7 ms·

It's tragic how little we know about the Maya compared to what we could have known. Thousands of books were destroyed, primarily by one Spanish bishop, and onl

It's tragic how little we know about the Maya compared to what we could have known. Thousands of books were destroyed, primarily by one Spanish bishop, and only four survive today[1]. If that hadn't of happened, it's possible we could have known as much about the Maya as we do about the Ancient Greeks. 1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maya_codices https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maya_codices

jcranmer 6y ago
The Mayans did leave lots of stelae around, and recorded a wealth of chronological information on them using a rather precise calendrical system. Consequently, we actually know more about the Classical Maya than contemporary Europe in this regard, the latter being in the midst of the Dark Ages.
- helloooooooo 6y ago
  If anyone wants a good primer on pre-Columbian America, read 1491 by Charles Mann.
- 29athrowaway 6y ago
  By the end of the 15th century, there were paper mills in Europe but paper was still not very commonly used. Instead, people used parchments/vellum (animal skins) as writing material. You cannot have vast libraries with books made from animal skins.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
hymnsfm 6y ago
I suggest reading the Book of Mormon. It's a fascinating record of the peoples of ancient America, specifically the Nephites, Lamanites and Jaredites. Where these civilizations lived and fought (there are lots of battles in the book) is uncertain, but it's believed to be mainly Central and South America. Keep in mind that The Book of Mormon is a primarily a spiritual book: another testament of Jesus Christ. The Lord expects readers to accept the book on faith. When the time is right, the Spirit will testify of its truthfulness and the Lord will bring forth further evidence. For some, this recent discovery is further evidence.
- jl6 6y ago
  Of similar historical weight, I recommend The Mysterious Cities of Gold 39-part animated TV documentary.
  - prepend 6y ago
    If possible, watch the version that includes the 1-2 minute live video documentaries at the end each episode.
- bildung 6y ago
  "The bare facts of the matter are that nothing, absolutely nothing, has ever shown up in any New World excavation which would suggest to a dispassionate observer that the Book of Mormon, as claimed by Joseph Smith, is a historical document relating to the history of early immigrants to our hemisphere." http://mit.irr.org/book-of-mormon-archaeology-full http://mit.irr.org/book-of-mormon-archaeology-full
  - brobdingnagians 6y ago
    That's a very narrow and biased paper. "nothing, absolutely nothing, has ever" are loaded emotional words. It would be much more accurate to say "nothing that they know of, in their interpretation, and according to the two theories they cherrypicked and considered would suggest to them, yada yada yada". They seem to consider themselves dispassionate observers, but their analysis indicates otherwise. I am always disappointed, but not surprised, when individuals who consider themselves to be scientists fail to recognize their personal bias. There are lots of other theories, interpretations, and excavations, some obvious, that they do not consider, and which they either wilfully, or ignorantly, ignore. But that is inexcusable when they use such strong language in an obviously biased analysis, based on their personal belief. As a scientist, it is always healthy to be aware, and open, that you may not know everything, and you might be missing something obvious-- even when dealing with something that you may personally dismiss as incredible.
    - bildung 6y ago
nkoren 6y ago
The destruction of those codixes is, without a doubt, one of the greatest acts of cultural vandalism in history. Absolutely tragic. At the same time, I've read a bit more about that incident, and... this is probably not politically correct to say, but I did develop some sympathy for that bishop. Yes, he was a religious zealot who couldn't distinguish other cultures from "satanism". But also, well, the Maya were in a pretty rough state when he encountered them. They'd been experiencing severe drought and civil war and plagues brought by the Europeans and more. Their way of dealing with this was mass human sacrifice. The Maya didn't have a sacrificial-industrial complex the way that the Aztecs did, but when nothing else would appease the gods, that's what they'd do. So anyhow, the Bishop had apparently witnessed a mass human sacrifice. Of children. And it really got to him, convincing him that their religion was strictly satanic. Given his own cultural frame, and what he witnessed, it's hard for me to say that I would have done any differently under the circumstances. That would've gotten under my skin too. Hard to say I would've kept perspective after that.
- kilroy123 6y ago
  That's a pretty fair stance. I've actually been to Southern Mexico where their descendants live today. Even today, to my American frame, the indigenous people are strange. But that's what drew me to check out some of their villages. I highly recommend these places out! Their churches which mix Catholicism with their own believes are very far out.
  - nkoren 6y ago
    You don't even need to go to Southern Mexico for that. There's a small enclave town in Phoenix, Arizona, called Guadalupe. It's a Mexican / native community. In the centre of town, there's a public square flanked by two Catholic churches.[1] One is a very traditional Catholic church. The other is a syncretic church which (according to people I knew in the community) mixed in many elements of Yaqui spirituality. The survival of native spirituality, even within syncretic religion, is always somehow reassuring to me, given how much cultural vandalism occurred during the colonisation of the Americas. 1: https://www.google.com/maps/@33.3690036,-111.9644457,3a,15.4y,244.62h,93.27t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sfMKLbVmw0T5Q5OX4lR52gQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192 https://www.google.com/maps/@33.3690036,-111.9644457,3a,15.4...
Azametzin 6y ago
As far as I know, the Incas had a lot of books, not the Mayans. The Spaniards burned them for considering heresy.
- mkl 6y ago
  The Incas didn't have writing: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inca_Empire https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inca_Empire (They did have a knotted string message system, but it couldn't contain full language: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quipu https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quipu .) The Maya did have writing: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maya_script https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maya_script If you don't know, and don't want to spend a few seconds searching, asserting things doesn't contribute to the conversation.
  - Azametzin 6y ago
    Sorry about that. I just repeated what I heard from a professor that was around. And he is a historian. It seems that having higher education sometimes doesn't mean much

jcranmer 6y ago

The Mayans did leave lots of stelae around, and recorded a wealth of chronological information on them using a rather precise calendrical system. Consequently, we actually know more about the Classical Maya than contemporary Europe in this regard, the latter being in the midst of the Dark Ages.

