
mastery of physics that implied a high state of learning surely a marker of
a developed civilisation. Although the same knowledge if not the will to use
it may have existed in "lesser" civilisations the fact remains that there is
no evidence for this. Leading to a discrimination based on their monumental
legacies. It could be as simple as the fact that northern Europeans blessed
with wood and cursed with weather, choose to build rapidly out of what was
to hand. A material that would sadly not withstand the ravages of time.
:
:Anyways, the he-said-she-said school of ancient history is a bit of a
:waste of time. Every civilisation was "advanced" in something.
:
Tis true I am in the advanced stages of battering the living daylights out
of an intransigent engineering package designed by a bunch of monkeys in bad
haircuts.
KateH
> That would be the Saint Brendan argument. I don't know the dates exactly
but
> would he not have been contemporary with the Vikings given that the rise
of
> the monasteries in Ireland coincided with the emergence of Vikings as a
> northern European force? Either way Both are post-Celtic. Post Roman even.
> After C4 ad. Oh history heads feel free to rip me to shreds on this.
I knew (as soon as I sent) .....that I shoulda said "Irish" -not- "Celtic".
BUT.....I dare you to dispute the fact that Brendan wore black socks w/his
sandals........if and when he ever got to Canada.
KateH
Cat
"Pilar Quezzaire" <quez...@fas.harvard.edu> wrote in message
news:9f2u2o$9u3$2...@news.fas.harvard.edu...
snip
> Why is this considered "advanced" at all? Big, impressive, sure, but
> advanced? Hardly.
>
Before I get torn to shreds, let it be said that I am *not* a expert in
architectural history. But surely, you are implying a modern understanding
of the term "advanced" or "civilised". I dare say that when the Egyptian
pyramids, or even the great European cathedrals were built, exploitation and
slavery would have been more the norm in more countries than they is now.
While I would agree that neither can be described as "advanced" as we
understand it nowadays, I would say that the understanding of engineering
and physics which were necessary to build those monuments were indeed signs
of "advancement"... if not of humanistic enlightenment.
Cat(h)
China Kate Sunflower
cannonballs, "Si"'s motto is:
There have been some suggestions that pre-Viking explorers made it to Atlantic
Canada and/or Maine, but not Stone Age, more like St. Brendan et al.
K.
--
The Dude abides.
westprog++
>A serious answer:
>I don't understand why concurrent developmwent is so surprising to
>historians and laypeople alike. I also don't understand why the same
>stupid markers for cultural advancement we use in the Avalon
>Hill "Civilization" game are being used here. There are differing
ways of
>looking at what is "civilized".
>What bothers me particularly about the use of architecture as a
marker
>(sorry folks, I'm an architectural historian) is that it's rarely
factored
>in that the the enormous projects we call signs of civilization used
the
>most barbaric of methods to make them happen. Slaves and war
prisoners in
>essence built the ancient world, at the cost of their lives in many
cases.
>In cases where wage laborers tended to make buildings (Egypt's
workers
>were largely low-wage earners) they lived incredibly short,
dangerous, and
>miserable lives in a social system that was hopelessly stratified.
>Why is this considered "advanced" at all? Big, impressive, sure, but
>advanced? Hardly.
We aren't talking about "advanced" though - we are talking about
"civilised". "civilised" does not mean "nice". It isn't surprising
that in order to concentrate a large population in a small area, and
allow significant numbers of people to follow non-agricultural
lifestyles, that slavery should precede technology.
Séimí mac Liam
China Kate Sunflower <norac...@stealthisspamblocker.celticweb.com>
wrote in message news:9f2tr...@drn.newsguy.com...
states of Phoenician inhabitation. It's been a long time and I can't
remember the details.
westprog++
>Scríobh westprog++ <3b14bca7$1...@news.boards.ie> :
>>Gearóid Mac Cuinneagáin <Ger@r.d> wrote:
>>>http://www.guardianunlimited.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,3604,497953,00.html
>>..
>>>He went on: "They were the first, for instance, to make what we
call
>>>'careful burials' and to leave offerings for the dead, surrounding
>>>their heads with red ochre to symbolise blood. You find remarkable
>>>similarity in these coastal burials from Iberia right up to Ireland
>>>and even to Denmark."
>>..
>>
>>It may be a value judgement, but I wouldn't rate the use of red
ochre
>>in tombs as being major competition for aqueducts and roads across
Europe.
>
I'm all in favour, but I think the Egyptians were up with that one.
Perhaps they took it a bit too far.
I still rate the Parthenon and Colosseum as achievements higher than
Newgrange and Stonehenge.
J/
SOTW: "Danny Boy" - Sinead O'Connor (Only just been noticed)
Séimí mac Liam
westprog++ <west...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:c7dadbe0.01053...@posting.google.com...
Stonehenge which indicates an advanced society not the actual
construction techniques. Especially the Aubrey holes.
Pilar Quezzaire
: We aren't talking about "advanced" though - we are talking about
: "civilised". "civilised" does not mean "nice". It isn't surprising
: that in order to concentrate a large population in a small area, and
: allow significant numbers of people to follow non-agricultural
: lifestyles, that slavery should precede technology.
This cracked me up when I read it:
Are you saying that "civilized" is not civil?
--
Just Pilar
Pilar Quezzaire
: :A serious answer:
: :What bothers me particularly about the use of architecture as a marker
: :(sorry folks, I'm an architectural historian) is that it's rarely factored
: :in that the the enormous projects we call signs of civilization used the
: :most barbaric of methods to make them happen. Slaves and war prisoners in
: :essence built the ancient world, at the cost of their lives in many cases.
: :In cases where wage laborers tended to make buildings (Egypt's workers
: :were largely low-wage earners) they lived incredibly short, dangerous, and
: :miserable lives in a social system that was hopelessly stratified.
: :
: A serious rejoinder:
Uh oh.
: To be a pedant I wasn't talking about Architecture specifically which tends
: to be more coloured by local conditions and is rarely transportable and
: tradable. The Atlantean argument stems mainly from a study of the artefacts
: such as pottery and jewellery which does seem to have many similarities and
: motifs in common (and even more that are not which are often ignored).
