|
Atrocious Joe posted:Another topic that sticks in my mind is learning how the Norse were on Greenland before the ancestors of the Inuit arrived. That led me down a number of Wikipedia pages saying that the dominance of Inuit and related languages in the North American arctic is a relatively recent phenomenon, becoming established since like 900 AD. That was interesting enough, but apparently that whole language family also extends to Far Eastern Russia, implying that people were crossing the Bering Strait far after the land bridge was submerged. This made me feel like twoday in that there is this seemingly obvious evidence of contact between North America and Asia that no one talks about. Yeah, it took a while to discover that the Dorset culture was an entirely unrelated culture who had lived in the arctic before the Thule culture, and the current theory is that they never even really interacted, which is pretty fascinating, but also seems suspect to me https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dorset_culture quote:
 "There is no evidence that the Inuit and the Dorset interacted, except for the fact that one territorially replaced the other within a century, and that the Inuit say that this was the case and remember it in their accounts of history and describe it in detail in their stories. But we western scholars don't believe them because we do not value the historical accounts of non-western cultures, and we aren't convinced because there's no genetic data and we haven't yet found a Dorset corpse with an Inuit spear in it." lol, gently caress off twoday has issued a correction as of 02:04 on Aug 21, 2019 |
#
?
Aug 21, 2019 01:34
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 10, 2024 16:10 |
|
|
Atrocious Joe posted:implying that people were crossing the Bering Strait far after the land bridge was submerged. This reminds me of another criticism I have about the standard historical narrative, which has to do with the history of seafaring. The oldest boat ever discovered was the Pesse Canoe, which was found in the Netherlands and dated to somewhere between 8040 BC and 7510 BC. Now, because this is the oldest boat that his been found, it kind of sets the date for when boats were invented. We kind of assume that they may have been around even 10 or 20 thousand years before that, but we generally stay within that ballpark. But the standard assumption of most historians and archaeologists is that ancient people were loving morons, and that we shouldn't even assume that they could figure out how to float around on a piece of wood unless we find direct evidence which proves this. Meanwhile, we have observed just in the last few decades that even god drat Orangutans can adapt new technologies incredibly quickly, such as learning from humans how to hunt with spears, which they seem to have learned only in the past few decades, by observing humans doing the same.  But anyway, many academics find it extremely difficult to imagine that human beings could have known how to operate a log canoe 20 or 30 thousand years ago, much less navigate seas at all, notwithstanding the fact that celestial observation is the key to doing so, as well as one of the most universal aspects of all human cultures since the dawn of humanity. So if "ancient humans must have been morons" is what you believe, you start to run into various problems when trying to explain human history. For instance, it took a long time to piece together the pre-history of Australia. Australian Aboriginals resemble Africans, and for a long time it was puzzling how they could have ended up in Australia. With the development of modern dating methods we learned that they were there very long ago. First it was thought that they didn't arrive there until 30 or 40 thousand years ago, but more recent research puts that date at about 65,000 years ago. How was this possible? quote:The movement from Africa to Australia culminated in a series of hazardous sea voyages across island southeast Asia. Recent studies suggest the last voyage, potentially between Timor/Roti and the northern Kimberley coast, would have involved advanced planning skills, four to seven days paddling on a raft, and a total group of more than 100 to 400 people. Indeed, crossing this body of water would have been a massive undertaking and even at the lowest water levels this would still be a journey of at least 90 km (55 miles). Other evidence suggests that it must have involved 100's of people, and the logistics of such a mass migration dictate that it would have required people going back and forth and organizing this daunting sea voyage involving many boats and a lot of planning.  But you say, we don't have evidence that early humans were capable of operating boats, so how did they do this? They did it by operating boats, you idiot. This is the evidence. You would think that the presence of humans in Australia would be enough for scholars to accept the idea that ancient humans operated boats. No. They refuse. In particular, the Australian scholar Rupert Gerritsen refuses to accept the idea that Australian Aboriginals would have ever been capable of operating boats successfully. He has written many articles and even books trying to argue against this possibility, and offering an alternative solution instead: quote:Chapter 5 considers how Sahulian Australia was first colonised, about 49,000 year ago, by the ancestors of its current Indigenous population. The origins of the first Australians, where they came from, and when and how they reached Australia’s doorstep is summarised. The default explanation, that some form of watercraft must have been used, is examined and found wanting. The global prehistory of watercraft is considered in some depth, in terms of direct archaeological evidence and indirect evidence based on zoogeography and obsidian transportation. This suggests watercraft did not come into existence until 25,000-30,000 years ago. The prehistory of Indigenous watercraft also comes under scrutiny in this context. Issues around much earlier colonisation of islands by hominims, such as Flores by Homo floresiensis (the ‘Hobbit’), and the technical capabilities of hominims and early modern humans are considered as well. A dataset of island colonisation in the last 70,000 years is presented graphically, and this also indicates that systematic island colonisation did not commence until 25,000-30,000 years ago. It is argued that earlier crossings of seaways arose from incidental circumstances. To explain the colonisation of Sahulian Australia a new hypothesis is presented. So what's this great alternative that he is suggesting? That they arrived there accidentally, having been carried there by a tsunami. Just take a moment to consider that, for about 10 seconds, imagine that possibility. This idea is loving insane. Yet, this is the idea he came up with, because he refuses to believe that ancient people could have operated boats over a 90 km distance, and has forced himself to engage in these sorts of mental gymnastics because he is incapable of questioning or re-calibrating his assumptions about ancient humans and their ability to operate watercraft.  