 |
||
| · join · view topics · view or post blog · bookmark · post new topic · subscribe · | ||
Posted on 11/03/2009 12:13:27 PM PST by BGHater
bump
“... But, cannibalism was widespread across the Americas, as a whole.”
Give the progressives time. Cannibalism will be making a come back to the Americas.
It seems to have existed in the extreme famine in the Ukraine under Stalin.
|
||
| · join · view topics · view or post blog · bookmark · post new topic · subscribe · | ||
|
|
|||
Gods |
Thanks BGHater. |
||
|
· Discover · Nat Geographic · Texas AM Anthro News · Yahoo Anthro & Archaeo · Google · · The Archaeology Channel · Excerpt, or Link only? · cgk's list of ping lists · |
|||
All you need is the Starry Night software package, for example. You can go anywhere, anytime, on the earth and beyond, and see the sky from that vantage point. I used it to ascertain what star it was that Shackleton saw from the rail of his ship the evening he died, and what star Thoreau saw through the fabric of his tent camping "near Penichook Brook, on the confines of Nashville" the night of Sept. 2, 1839. I also checked up on some of Ptolemy's observations recorded in the Almagest ... yes, the software accounts for precession!
As a matter of fact, something like this article was posted a year or so ago, and I used it to look into that, as well.
I think you mean S. America. The Aztecs, Mayans and Incas all understood mathematics, they had agriculture and trade specializations, and astrology. They had a written language and understood the concept of domesticated animals and farming.
There is no evidence that this is true for the North American Indian.
He’s talking about the Anasazi - quite a bit different than the Native American Indian. These were the types of guys that built the cave dwellings and adobe buildings in the SW.
But yes - I’ve always wondered about the Native American Indian that they did not figure out the wheel. Either their “traditions” and communal nature stifled them - or their surroundings (soft dirt?). Of course that soil didn’t stop the settlers on the Oregon Trail.
Monks Mound
"Monks Mound is bigger than any of the three great pyramids at Giza outside Cairo. “This is the third or fourth biggest pyramid in the world, in terms of volume,” says archaeologist Tim Pauketat of the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign."
This is something I have never understood. Now, I can understand the Polynesians not progressing technologically, I mean it’s warm, food is abundant - heck, they live in paradise. No predators (ok, sharks); no harsh seasons, freezing temperatures - no real reason, other than warfare, to develop technologically.
However, the American Indians typically had harsh winters, they were basically in a state of perpetural war with skirmishes with other tribes. One would think that advances in weaponry, let alone food storage and a means of passing the information down through the generations would have emerged in some fashion.
There are limited ‘I wonder why ...’ exhibits that were made by the Native American Indian - but the development of working ores, the wheel, lever, mathematics, agriculture, trade specialization, agriculture, astronomy, animal husbandry, irrigation, trade routes or even shipping was virtually unknown. One would think that the harsher the enviroment, the more necessity would drive innovation. But, it just didn’t happen here.
So, when I see an article that attributes an appreciation of science that is unsupported by any other fact; I’m inclined to call it simply a coincidence. There simply isn’t any evidence to support this claim.
BTW, I have an authentic DVD of Hawiatha hunting Do-do birds - it is in this box along with my deeds to the London Bridge, just saw it the other day ...
Cannibal: Old Indian word for bad hunter too lazy to farm.
It is nothing to do with Science, as we know it. It is simply noticing cycles of daily, seasonal, yearly existence that are of life and death importance; then marking them, usually cloaked in religion.
We need to use the math as a shortcut to get back to their time period and observational vantage, and not spend the same umpteen years of the same trial and error that they did, just in order to find the correlations.
Also, the Anasazi (the people this article is about) had very large and complex irrigation systems for their farming. They also built Casa Grande, quite possibly as an observatory.
As for other Native Americans, some had writing and farming and domesticated (or semi domesticated); some built rather sophisticated dwellings and public buildings; others ran around naked, eating lizards and bugs, and sleeping under handy logs or rocks. Others fell anywhere in between.
“So, when I see an article that attributes an appreciation of science that is unsupported by any other fact; I’m inclined to call it simply a coincidence. There simply isn’t any evidence to support this claim.”
Like I said - this guy is studying remains of the Anasazi. They were more like the Mayans. Large communities, agricultural (so the seasons/astronomy were important), traded with others, etc. Several other smaller-scale measuring devices for the solstice, etc. can be found in the SW.
They were NOT like the Plains Indians. You bring up good points about why didn’t the indians develop more technology.
They definitely did have agriculture—corn, beans, squash probably chile peppers, and were settled for fairly long periods in the places where kivas were built. When they moved it was probably due to drought conditions and consequent warfare.
Remember how an indian taught the Pilgrims how to plant corn with a fish in the hole for fertilizer? In addition to the southwestern settled tribes, consider the Iriquois Confederation, they definitely gardened and traded.
As to astronomy, while there may not have been written language, many groups have detailed oral traditions which are passed on to their trainees. It is quite possible that our southwestern indians had some remnant knowledge from the Mayans and Toltecs which was very detailed.
The Aztecs and Mayans were in North America (Mexico) the last time I looked. They were preceeded by the Toltecs of Central Mexico, the Olmecs of Caribbean coastal Mexico, and included the Zapotecs and Michtecs near Oaxaca. I have seen many of the impressive structures built by these various peoples. If by North America, you only mean the US, then consider the 50 foot high mound built at St. Louis roughly 1,000 years ago by the Mississippean culture. While perhaps the most famous and highest, there were quite a lot of others. That is why they are also known as the Mound Builders.
So, no understanding of mathematics, agriculture, domestication of animals, the wheel, the lever - their great accomplishment is that they could pile dirt.
And yes, I have been down to Mexico and have seen some Mayan ruins. The question I keep asking is 'Why did the American Indian fail so miserably to progress?' No idea of how to navigate, mine ore, build permanent dwellings, notice the stars, invent the wheel, even the most basic skills were undiscovered. No written language, no permanent dwellings; they were nomads because they had no choice but to follow the herds like any other predator.
Perhaps these huge piles were a hunting vantage point to shoot the herds from, or they ran the herds up the embankment hoping that some would fall and be able to be killed.
Why did the overwhelming majority of the American Indian fail to advance past the stone age? They had every reason to develop, harsh climate, short growing season, warfare with their neighbors. Yet, for thousands of years they did not progress; unlike the Aztecs, Mayans, Incas, Toltecs and the others. I ask a simple question ... 'Why'?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.