Aha. Similar things have been said about Ireland and Africa as well -- in
fact, genetic studies have proven very recently a link between the Irish
and North Africa that seems to go back quite a while. I just got out a of
BIG discussion of the influence of Christian Nubia on WEst African Europe
with my advisor. Fascinating stuff.
: :Why is this considered "advanced" at all? Big, impressive, sure,
but : :advanced? Hardly.
: It is arguable that ancient grand projects are less indicative of a "High"
: civilisation than of a high degree of social organisation. Although I don't
: think two are mutually exclusive. Many of the grand projects required
: mastery of physics that implied a high state of learning surely a marker of
: a developed civilisation. Although the same knowledge if not the will to use
: it may have existed in "lesser" civilisations the fact remains that there is
: no evidence for this.
A lot of the great buildings of the ancient and medieval eras were
constructed using trial-by-error. I do think that social organization and
empirical skill are important marks of a society's capability -- but it's
one all societies seem to have. The "advancement" argument based on trade,
architecture, or any other arbitrarily-chosen marker to me indicates the
general ability of humanity to adapt, is all. "Great civilizations" manage
to amass or control enormous resources, which seems to be the big
difference between "greater" and "lesser" societies.
All of this I think should be considered when we find pottery fragments or
genetic studies of comparative civilizations.
: Leading to a discrimination based on their monumental
: legacies. It could be as simple as the fact that northern Europeans blessed
: with wood and cursed with weather, choose to build rapidly out of what was
: to hand. A material that would sadly not withstand the ravages of time.
And Africans were too busy travelling to make big stone churches. When
they did (mosques) they were spectacular.
: Tis true I am in the advanced stages of battering the living daylights out
: of an intransigent engineering package designed by a bunch of monkeys in bad
: haircuts.
Ow, dude, shit you have my sympathies. I fight with academics all day, so
I understand.
--
Just Pilar
China Kate Sunflower
Not necessarily.
Mary
The Native Americans/American Indians/Innuit/Eskimo/etc. discovered America.
Everyone else is just an invader.
Mary
-------
"History, Stephen said, is a nightmare from which I am trying to awake" -James
Joyce.
"Ever noticed the more they dole out freedom over there, the more they take it
away over here?" -Jello Biafra
http://www.geocities.com/branwaedd
kfuzzbox
> Regarding if the Irish etc. discovered America:
>
> The Native Americans/American Indians/Innuit/Eskimo/etc. discovered America.
> Everyone else is just an invader.
This is such bollox. [William Haig Looks Like Pinky and the Brain] What
about the blacks in the Americas? They are not invaders they were
sitting in Africa minding their own business and a bunch of blokes came
along and took them from Africa and put them in the Americas. [reject
RTE] The world belongs to everybody not just to the first group who
arrived in such and such a place. That's so stupid. The native Americas
have every right to complain about their genocide and opression at the
hands of American imperialist [reject RTE] but they are talking bollox
with the whole "we got here first so it's ours shite" argument. I'm
fucked if I am giving Europe back to the Neanderthals. [William Haig
Looks Like Pinky and the Brain] I have a hard enough time with Shamrock
Rovers playing on the Northside. [I have a big dick]
Terry McT
<re...@to.newsgroup> wrote:
[snipped]
>
>
> Fabricating them while off your radar on mushrooms helps too. So what about
> all the stone age European sites in Newfoundland or around there ??
>
Stoneage sites in Newfoundland? Are you sure you aren't confusing
Stoneage with Viking?
Terry
sidhe...@webtv.net
(That would be the Saint Brendan argument. I don't know the dates
exactly but would he not have been contemporary with the Vikings given
that the rise of the monasteries in Ireland coincided with the emergence
of Vikings as a northern European force?)
I think the monasteries were pretty well established by the time the
Vikings arrived.. that being said.. Brendan was probably a
Johnny-Come-Lately in the Irish sea-faring business.. on his arrival in
Iceland.. Irishmen were allready there..
Sweeney the Wanderer
>
>Scríobh Pilar Quezzaire <9f3ec3$bnd$3...@news.fas.harvard.edu> :
>you don't believe me.
>
That's the understatement of the year. I once had to explain to my mother-in-law
that saying that something is "very nice" or that someone is "a nice girl" is
slagging to the nth degree. Southerners always speak in code, and the code is
frequently not very civil.
Sweeney, turning niceness on its head.
Mary
>about the blacks in the Americas? They are not invaders they were
>sitting in Africa minding their own business and a bunch of blokes came
>along and took them from Africa and put them in the Americas. [reject
>RTE] The world belongs to everybody not just to the first group who
>arrived in such and such a place. That's so stupid. The native Americas
>have every right to complain about their genocide and opression at the
>hands of American imperialist [reject RTE] but they are talking bollox
>with the whole "we got here first so it's ours shite" argument. I'm
>fucked if I am giving Europe back to the Neanderthals. [William Haig
>Looks Like Pinky and the Brain] I have a hard enough time with Shamrock
>Rovers playing on the Northside. [I have a big dick]
>
What the hell is this?
As for the Africans, they're an exception, like the Chinese. The difference
with America is that there's an argument about who discovered it first.
There's no argument about that with Europe. And anyway, there aren't any
Neanderthals anymore, but there sure as hell are still Native Americans.
Pilar Quezzaire
: Scríobh Pilar Quezzaire <9f3ec3$bnd$3...@news.fas.harvard.edu> :
:>This cracked me up when I read it:
:>
:>Are you saying that "civilized" is not civil?
: Civil doesn;t mean nice either. Just check out southern manners if
: you don't believe me.
Which southern? I'm thinking Savannah, you may be thinking Kerry. It
prolly applies to both.
--
Just Pilar
Pilar Quezzaire
: :
:>>How about interring the dead with honour in the first place?
:>
:>I'm all in favour, but I think the Egyptians were up with that one.
:>Perhaps they took it a bit too far.
: Newgrange predates the pyramids.
Newgrange doesn't predate mound burials in Egypt and Nubia, nor Cycladic
sites in Greece and Cyprus.