One recent finding which supports the hypothesis that this man is an idiot has recently emerged in Greece, on Crete. quote:Early humans, possibly even prehuman ancestors, appear to have been going to sea much longer than anyone had ever suspected. (And yes, this was a real major discovery, not a hoax.) The reaction to this news was such a shitshow, people really didn't know what to do with this information. Current data suggests that there were only Neanderthals in Europe at this time, so there were articles suggesting that this was proof of Neaderthal seafaring. Meanwhile others considered the possibility that this could push back the date Homo Sapiens Sapiens arrived in Europe, and acknowledged that these findings should shake up our understanding of early humans. "aw gee, all these books I read say that humans only learned how to operate boats 20,000 years ago and were really bad at it, how did they get to all these islands? was it a tsunami??" No, you moron, they were operating boats, your books were wrong. Your presumptions were wrong. You severely underestimated what human beings are capable of and continue to latch on to outdated theories out of stubborn inflexibility of the mind, to the detriment of all others you interact with. Sorry that I keep ranting about this, but it comes up again and again. History is not a science, but it is treated as such. As a result, many historians are incredibly dogmatic and inflexible because they try to apply scientific principles to a field where they don't apply. The net result is a lot of bad ideas lingering in our collective consciousness, often for decades or centuries longer than they should. And though history isn't a science, the understanding of it is absolutely crucial to people's identities and motivations, and this shapes the world we inhabit. One of the major political forces in America believes that people of European descent belong to the Aryan race (this is wrong for several reasons), and this is one of the things which motivates everything they do. Sorting out misconceptions about history is crucially important if we want to sort out the misconceptions which drive our society. But a lot of historians have overly stubborn outlooks that make this into an unnecessarily tedious and slow process. It loving sucks. The only way to advance our understanding of history is by being constantly critical of what we know, even at the most fundamental levels, and by searching for and remaining open to new ideas. You will never advance human knowledge by sticking your neck out to defend the status quo. twoday has issued a correction as of 04:34 on Aug 21, 2019 |
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2019 03:41
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2019 03:54
|
|
|
yeah just because we dont have evidence doesnt mean it didnt happen. early boats probably decomposed or got buried by rising sea levels after the mass glaciation melted, etc. So if humans sailed to Crete 140k years ago, maybe they invented boats like 200k yrs ago? Also ive been reading about the development of language in humans and its fascinating that Bonobos are pretty good at Asl but still cap out at about a 2yr old human's imagination level, with regard to storytelling. and there are a few reports of some wild bonobos leaving branches in the forest to show followers which way to go, or knocking on a tree twice to signify a 2 hour rest. and humans split from bonobos about 7mil years ago
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2019 04:14
|
|
|
twoday posted:"ancient humans must have been morons" ... I don't have much to say with regards to this post because I'm both not an expert and a blithering idiot who only thinks of historical people with regards to art, but I like this bit. A writer, actor and stage director I worked with always recommends the book Hamlet's Mill to his staff and the central conceit of this book is that ancient humans weren't morons and fully capable of travelling, communicating and exchanging myths and ideas. The consensus the book tries to draw from this is extremely fuckin iffy, but that particular point (that ancient peoples weren't as stupid as we believe) has stuck with me ever since I read it. Good post, dude. As an aside, Hamlet's Mill is a fun little read. Just don't take it too seriously as a work of anthropology.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2019 04:21
|
|
|
Anthropology is another field where this type of ascientific dogmatic thought dominates due to lovely presumptions and, frankly, racist-rear end motherfucking old white men from Ivy League schools. A buddy of mine did a master's in physical anthro that attempted to explain why a certain type of ceramic pot style arose in a group of people. At the time it was thought that it was a fad or a style that arose due to "unquantifiable cultural characteristics." Well, my friend and his mentor recreated these pots, which were used for cookware, and guess what? The newer pot, due to its physical characteristics, loving cooked food more efficiently thus reducing fuel needs. That's why it spread, it was a better tool! The biggest mistake modern window lickers make is that they think ancient man is dumb. Our ancestors were whip smart, in tune with nature, and knew how to observe the world around them because if they couldn't they loving died. So much of our modern existence removes us from this environment, it's little wonder that even our scholars can't fathom how a brown hunter-gatherer could make a raft; after all, I can't do that, and I'm a Harvard Man!
