3 ms·
Underneath all this is a recent phenomenon to recast Central/South American civilizations as 'ancient' and 'comparable' to other non-American civilizations. A l
by stakkur 4y ago
Underneath all this is a recent phenomenon to recast Central/South American civilizations as 'ancient' and 'comparable' to other non-American civilizations. A lot of this is normal, on the level kind of research, but there's a significant amount of breathless hyperbole about it too. You can usually identify the latter by the language it uses.
This article does a lot of that ("Mind blowing!" "Challenges archeaological dogma!" "Mysterious"!), and it repeats something that's very suspect, even amongst conservative historians--it dates civilization in the area to "10,000 years old". Also, much of what's in these kinds of articles is not new, but simply repackaged content.
- yesenadam 4y agoMaybe I was too obscure or something - there's no sign in your reply that you heard my point: that, contrary to what you said, it seems 500AD is "‘ancient’, at least by common definitions of what ancient means."
- stakkur 4y agoMaybe you thought I was trying to respond to your point, instead of adding more information of my own.