: OTOH, Neanderthals were burying their dead too.
:>I still rate the Parthenon and Colosseum as achievements higher than
:>Newgrange and Stonehenge.
: Whoopee for you.
Depends on what you're lookin' for, dude. I marvel at all things ancient
-- except Ger's leftover cigarette butts.
Oh, and Unki's anatomy.
--
Just Pilar
Si
--
Si,
Bog Snorkler Extrordinaire
Gearóid Mac Cuinneagáin wrote in message ...
:Scríobh Si <991215981.5700.0...@news.demon.co.uk> :
:
:>Atlantean theory is old hat.
:
:Tsh tsh, never assume that the title I choose for a thread has
:anything to do with the content I post
:
:--
:Gearóid Mac Cuinneagáin abardubh at eircom dot net
:Read the Irish FAQ: http://www.geocities.com/welisc/ifaq
:Seanfhocal na Seachtaine:
: "Cuir suas den Ceathrú Leasu is Fiche"
Hans Dermot Doran
>
> A lot of the great buildings of the ancient and medieval eras were
> constructed using trial-by-error. I do think that social organization and
> empirical skill are important marks of a society's capability -- but it's
> one all societies seem to have. The "advancement" argument based on trade,
> architecture, or any other arbitrarily-chosen marker to me indicates the
> general ability of humanity to adapt, is all. "Great civilizations" manage
> to amass or control enormous resources, which seems to be the big
> difference between "greater" and "lesser" societies.
Yes, a lot of modern physics is constructed by trial and error as well, it
just a slightly different dimension when you spend a couple of billion on a
particle accelerator. As the man said, its not the size of the wand but the
magician that waves it. It's how you "leverage" those resources that makes
the civilisation. Furthermore although "European" civilisation was in a
constant state of advancement, it was pretty much an asynchronous process
with no one "sub-culture" having the upper hand for that long. Growth
control (open or closed), is probably the mark of a great civilisation.
Regards
HTD
westprog++
> Gearóid Mac Cuinneagáin <Ger@r.d> offered this sage advice:
> : Scríobh westprog++ <c7dadbe0.01053...@posting.google.com>
> :>>How about interring the dead with honour in the first place?
> :>I'm all in favour, but I think the Egyptians were up with that one.
> :>Perhaps they took it a bit too far.
> : Newgrange predates the pyramids.
Which I didn't mention.
> Newgrange doesn't predate mound burials in Egypt and Nubia, nor Cycladic
> sites in Greece and Cyprus.
I'm
> : OTOH, Neanderthals were burying their dead too.
>
> :>I still rate the Parthenon and Colosseum as achievements higher than
> :>Newgrange and Stonehenge.
> : Whoopee for you.
> Depends on what you're lookin' for, dude. I marvel at all things ancient
It is possible to marvel at an ancient achievement without approving
of the methods that led to its construction.
> -- except Ger's leftover cigarette butts.
> Oh, and Unki's anatomy.
Sometimes there is nothing to be done but kneel and worship.
J/
SOTW: "Danny Boy" - Sinead O'Connor
"If the Republicans do not stand aside, then they must resist, and
Finish your sentences
west...@hotmail.com (westprog++) wrote:
>Pilar Quezzaire <quez...@fas.harvard.edu> wrote in message news:<9f4fnv$gtv$6...@news.fas.harvard.edu>...
>> Gearóid Mac Cuinneagáin <Ger@r.d> offered this sage advice:
>> : Scríobh westprog++ <c7dadbe0.01053...@posting.google.com>
>
>> :>>How about interring the dead with honour in the first place?
>
>> :>I'm all in favour, but I think the Egyptians were up with that one.
>> :>Perhaps they took it a bit too far.
>
>> : Newgrange predates the pyramids.
>
>Which I didn't mention.
>
>> Newgrange doesn't predate mound burials in Egypt and Nubia, nor Cycladic
>> sites in Greece and Cyprus.
>
>I'm
Not only do you misspell "American's", you don't even finish sentences.
What a fool.
A Critic
westprog++
Very much so. I don't see any reason why early civilisations should
have been more "civil" or morally upright than the arrangements which
they replaced.
westprog++
>>> Are you saying that "civilized" is not civil?
>>Very much so. I don't see any reason why early civilisations should
>>have been more "civil" or morally upright than the arrangements
which
>>they replaced.
>Civilized just means city folks. Only the selfish bias of the city
>folks gives it any connotations of 'enlightenment' or 'morality'.
There's an assumption that the growth of civilisation was a 'good'
thing. This may be true, but it is not unarguable. I'd say that
technological, scientific and artistic progress is linked to
civilisation.
>Then again, its such a common mistake that the second meaning does
>have validity, though I doubt an archaeologist would use it that way.
There are plenty of words implying nice and polite. "Civilisation" is
a useful word to describe a type of human society, and it is wasteful
to squander it.
>One of the reasons I posted the article was because of the difference
>between what Cunliffe might have said, and what the reporter thinks
he
>said. Cunliffe almost certainly didn't say it was a myth that Britons
>were uncivilized barbarians for example (not in those words anyway).
>They did live in the countryside, and they didn't speak Greek. :)
>More seriously, I'm fairly sure Cunliffe never said that Celts came
>from Northern India.
It seems more important nowadays that one's own ethnic group was more
advanced and moral in the distant past. In the nineteenth century
empire-builders considered themselves heirs to the Greeks and Romans
regardless of ancestry.
Pilar Quezzaire
:>Which southern? I'm thinking Savannah, you may be thinking Kerry. It
:>prolly applies to both.
: Evidently, the books don;t teach all you need to know about Ireland
Nice shot, but I saw evidence of double-talking in many parts of the RoI.
--
Just Pilar
Pilar Quezzaire
: Furthermore although "European" civilisation was in a
: constant state of advancement, it was pretty much an asynchronous process
: with no one "sub-culture" having the upper hand for that long. Growth
: control (open or closed), is probably the mark of a great civilisation.
The only correction I'd make is that all cultures experinced some
"advancement", not just European.
