4 ms·

Every time one of these archaeology articles comes up, I'm reminded about what thin reeds most of these theories are based upon. It's the blind men and the ele

by douche 10y ago

Every time one of these archaeology articles comes up, I'm reminded about what thin reeds most of these theories are based upon. It's the blind men and the elephant, except the pieces available for inspection are even smaller, and the conclusions more sweeping.

astrodust 10y ago
Doesn't help that a large part of that history was kept as oral tradition, and those who remembered it were starved, shot, died by disease and outright murdered over the last few centuries.
- Synaesthesia 10y ago
  American Holocaust by David Stannard was a tough read for sure. I didn't know about the extent to which the genocide of the American Indians was a real deliberate and conscious act. But the book convinced me.
- omginternets 10y ago
  What's your point? The fact that these people suffered has literally no bearing on the fact that the theory is built on shaky grounds (according to the parent poster, that is).
  - astrodust 10y ago
    My point is you can say there's not a lot of evidence but you can't ignore why this is the case. Destroying people was destroying evidence.
jcranmer 10y ago
There are three cases in history where civilizations left written scripts that were lost to history and have subsequently been decoded (Mayan script, Egyptian hieroglyphs, and Sumerian cuneiform). In the intervening period, archaeologists have attempted to reconstruct history without knowledge of what the scripts meant, which means we can use those scripts as a means of checking how good the archaeological reconstructions were. In the case of the Maya (the only one with which I have some familiarity), the results are atrocious. Being able to read the Mayan script completely changed our understanding of how they acted. The major view had been that the Maya were basically a peaceful scientific/religious culture, whereas the decipherment of the script show them to be no less violent than the other Mesoamerican civilizations. Those markings on everything that to make reference to the gods? They really just say "property of <name>".

by douche 10y ago

astrodust 10y ago

Doesn't help that a large part of that history was kept as oral tradition, and those who remembered it were starved, shot, died by disease and outright murdered over the last few centuries.

Synaesthesia 10y ago
American Holocaust by David Stannard was a tough read for sure. I didn't know about the extent to which the genocide of the American Indians was a real deliberate and conscious act. But the book convinced me.
omginternets 10y ago
What's your point? The fact that these people suffered has literally no bearing on the fact that the theory is built on shaky grounds (according to the parent poster, that is).
- astrodust 10y ago
  My point is you can say there's not a lot of evidence but you can't ignore why this is the case. Destroying people was destroying evidence.

jcranmer 10y ago

There are three cases in history where civilizations left written scripts that were lost to history and have subsequently been decoded (Mayan script, Egyptian hieroglyphs, and Sumerian cuneiform). In the intervening period, archaeologists have attempted to reconstruct history without knowledge of what the scripts meant, which means we can use those scripts as a means of checking how good the archaeological reconstructions were. In the case of the Maya (the only one with which I have some familiarity), the results are atrocious. Being able to read the Mayan script completely changed our understanding of how they acted. The major view had been that the Maya were basically a peaceful scientific/religious culture, whereas the decipherment of the script show them to be no less violent than the other Mesoamerican civilizations. Those markings on everything that to make reference to the gods? They really just say "property of <name>".