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2019 04:24
|
|
|
got any sevens posted:yeah just because we dont have evidence doesnt mean it didnt happen. early boats probably decomposed or got buried by rising sea levels after the mass glaciation melted, etc. Yes, which is highly problematic once you realize that almost every single theory about the arrival of human beings in North America is based upon the presumption that they were incapable of seafaring and must have come by land. And that this presumption in turn fundamentally determines the historical narrative of an entire continent. Just to name one one example.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2019 04:24
|
|
|
Ancient people must have been morons because modern people are also morons.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2019 04:28
|
|
|
twoday posted:Yes, which is highly problematic once you realize that almost every single theory about the arrival of human beings in North America is based upon the presumption that they were incapable of seafaring and must have come by land. And that this presumption in turn fundamentally determines the historical narrative of an entire continent. Just to name one one example. reminds me of that stupid loving movie 'what the gently caress do you know' that decided native americans couldn't comprehend what a large boat looked like so they never existed. god i fuckin hated that movie and the lovely person who made me watch it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2019 04:29
|
|
|
Giga Gaia posted:reminds me of that stupid loving movie 'what the gently caress do you know' that decided native americans couldn't comprehend what a large boat looked like so they never existed. god i fuckin hated that movie and the lovely person who made me watch it. yes, I remember being shown this film by a hippy friend of mine in college and becoming super pissed off. IIRC it also told you that psychotic episodes were a sign of enlightenment, and ended up having some affiliation with a cult sullat posted:Ancient people must have been morons because modern people are also morons. this is a fair point, but even a moron can learn how to operate a canoe, otherwise we wouldn't have them around today
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2019 04:36
|
|
|
mycomancy posted:Anthropology is another field where this type of ascientific dogmatic thought dominates due to lovely presumptions and, frankly, racist-rear end motherfucking old white men from Ivy League schools. You know Christopher D. Pierce? (His doctoral dissertation was on the spread of labor-intensive corrugated ceramics in the US Southwest and similar conclusions)
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2019 04:39
|
|
|
got any sevens posted:yeah just because we dont have evidence doesnt mean it didnt happen. early boats probably decomposed or got buried by rising sea levels after the mass glaciation melted, etc. I'm not unsympathetic, but there's a great danger in this school of thought that can quickly tumble down the counterfactual staircase into the basement of conspiracy theories. Sure, given the oceans of time between us and the ancient world, to say nothing of the prehistoric, who's to say what we may have lost forever, but that doesn't mean it makes a lick of sense to think that indigenous Americans actually originally came from *rolls dice, consults chart* Balochistan.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2019 04:54
|
|
|
Being critical of the status quo opens you up to new ideas, and some will be wrong and some will be right. Remaining critical will be what sorts this out. Question everything all the time and constantly work towards ruling out possibilities and eliminating false presumptions, that's how you will find the truth
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2019 05:01
|
|
|
twoday posted:Being critical of the status quo opens you up to new ideas, and some will be wrong and some will be right. Remaining critical will be what sorts this out. Some thing we're never going to know the truth about beyond the level of "vaguely educated guess."