--
Just Pilar
Pilar Quezzaire
:>What the hell is this?
:>
:>As for the Africans, they're an exception, like the Chinese. The difference
:>with America is that there's an argument about who discovered it first.
:>There's no argument about that with Europe. And anyway, there aren't any
:>Neanderthals anymore, but there sure as hell are still Native Americans.
: How the fuck did ye manage to go from Iron Age Brits to Americans?
Why don't you ask Unki, bubblebrain.
--
Just Pilar
Pilar Quezzaire
:
:> Depends on what you're lookin' for, dude. I marvel at all things ancient
: It is possible to marvel at an ancient achievement without approving
: of the methods that led to its construction.
Agreed. I think to marvel should always have a sense of chagrin attached
to it.
:> -- except Ger's leftover cigarette butts.
:
:> Oh, and Unki's anatomy.
: Sometimes there is nothing to be done but kneel and worship.
Well, I've been branded a heretic before...
--
Just Pilar
Hans Dermot Doran
If a culture does not grow then it is not a culture, but sometimes it grows
too big and dies, sometimes it overgrows its boundaries and survives and
sometimes it just withers away, biology basics ... My (time-) reference
frame is over and above that of the isolated cultures (ancient Rome, Egypt
etc). Each European country has benefitted from its neighbours (look at the
benefit Ireland got from 800 years of occupation --- hee hee). and more or
less achieved a pretty high standard, certainly more than each would have
achieved if it were isolated.
Great civilisations therefore overcome the nadirs in their existance.
Regards
> --
> Just Pilar
westprog++
>>>More seriously, I'm fairly sure Cunliffe never said that Celts came
>>>from Northern India.
>>It seems more important nowadays that one's own ethnic group was
more
>>advanced and moral in the distant past. In the nineteenth century
>>empire-builders considered themselves heirs to the Greeks and Romans
>>regardless of ancestry.
>What you see as 'more important nowadays' is often just rebalancing
to
>counter the established imperialist line. The empire-builders
weren't
>the only ones with ingenious ancestors, but pointing that out often
>seems to annoy.
As I was pointing out, the empire-builders tended to disregard their
own ancestors and regard the Greeks and Romans more highly. They felt
that cultural inheritance was more significant than ancestry. There
was a European bias but that was a seperate issue.
westprog++
>Scríobh westprog++ <c7dadbe0.01053...@posting.google.com>
...
>>As I was pointing out, the empire-builders tended to disregard their
>>own ancestors and regard the Greeks and Romans more highly. They
felt
>And even go to extraordinary lengths to mimic them. All those
>Victorian "Classical" buildings, for instance. FWIW, there was a
>concerted effort to prove that the British (or even French, Germans,
>etc) were the "true" descendants of the Roman empire.
The average Victorian gentleman knew that without being told.
>>that cultural inheritance was more significant than ancestry. There
>Gee, you mean culture isn't genetic? Oh wait, that's a different
>thread.....
There is only one thread.
>>was a European bias but that was a seperate issue.
>"Europe" in this case being defined as the need arose to include
>Egypt, Mesopotamia...
But not usually India, China or South America.
Walking through Roman ruins in Spain, a Spaniard said "You know,
Westprog, these fucking Basques are so stupid, they're proud of not
being conquered by the Romans."*
J/
SOTW: "Danny Boy" - Sinead O'Connor
"If the Republicans do not stand aside, then they must resist, and
resistance means just this civil war and armed opposition to what is
undoubtedly... the decision of the majority of the people"
*Some names changed in the above text.
Brian J Goggin
wrote:
>How the fuck did ye manage to go from Iron Age Brits to Americans?
Collapse of British Iron Age civilisation and reversion to barbarism.
bjg
The Pirate Queen
"Gearóid Mac Cuinneagáin" <Ger@r.d> wrote in message
news:ceschtk2lhj3aosk4...@4ax.com...
> Scríobh westprog++ <c7dadbe0.01053...@posting.google.com>
> >It seems more important nowadays that one's own ethnic group was more
> >advanced and moral in the distant past. In the nineteenth century
> >empire-builders considered themselves heirs to the Greeks and Romans
> >regardless of ancestry.
>
> counter the established imperialist line. The empire-builders weren't
> the only ones with ingenious ancestors, but pointing that out often
> seems to annoy.
hmmm..... what gets me is that somehow, someone decided what the most
"important and contributing" civilizations were and that keeps getting
taught..... that is one of the reasons I love leanring about what is NOT
taught in traditional curriculums.... like the Mayans, IMHO an outstandingly
advanced civilization scientifically even if they did chop off the head of
the winning team in sports matches....... and does it bother anyone else
that every friggin ancient history class terms the area around the Tigress
and Euphrates as the cradle of civilization? Also, I am much more apt to
support concurrent developement of the same techniques and discoveries in
different places than I am just one group.
Westie, I think the Mayan ruins are much more impressive than the Greek
stuff any day! And I'll be seing more in July when I go to Belize!
PQ
Pilar Quezzaire
: If a culture does not grow then it is not a culture, but sometimes it grows
: too big and dies, sometimes it overgrows its boundaries and survives and
: sometimes it just withers away, biology basics ... My (time-) reference
: frame is over and above that of the isolated cultures (ancient Rome, Egypt
: etc). Each European country has benefitted from its neighbours (look at the
: benefit Ireland got from 800 years of occupation --- hee hee). and more or
: less achieved a pretty high standard, certainly more than each would have
: achieved if it were isolated.
I'm not totally understanding what you're saying here exactly -- could you
clarify which time references you are using?
--
Just Pilar
Pilar Quezzaire
:>The only correction I'd make is that all cultures experinced some
:>"advancement", not just European.
: Why are we all equating 'change' with 'advancement'?
I'm using quotes for this very reason. I think it's really easy to use
"advancement" in lieu of non-linear progress.
I dunno -- we wanna get into definitions of this or not?
BTW -- there are a couple of good sites dicussing early man I've been
looking at since this argument started. People want me to pass them on?
--
Just Pilar
Pilar Quezzaire
:>Why don't you ask Unki, bubblebrain.