helloooooooo 6y ago
If anyone wants a good primer on pre-Columbian America, read 1491 by Charles Mann.
29athrowaway 6y ago
By the end of the 15th century, there were paper mills in Europe but paper was still not very commonly used. Instead, people used parchments/vellum (animal skins) as writing material. You cannot have vast libraries with books made from animal skins.

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

hymnsfm 6y ago

I suggest reading the Book of Mormon. It's a fascinating record of the peoples of ancient America, specifically the Nephites, Lamanites and Jaredites. Where these civilizations lived and fought (there are lots of battles in the book) is uncertain, but it's believed to be mainly Central and South America. Keep in mind that The Book of Mormon is a primarily a spiritual book: another testament of Jesus Christ. The Lord expects readers to accept the book on faith. When the time is right, the Spirit will testify of its truthfulness and the Lord will bring forth further evidence. For some, this recent discovery is further evidence.

jl6 6y ago
Of similar historical weight, I recommend The Mysterious Cities of Gold 39-part animated TV documentary.
- prepend 6y ago
  If possible, watch the version that includes the 1-2 minute live video documentaries at the end each episode.
bildung 6y ago
"The bare facts of the matter are that nothing, absolutely nothing, has ever shown up in any New World excavation which would suggest to a dispassionate observer that the Book of Mormon, as claimed by Joseph Smith, is a historical document relating to the history of early immigrants to our hemisphere." http://mit.irr.org/book-of-mormon-archaeology-full http://mit.irr.org/book-of-mormon-archaeology-full
- brobdingnagians 6y ago
  That's a very narrow and biased paper. "nothing, absolutely nothing, has ever" are loaded emotional words. It would be much more accurate to say "nothing that they know of, in their interpretation, and according to the two theories they cherrypicked and considered would suggest to them, yada yada yada". They seem to consider themselves dispassionate observers, but their analysis indicates otherwise. I am always disappointed, but not surprised, when individuals who consider themselves to be scientists fail to recognize their personal bias. There are lots of other theories, interpretations, and excavations, some obvious, that they do not consider, and which they either wilfully, or ignorantly, ignore. But that is inexcusable when they use such strong language in an obviously biased analysis, based on their personal belief. As a scientist, it is always healthy to be aware, and open, that you may not know everything, and you might be missing something obvious-- even when dealing with something that you may personally dismiss as incredible.
  - bildung 6y ago

nkoren 6y ago

The destruction of those codixes is, without a doubt, one of the greatest acts of cultural vandalism in history. Absolutely tragic. At the same time, I've read a bit more about that incident, and... this is probably not politically correct to say, but I did develop some sympathy for that bishop. Yes, he was a religious zealot who couldn't distinguish other cultures from "satanism". But also, well, the Maya were in a pretty rough state when he encountered them. They'd been experiencing severe drought and civil war and plagues brought by the Europeans and more. Their way of dealing with this was mass human sacrifice. The Maya didn't have a sacrificial-industrial complex the way that the Aztecs did, but when nothing else would appease the gods, that's what they'd do. So anyhow, the Bishop had apparently witnessed a mass human sacrifice. Of children. And it really got to him, convincing him that their religion was strictly satanic. Given his own cultural frame, and what he witnessed, it's hard for me to say that I would have done any differently under the circumstances. That would've gotten under my skin too. Hard to say I would've kept perspective after that.

kilroy123 6y ago
That's a pretty fair stance. I've actually been to Southern Mexico where their descendants live today. Even today, to my American frame, the indigenous people are strange. But that's what drew me to check out some of their villages. I highly recommend these places out! Their churches which mix Catholicism with their own believes are very far out.
- nkoren 6y ago
  You don't even need to go to Southern Mexico for that. There's a small enclave town in Phoenix, Arizona, called Guadalupe. It's a Mexican / native community. In the centre of town, there's a public square flanked by two Catholic churches.[1] One is a very traditional Catholic church. The other is a syncretic church which (according to people I knew in the community) mixed in many elements of Yaqui spirituality. The survival of native spirituality, even within syncretic religion, is always somehow reassuring to me, given how much cultural vandalism occurred during the colonisation of the Americas. 1: https://www.google.com/maps/@33.3690036,-111.9644457,3a,15.4y,244.62h,93.27t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sfMKLbVmw0T5Q5OX4lR52gQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192 https://www.google.com/maps/@33.3690036,-111.9644457,3a,15.4...

Azametzin 6y ago

As far as I know, the Incas had a lot of books, not the Mayans. The Spaniards burned them for considering heresy.

mkl 6y ago
The Incas didn't have writing: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inca_Empire https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inca_Empire (They did have a knotted string message system, but it couldn't contain full language: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quipu https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quipu .) The Maya did have writing: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maya_script https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maya_script If you don't know, and don't want to spend a few seconds searching, asserting things doesn't contribute to the conversation.
- Azametzin 6y ago
  Sorry about that. I just repeated what I heard from a professor that was around. And he is a historian. It seems that having higher education sometimes doesn't mean much