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2019 05:04
|
|
|
Why did it take so long to settle Madagascar?
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2019 05:04
|
|
|
Captain_Maclaine posted:Some thing we're never going to know the truth about beyond the level of "vaguely educated guess." Agreed. There is no guarantee that you will ever come to any conclusions, especially if you take the standpoint that one should always be skeptical of everything. But perhaps it's worth a shot anyway, to make our educated guesses the tiniest bit more educated?
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2019 05:09
|
|
|
Platystemon posted:Why did it take so long to settle Madagascar? I have a long post about the colonization of Madagascar planned actually, hang on, I have two or three more posts to get through about Mauritius first The short answer is that archeological evidence indicates that humans have been there since at least 10,000 years ago, and there haven't even been all that many excavations twoday has issued a correction as of 05:20 on Aug 21, 2019 |
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2019 05:10
|
|
|
the Zanzibarbarians kept figting them off
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2019 05:26
|
|
|
drat, there are over 345 versions of Cinderella thats a popular archetype
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2019 05:48
|
|
|
Delthalaz posted:Who are you going to believe— your lying eyes or a piece of paper hundreds of years old divorced 100% from any sort of relevant context? 
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2019 06:09
|
|
|
More proof that he earth is only 6,000 years old. What else could that possibly mean besides humans living with dinosaurs? 
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2019 06:43
|
|
|
The Smithsonian website is trying hard to gaslight us:quote:If you look at the carving quickly and at an angle, yes, it does superficially look like a Stegosaurus that a kindergartener made out of play-doh. As anyone who has spent time watching the clouds go by knows, though, an active imagination can turn something plain into something fantastic. If viewed directly, the carving hardly looks Stegosaurus-like at all. The head is large and appears to have large ears and a horn. The "plates" along the back more closely resemble leaves, and the sculpture is a better match for a boar or rhinoceros against a leafy background. thats a goddamn dinosaur
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2019 06:46
|
|
|
Real hurthling! posted:oh and cicero defended milo in court for the murder but its said pulcher's mob was heckling him so hard that nobody could hear the defense and milo got exiled. So many parts of roman history are insane and C-SPAM as gently caress: -how often the senate would go "hmmm, a populist reformer who wants to raise our taxes?... get the murderin' clubs, boys!" -early Rome's insane habit of having command of the army switch between the two consuls on alternating days, which led directly to Cannae -the slave rebellion led by a magician who could see the future and breathe fire. who jokingly told rich guys "I'm gonna be king someday" and only spared the lives of the ones who were nice to him when he took over and started guillotining folks -the fact that said rebellion was entirely preventable, but rich landowners on sicility didn't want to have to pay their workers. gently caress that, so they just armed them and let them "forage for what they needed" until thousands of armed bandits were murdering people in the streets order to not starve... then killed their bosses -the time the senate threw the tiles down from the roof of the senate house to murder saturninus & his boys while they were being held prisoner -Rome's elites not wanting to let poor people be in the army. Also never redistribute land. Also never pay their workers. Also let their allies in Italy vote. Wait, where did this social war come from?? -crassus dying because "don't worry boys, they're gonna run out of arrows eventually!" -when an 8'6" barbarian Legionary named Max Thrax became emperor, and went murder-spree crazy on the senators of Rome but took defending the border very seriously. finally, he spent so long defending the border, that when he marched down into Italy to put down a rebellion, he failed to take the 1st major City of Aquileia, his siege failed, and his own troops stabbed him because he kept going into murder-rages and executing them -the time an emperor (Theodorus?) left some homophobic barbarians in charge of a greek city, the barbarians executed a popular gay chariot-racing star, the city went batshit insane, rioted, and murdered the barbarians, then emperor came back and executed 50,000 people in a sports stadium -how the Romans really didn't have to piss off the Goths, but dumbfuck roman officials kept pulling poo poo like putting 100,000 armed barbarians in a concentration camp, not giving them enough food, then forcing them to sell off everything they owned for food. including selling off their children into slavery for some rotting grain. then they rioted and went berserk? weird. -when the Romans sent a huge fleet to fight the Vandals for Africa, but the dude commanding the fleet was mad at the emperor and did a bad job on purpose. OH poo poo the vandals burned the biggest fleet we've ever put together, I guess it's theirs now? Time to go back home and depose