: He's baiting the Scots, I decided to killfile him till he gets it out
: of his system.
Well, that I can't shake a stick at. Unfortuantely, it's his fault again.
--
Just Pilar
Tony Cooper
> Westie, I think the Mayan ruins are much more impressive than the
Greek
> stuff any day! And I'll be seing more in July when I go to Belize!
>
The Baboon Sanctuary along the Belize River is highly recommended.
The Howler monkeys are incredible. When you get back, we expect an
essay on "My Summer Vacation; And Why Paul Carr reminds me of a
Howler monkey".
--
Tony Cooper aka: Tony_Co...@Yahoo.com
Provider of Jots & Tittles
westprog++
...
> hmmm..... what gets me is that somehow, someone decided what the most
> "important and contributing" civilizations were and that keeps getting
> taught in traditional curriculums.... like the Mayans, IMHO an outstandingly
> advanced civilization scientifically even if they did chop off the head of
> the winning team in sports matches....... and does it bother anyone else
> that every friggin ancient history class terms the area around the Tigress
> and Euphrates as the cradle of civilization? Also, I am much more apt to
> support concurrent developement of the same techniques and discoveries in
> different places than I am just one group.
> Westie, I think the Mayan ruins are much more impressive than the Greek
> stuff any day! And I'll be seing more in July when I go to Belize!
Bix a belex, PQ?
The Mayans would have been underestimated due to not being European -
but they failed to come up with the wheel and the arch, which limited
what they could do. However, progress in these areas is as much a
matter of geographical limitations as the capacity of a culture to
create new things.
westprog++
>Scríobh Pilar Quezzaire <9f5u07$lmc$2...@news.fas.harvard.edu> :
>>Gearóid Mac Cuinneagáin <Ger@r.d> offered this sage advice:
>>: Scríobh Pilar Quezzaire <9f5ijn$k3b$2...@news.fas.harvard.edu> :
>>:>The only correction I'd make is that all cultures experinced some
>>:>"advancement", not just European.
>>: Why are we all equating 'change' with 'advancement'?
>>I'm using quotes for this very reason. I think it's really easy to
use
>>"advancement" in lieu of non-linear progress.
>Or to see what has happened as 'inevitable'. Or to view the victors
>in any given skirmish as morally deserving
I would not preclude a wary definition of certain things as
"advancements" or even advancements. The use of the plough was an
advancement in the art of agriculture. The invention of zero was an
advancement in mathematics. That doesn't necessarily imply that the
civilisations which came up with these things were superior to others.
>>I dunno -- we wanna get into definitions of this or not?
>Nah, I'm already stuck in a subthread with Westprog over the lead in
>the original article using 'civilization' and 'barbarian'. Goddess
>help us if we go through the entire thing with a dictionary.
"Stuck" - you make it sound so burdensome. Go off and have fun with
Pilar then. I won't even mention the discussion about the Celts I
heard on RTE this morning.
Pilar Quezzaire
: I would not preclude a wary definition of certain things as
: "advancements" or even advancements. The use of the plough was an
: advancement in the art of agriculture. The invention of zero was an
: advancement in mathematics. That doesn't necessarily imply that the
: civilisations which came up with these things were superior to others.
They were as superior as the culture that invented the saddle and stirrup,
for whatever purpose any invention served.
I think we get caught up in what's BIG when we consider any society's
"advancement". It's very easy to point at a prominent marker and say,
"This is evidence". However, it is usually the smallest of inventions that
make or break a society as it expands. For the Huns, for example, it was
their horseriding technology -- same for Pazaryks and Mongols. No one
would deny these groups played a serious role in world history -- yet none
of these culture ever made a Stonhenge, Parthenon, or a Karnak.
: "Stuck" - you make it sound so burdensome. Go off and have fun with
: Pilar then. I won't even mention the discussion about the Celts I
: heard on RTE this morning.
Umm...excuse me, I wanna hear it!
--
Just Pilar
The Pirate Queen
"westprog++" <west...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> > stuff any day! And I'll be seing more in July when I go to Belize!
>
> Bix a belex, PQ?
?????.... my brain is not working this early in the morning... is this the
name of some C++ proc or what?
> The Mayans would have been underestimated due to not being European -
as many other cultures have been
> but they failed to come up with the wheel and the arch, which limited
> what they could do. However, progress in these areas is as much a
> matter of geographical limitations as the capacity of a culture to
> create new things.
hmmm... now I have to go look something up dammit.... and it's Friday and I
don't want to think! Thanks a lot westie!!! But I am certainly struck by
their mathematical precision.
PQ
westprog++
"The Pirate Queen" <p...@austin.rr.com> wrote:
>"westprog++" <west...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> "The Pirate Queen" <p...@whothehellcares.com> wrote in message
>> > Westie, I think the Mayan ruins are much more impressive than the Greek
>> > stuff any day! And I'll be seing more in July when I go to Belize!
>> Bix a belex, PQ?
>?????.... my brain is not working this early in the morning... is this the
>name of some C++ proc or what?
It's Mayan - I pulled it off a website.
>> The Mayans would have been underestimated due to not being European -
>as many other cultures have been
>> but they failed to come up with the wheel and the arch, which limited
>> what they could do. However, progress in these areas is as much a
>> matter of geographical limitations as the capacity of a culture to
>> create new things.
>hmmm... now I have to go look something up dammit.... and it's Friday and
I
>don't want to think! Thanks a lot westie!!! But I am certainly struck
by
>their mathematical precision.
Take your time - I probably won't be around much till Tuesday.
Séimí mac Liam
Gearóid Mac Cuinneagáin <Ger@r.d> wrote in message
> Scríobh westprog++
<c7dadbe0.01060...@posting.google.com>
> :
>
> >The Mayans would have been underestimated due to not being
European -
> >but they failed to come up with the wheel and the arch, which
limited
> >what they could do. However, progress in these areas is as much a
> >matter of geographical limitations as the capacity of a culture to
> >create new things.
>
example
> of ethnocentric focus. The Mayans lived in big mountainy Andes
ranges,
> why would they waste their time with wheels when pack animals were
so
> much more efficient?
>
Stick to the Irish stuff, you're much better at it. Do a web search
for Mayans. Find out where they lived and why they had big wide roads
through the jungle. Not mountains.
Pilar Quezzaire
: :
:>The Mayans would have been underestimated due to not being European -
:>but they failed to come up with the wheel and the arch, which limited
:>what they could do. However, progress in these areas is as much a
:>matter of geographical limitations as the capacity of a culture to
:>create new things.
: Indeed. The idea that lacking a wheel is limiting is a classic example
: of ethnocentric focus. The Mayans lived in big mountainy Andes ranges,
: why would they waste their time with wheels when pack animals were so
: much more efficient?
Ger, the MAyans lived in Central America. The Incas lives in the Andes.
: --
: Gearóid Mac Cuinneagáin abardubh at eircom dot net
: Read the Irish FAQ: http://www.geocities.com/welisc/ifaq
: Seanfhocal na Seachtaine:
: "Cuir suas den Ceathrú Leasu is Fiche"
--
Just Pilar
The Pirate Queen
>
> >The Mayans would have been underestimated due to not being European -
> >but they failed to come up with the wheel and the arch, which limited
> >what they could do. However, progress in these areas is as much a
> >matter of geographical limitations as the capacity of a culture to
> >create new things.
>
> of ethnocentric focus. The Mayans lived in big mountainy Andes ranges,
> why would they waste their time with wheels when pack animals were so
> much more efficient?
possibly a good point... but I believe you mean the Incas from the Andes
L
Turlough
> Ger, the MAyans lived in Central America. The Incas lives in the
> Andes.
You beat me to it. The Mayans also built pyramids, didn't they, or am I
thinking of another group? A&E had a good documentary on those. Was
there a land mass between Africa and Central America?
Turlough
Terry McT
<turlo...@excite.com> wrote:
> Pilar Quezzaire wrote:
>
> > Ger, the MAyans lived in Central America. The Incas lives in the
> > Andes.
>
> You beat me to it. The Mayans also built pyramids, didn't they, or am I
> thinking of another group?
Chichen Itza is a neat Mayan complex towards the center of the Yucatan
Peninsula. I took a tour of it a few years back with a graduate
student studying Mayan history/archaelogy. What a great day that way.
Only drawback was that it was in late July and so frickin hot you can't
imagine it.
http://emuseum.mankato.msus.edu/prehistory/latinamerica/meso/sites/chich
en_itza.html
http://www.tidepool.com/~codyspot/newpage3.htm
http://www.internet-at-work.com/hos_mcgrane/chichen/chichen_index.html
That's probably the best known big Mayan complex in Mexico, but lots of
folks go to Tulum and Xel-ha.
Really beautiful part of the world.
Terry
Pilar Quezzaire
: Pilar Quezzaire wrote:
Mayans and Azetcs had some form of pyramids, Toltecs and Olmec monumental
statuary.
I have not heard of a land mass between Central America and Africa, save
the Carribean Islands, of course. :) There has been some talk that
Africans from the Western coast made it across teh Carribean and into
Central America via shipping routes, just as the Vikings made it to Nother
America. The gulf stream is extremely difficult to navigate across West
Africa (that's why a shipping route through Europe only became possible
with large ships). The theory still may be valid, but mroe research on
West African history needs to be done.
My advisor and myself here at Harvard have been working on river travel
and trade routes in Sub-Saharan Africa for some time. It is at least
possible that Nubia had the technology to reach West Africa via the Benue
River and Lake Chad. Other cultures may have had the technology to move
further.
: Turlough
--
Just Pilar
Zacatecas
>Scríobh westprog++ <c7dadbe0.01060...@posting.google.com>
>:
>
>>The Mayans would have been underestimated due to not being European -
>>but they failed to come up with the wheel and the arch, which limited
>>what they could do. However, progress in these areas is as much a
>>matter of geographical limitations as the capacity of a culture to
>>create new things.
>
>Indeed. The idea that lacking a wheel is limiting is a classic example
>of ethnocentric focus. The Mayans lived in big mountainy Andes ranges,
I suspected for years that you were Keith Mills in Donegal drag.
Now I am vindicated.
Where is my prize?
>Seanfhocal na Seachtaine:
> "Cuir suas den Ceathrú Leasu is Fiche"
Speaking of amendments, here's an interesting article on the Death penalty in Ireland.
http://www.ireland.com/special/referendums/cappun/issues/issue2.htm
The last man put to death in Ireland was a Limerick man, as was the only woman that the State put to
death.
Also a Canadian, I wonder what the story behind that was?
Appartenly Ireland never had it's own executioner, we borrowed them from the British.
Interesting stuff.
>Gearóid Mac Cuinneagáin abardubh at eircom dot net
MMcC
sidhe...@webtv.net
(I think the Mayan ruins are much more impressive than the Greek stuff
any day! And I'll be seing more in July when I go to Belize!)
I ran across this last night..
westprog++
> Scríobh westprog++
> >The Mayans would have been underestimated due to not being European -
> >but they failed to come up with the wheel and the arch, which limited
> >what they could do. However, progress in these areas is as much a
> >matter of geographical limitations as the capacity of a culture to
> >create new things.
> Indeed. The idea that lacking a wheel is limiting is a classic example
> of ethnocentric focus. The Mayans lived in big mountainy Andes ranges,
> why would they waste their time with wheels when pack animals were so
> much more efficient?
I see no need to join in the unseemly queue of Western Hemisphere
experts pointing out the lack of Andes in Mayan geography. I was
pointing out that the circumstances of a society might prevent them
creating something like the wheel, because it was not immediately
useful, even though long term benefits
might result.
J/
SOTW: "Baby, I Love You" - The Ronettes
Insert Dev quote here.
Séimí mac Liam
to see or imagine a reasonable explanation for why a culture with wide
straight roads, round calendars and the ability to create the
architecture that they did, didn't use the wheels. It's a puzzlement.
Best guess I have come up with is some kind of religious prohibition.
westprog++
...