the emperor so I don't get in trouble. -Theodora, who hooker whose specialty was having geese eat grain out of her on-stage. Then emperor Justinian fell in love with her and she became 2nd in command of the whole empire. who intimidated her bitch-rear end husband into not fleeing the city during the Nica riots, when all of Constantinople went insane over a sports riot and the emperor favoring one sports team over another -John Tzimiskes, who became emperor by sneaking into the imperial palace by boat, straight-up stabbing the old emperor to death in the middle of the night, then going "lol I'm the emperor now" when the guards busted in -Roman dudes using backpack flamethrowers and boat-mounted flamethrowers to annihilate entire fleets of russian and muslim invaders -Nikephoros I who killed a fuckload of Bulgarians, then started marching home through a tiny narrow pass in the mountains. His guys found the pass ahead of them blocked by Bulgar fortifications, so he went "lets just camp for the night in this swampy valley. Don't post guards or tell the soldiers they'll panic". Surprise! The bulgars blocked the other end of the valley in the middle of night and killed them all. His skull got used as a drinking cup by a dude named Krum. -Basil I, who became emperor by being a hot stable boy who hosed the emperor, then married into his family, then murdered him -Basil II, who beat the poo poo out of a huge Bulgar army, then blinded all the prisoners... except 1 in every 100 who he left with 1 eye, to lead their fellow blind POWs home -in general, the weird state of pseudo-elections where Constantinople was invulnerable to sieges, but if an emperor was lovely the armed mobs inside the city would go all "we're not trapped in here with you, you're trapped in here with us  " in a heartbeat..And that's just the big weird poo poo that I remember off the top of my head.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2019 06:58
|
|
|
regarding the executed last king of alba longa and dumb name haver, mettius fufetius; a poem i once discovered Mettius Fufetius didn’t have a clue. Mettius Fufetius couldn’t follow through. They started out with one of him And ended up with two And neither one of him knows what the other’s gonna do. Mettius Fufetius had a fickle will. Mettius Fufetius ran up on the hill. Mettius Fufetius was torn apart and killed By some horses and some chariots, and all his guts were spilled. So if you ever find yourself the king of Alba Longa, Here’s a little tip the gig from going wrong: It’s dangerous, derangerous — oh what could be so silly as To fail to match the mettle of one King Tullus Hostilius? Mettius Fufetius died in awful pain. Mettius Fufetius was strewn across the plain. His head is bound for Sicily. His bottom is in Spain. Now don’t you think the punishment was rather inhumane?
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2019 07:18
|
|
|
Fly Molo posted:-Theodora, who hooker whose specialty was having geese eat grain out of her on-stage. Then emperor Justinian fell in love with her and she became 2nd in command of the whole empire. who intimidated her bitch-rear end husband into not fleeing the city during the Nica riots, when all of Constantinople went insane over a sports riot and the emperor favoring one sports team over another
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2019 07:54
|
|
|
Terrible Opinions posted:Didn't later emperors specifically cheer for less popular teams that never won? I think so. and all the sports teams had color names, so it was like, whoah, don’t root for the Blues or the Greens or shits gonna be apocalyptic. cheer for the the whites, they suck rear end.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2019 07:58
|
|
|
Delthalaz posted:More proof that he earth is only 6,000 years old. What else could that possibly mean besides humans living with dinosaurs? king Pakal piloting his starship. I was a big fan back in the day.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2019 08:12
|
|
|
You mentioned Max Thrax  and that always makes me think of poor ol' Gordian I. You see, when Max sent people to the province of Africa to collect taxes and tribute, the locals ganked the chief tax collector. Realizing they were now hosed, they proclaimed a popular local elder named Gordian to emperor. They did this without his foreknowledge and against his will, mind. Like, they straight up burst into his home and draped him in purple. The 79-year-old Gordian, with tears in his eyes, begged the crowd to let him enjoy his final days in peace. They refused to take no for an answer. So Gordian caved in, on one condition: his son was to be elevated alongside him as Gordian II. The Senate back in Rome quickly confirmed them - they hated Maximinus Thrax as much as anyone.Unfortunately, while many provinces supported the new Gordian dynasty, their immediate neighbors were Thrax loyalists. They also possessed the only proper legion in the area. Gordian II hastily assembled a force out of the rabble who elevated them and went to head off this threat. The two sides met near the city of Carthage and the professional legionaries utterly crushed the untrained militia. Somewhere in the fighting Gordian II was slain. When word got back to the elder Gordian that his son was dead, he hanged himself out of despair. Neither father nor son had asked for power, were thrust into it against their will, and died after "ruling" only 21 days. 