> This has been a curiosity to me for close to thirty years. I have yet
> to see or imagine a reasonable explanation for why a culture with wide
> straight roads, round calendars and the ability to create the
> architecture that they did, didn't use the wheels. It's a puzzlement.
> Best guess I have come up with is some kind of religious prohibition.
The number of people coming up with new ideas is always fairly small.
If these people aren't encouraged and supported, they will shut up
about it. A similar effect can be seen in many large companies.
J/
SOTW: "Baby, I Love You" - The Ronettes
Dev quote on the way, real soon now.
Cat
> If these people aren't encouraged and supported, they will shut up
> about it. A similar effect can be seen in many large companies.
>
> J/
So, you're saying that the inventor of the wheel was really a little
downtrodden Mayan nerd misunderestimated by the system ?
Cat(h)
Séimí mac Liam
Cat <cathy_ie@(spamfree)yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:z6pT6.5661$Fk7....@news.indigo.ie...
your chest while you watch might tend to inhibit original thought.
Cat
"Séimí mac Liam" <gwydd...@aracnet.com> wrote in message
news:f3rT6.67$F6....@typhoon.aracnet.com...
> > So, you're saying that the inventor of the wheel was really a little
> > downtrodden Mayan nerd misunderestimated by the system ?
> > Cat(h)
> >
> >
> Now even you have to admit that having your beating heart ripped from
> your chest while you watch might tend to inhibit original thought.
>
Or at least the expression of it ? My poor downtrodden little Mayan nerd
will never have his glory rightfully sung. We should have tombs for the
Unknown Mayan Nerd Who Thought About The Wheel But Could Not Speak About It.
Cat(h)
>
Séimí mac Liam
Gearóid Mac Cuinneagáin <Ger@r.d> wrote in message
> "S?m?mac Liam" <gwydd...@aracnet.com> wrote in message
> news:<4P5T6.18$F6....@typhoon.aracnet.com>...
> ...
> > This has been a curiosity to me for close to thirty years. I have
yet
> > to see or imagine a reasonable explanation for why a culture with
wide
> > straight roads, round calendars and the ability to create the
> > architecture that they did, didn't use the wheels. It's a
puzzlement.
> > Best guess I have come up with is some kind of religious
prohibition.
>
much
> simpler explanation. Look at your own country for example. Most of
> you seem to function perfectly well without irony.
>
>
True and they did have perfectly good feet and plenty of women to
carry their burden. Maybe they were Irish.
KateH
> Now even you have to admit that having your beating heart ripped from
> your chest while you watch might tend to inhibit original thought.
Yes, but then again ......it never stopped most of us from falling in love.
The thought of Incas on wheels is pretty cool.......kinda like the idea of
putting skiis on your feet ......and trying NOT to slide down snowy
mountains. But I still don't see why the Mayans wouldn't have found them
useful becasue of the terrain. Did I miss some brilliant insight?
KateH
KateH
> We should have tombs for the
> Unknown Mayan Nerd Who Thought About The Wheel But Could Not Speak About
It.
I think I saw that as I was whizzing through Gettysburg.
KateH
Séimí mac Liam
KateH <hock...@innw.nospam.net> wrote in message
news:thsg3a9...@corp.supernews.com...
years.
Séimí mac Liam
Gearóid Mac Cuinneagáin <Ger@r.d> wrote in message
> Scríobh "Cat" <cathy_ie@(spamfree)yahoo.com>
> <f9rT6.5684$Fk7....@news.indigo.ie> :
>
> >
> >"Séimí mac Liam" <gwydd...@aracnet.com> wrote in message
> >news:f3rT6.67$F6....@typhoon.aracnet.com...
> >> > So, you're saying that the inventor of the wheel was really a
little
> >> > downtrodden Mayan nerd misunderestimated by the system ?
> >> > Cat(h)
> >> >
> >> >
> >> Now even you have to admit that having your beating heart ripped
from
> >> your chest while you watch might tend to inhibit original
thought.
>
> risk of being fried alive by electricity inhibits the production of
> quality daytime TV
We Americans may lack a sense of irony but we at least have some
sense of humour.
Cat
> > Yo're assuming a causal relationship. I might as well say that the
> > risk of being fried alive by electricity inhibits the production of
> > quality daytime TV
>
> We Americans may lack a sense of irony but we at least have some
> sense of humour.
>
>
However, suggesting that certain tabboos and fears may inhibit invention
and/or discoveries ignores the fact that people like Galileo and others were
put under tremendous pressure (persuasion of all ilk right up to torture) to
relent their theories. Many inventors/discoverers risked / had to pay the
ultimate price to pursue their ideas, but did so nonetheless. Hence, for
our one little Mayan nerd who didn't dare speak of the wheel, there could
have been a few who would have died for it...
But maybe the ground iin Maya land was too soft, and stilts were more
suitable...
Cat(h)
Séimí mac Liam
stilt equipped right away. I'm just sure it will improve my wet
weather performance immensely.
Cat
> > However, suggesting that certain tabboos and fears may inhibit
> invention
> > and/or discoveries ignores the fact that people like Galileo and
> others were
> > put under tremendous pressure (persuasion of all ilk right up to
> torture) to
> > relent their theories. Many inventors/discoverers risked / had to
> pay the
> > ultimate price to pursue their ideas, but did so nonetheless.
> Hence, for
> > our one little Mayan nerd who didn't dare speak of the wheel, there
> could
> > have been a few who would have died for it...
> > But maybe the ground iin Maya land was too soft, and stilts were
> more
> > suitable...
> Oh, yes, I'm going to run right down to the stilt store and get my 4X4
> stilt equipped right away. I'm just sure it will improve my wet
> weather performance immensely.
>
You'd better believe it !! Send us a couple of pics, won't you ?
Cat(h) (engineering has always been my forte)
Pilar Quezzaire
: Or at least the expression of it ? My poor downtrodden little Mayan nerd
: will never have his glory rightfully sung. We should have tombs for the
: Unknown Mayan Nerd Who Thought About The Wheel But Could Not Speak About It.