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2019 08:13
|
|
|
Fly Molo posted:the whites, they suck rear end. history summed up this film was pretty cool btw https://youtu.be/GHlHqvoRSwo
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2019 08:46
|
|
|
Mantis42 posted:You mentioned Max Thrax It's okay, the two guys who took over after Max got ganked set up barricades in the palace and fought with each other until the Praetorian guards murdered them both. Then Gordian III, the grandkid, got to take over. Happy ending! ...until he got murdered in turn by Phillip the Arab at the ripe old age of 19. In summary, the 3rd century was a land of contrasts.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2019 09:02
|
|
|
Justinian II was overthrown and replaced with a guy named Leontios and had his nose mutilated before he was sent into exile. He spent a couple years with the Khazar khan then talked his way into leading a Bulgar army against Constantinople. He took the city by leading a strike force through the sewers. After seizing control of the city he imprisoned Leontios and Tiberios Apsimar, the possibly half-barbarian admiral who had overthrown Leontios in turn. Justinian appeared before the hippodrome mob one day wearing a golden nose and stood on Leontios' and Tiberios' necks before ordering them beheaded. Somehow, his second reign did not provoke an uptick in his popularity, perhaps because he did dumb poo poo like promptly try to double-cross the Bulgars. After a few years he was deposed again, this time in favor of an Armenian general named Vardan. Some enterprising officers gave the new emperor Justinian's head as a gift.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2019 09:28
|
|
|
Delthalaz posted:More proof that he earth is only 6,000 years old. What else could that possibly mean besides humans living with dinosaurs? an image resembling a stegosaurus can't be anything other than a historical document. it can't possibly be just a coincidence or even just an image of what some bones might have looked like while they were alive. like, modern society has produced hundreds of images of stegosauruses and they certainly aren't proof of contemporary living stegosaurs. it has to be an ancient astronaut at the controls of his stone-age spaceship because it has cosmological signs around and it and that's what it looks like to people who have mechanical contraptions with control panels, a thing the mayans definitely did not. there's absolutely no way it could just be an astrologically competent society referencing some spiritual after-death imagery that we completely lack context for outside of this one coffin lid that for some reason literally contains the dead body of the guy who's supposed to be being depicted launching himself into space. also, the idea that people can't just stop doing a thing just because it's what we know their culture most for. like mound builders have to have been some secret race that were chased out of the area, they can't have just been native americans who got bored of stacking dirt and didn't bother to mythologise how great stacking dirt was so that we could tell it was them (also they'd be lying anyway because of manifest destiny). like all the early historians who were convinced that the pyramids predated the flood and therefore egyptians because if they didn't how can you explain that the egyptians aren't still pouring the vast majority of their resources into building these mysterious structures with writing nobody can read. what's the secret behind the disappearance of the mayans? they can't be these native people who live in traditional mayan territories speaking mayan calling themselves mayans because they don't live in the big stone cities the mayans built.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2019 09:31
|
|
|
Fly Molo posted:
Not only was Nikephoros killed, but his son and heir Staurakios barely escaped with his life, suffering severe cranial and spinal injuries. He had to be carried back to Constantinople in a litter and for the next several months the empire was ruled by a brain-damaged cripple while Krum gilded his father's skull.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2019 09:35
|
|
|
 17,000 years old
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2019 09:57
|
|
|
The common saying is that humans are naturally selfish or self interested animals but it's obvious in most of human history our specialty was in being a cooperative species, so much so that we invented language to share our inner thoughts directly with each other. I think there's not too many species who build large social structures together without being a genetic colony of siblings no?
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2019 10:04
|
|
|
Kind of brave to post that directly after the skull cup post.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2019 10:14
|
|
|
he had it comin
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2019 10:18
|
|
|
That skull cup was the direct product of a large non-familial social structure all working together.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2019 10:25
|
|
|
Ghostlight posted:That skull cup was the direct product of a large non-familial social structure all working together.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2019 10:26
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 10, 2024 16:10 |
|
|
Modest Mao posted:
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2019 10:33
|
|