: Cat(h)
:>
I think it's:
"The Unknown Mayan Nerd who invented the wheel, relaized theyw ere too
heavy out of stone, and didn't have tree trunks thick and strong enough to
make wooden wheels like they did in other places. And even then, the
wheels kept getting caught in the jungle vegetation anyways."
Must be a resources thing.
--
Just Pilar
Pilar Quezzaire
:> putting skiis on your feet ......and trying NOT to slide down snowy
:> mountains. But I still don't see why the Mayans wouldn't have found
: them
:> useful becasue of the terrain. Did I miss some brilliant insight?
:> KateH
:>
: Not that I'm aware of but then I haven't had an original thought in
: years.
I think it was lack of materials, or rather, prioritization of them.
--
Just Pilar
Terry McT
<cathy_ie@(spamfree)yahoo.com> wrote:
There was a boom in the transportation technology business: the
development of an A-frame for dragging goods behind a pack animal, a
new and more efficient backpack for toting rocks up pyramids, a new
style of dugout that negoiates the coastal mangroves well, and so
forth. Just before our man was able to make his splash with this new
round rolling object, the trans-tech industry collapsed when the
religious and ruling classes faith in the trans-tech was shaken by a
series of bizarre signs from the gods - two headed animals being born,
an ecllipse, and a drought in the southern regions. What else could
they do but appease the gods by sacrificing all the trans-tech guys.
Tony Cooper
> There was a boom in the transportation technology business: the
> development of an A-frame for dragging goods behind a pack animal, a
> new and more efficient backpack for toting rocks up pyramids, a new
> style of dugout that negoiates the coastal mangroves well, and so
> forth.
According to my research, the Mayans were quite intellectual and
scientific. They worked with concepts like zero (nada, in Mayan
parlance), flavoured coffees, and tiny drums that hung from the waist
used to summon other Mayans. The pyramids at Uaxactún, Copán, Tikal,
Bonampak, Palenque, and Río Bec were - in actuality - drum towers so
signals could be sent additional distances.
It was a cruel society, though, that practiced slavery and human
sacrifice. Young virgins were sent to call centers to sell drum
minute programs. Those that didn't make quota were publically
sacrificed by having their still-beating hearts ripped from their
bodies. From this practice, we get the English phrase "marketing goal
implementation".
Since chewing gum and the MP3 were not yet invented (See: Puritans,
United States, 1600 AD), the young Mayan girls were actually able to
think. They developed the mini-breechcloth and the push-up chest
binder. After that, the number of virgins sharply decreased and human
sacrifices declined. There was an adverse affect of this in that the
average life span increased thus driving up the price of mangos,
bananas and red beans. This caused a further adverse effect since
various leaders attempted corrective economic policies to regulate the
price of mangos, bananas and red beans thus giving birth to what is
now known as "government" and generally recognized as a bad thing.
When the trade boomed, it was called the Yucatan Jaguar. It seems
that shaky economic plans are always named after cat-like creatures.
In addition to human sacrifice, the Mayans practiced indescribably
horrible acts of self-mutilation including the forcing of rings
through hanging bits of flesh. In this day and age, this is difficult
to imagine, but it is historically true. The Mayans also practiced
cranial deformation by confining an infant's head between two boards
so that the head would resemble an ear of corn. This practice is
generally acknowledged as the beginning of plastic and reconstructive
surgery. Practioners of cranial deformation now pull the facial skin
back of the ears and tie it in knots instead of using boards. (See:
Rivers, Joan. U.S.)
Mayan cities warred constantly with each other. The Great War of 220
AD between as Copán and Río Bec started with charges of bias of the
judges in the annual "Tidy Temple" competition. The Rio Bec troops
captured 11,000 prisoners and kept them in tiny carpet-lined cubicles
where personal photographs and pottery were not allowed for as long as
eight hours without a coffee break. The Rio Bec prison design,
however, has been copied all over the civilized world and is now known
as the Office Park.
One of the most famous aspects of the Mayan civilization was their
sport. They played a game in a stadium with very high walls with tiny
hoops set high in the wall that the players attempted to put the ball
through. The players could not touch the ball with their hands or
feet. The losers of the games were sacrificed. The game is still
played today and known as "soccer". Players may now use their feet,
and only spectators are killed after the game. Today's game is very
slow and dull because the players are afraid to leave the court and be
mistaken for a spectator and trampled to death. An offshoot of the
game is now played in the U.S. and is called "basketball". In this
version, the players may not use their feet, are allowed to use their
hands, and the losing coaches are sacrificed.
Mayan art was quite advanced. It was quite popular with the chalk
artists of the Yucatan School of Chichen Itza to draw human forms with
hugely exaggerated body parts. (See: "Boy With Alabaster Bum" and
"Self Portrait of a Headboard Rattler", Museum of Art, Mexico City)
The Mayans also developed a hieroglyphic writing and books. The
surviving books are called codices from which we get the term "code"
meaning an undecipherable sequence of commands resulting in a fatal
error. Incidently, the Mayan structures were built without windows,
which is a lesson to us all.
The Mayan civilization went into decline around 900 AD. While they
developed radically innovative concepts like the clamp, the car park,
and the round-about, they never came up with the wheel and these
inventions lay fallow. The decline is also blamed by some on their
inability to deep fry potatos and provide a late night staple food
group.
--
Tony Cooper aka: Tony_Co...@Yahoo.com
Provider of Jots & Tittles
KateH
of the Mayans, can I read that after school?"
Kate(How Tony warped history)H :)
Derek Bell
: The Pirate Queen wrote:
: (I think the Mayan ruins are much more impressive than the Greek stuff
: any day! And I'll be seing more in July when I go to Belize!)
There's a couple of books by Michael D. Coe on Mayans:
_Breaking the Maya Code_ and one called either _The Maya_ or _The Mayans_.
Derek
--
Derek Bell db...@maths.tcd.ie |"Usenet is a strange place."
WWW: http://www.maths.tcd.ie/~dbell/index.html| - Dennis M Ritchie,
PGP: http://www.maths.tcd.ie/~dbell/key.asc | 29 July 1999.
|