Live data from Hacker News

Indigenous civilizations are far older and more complex than history suggests

lithub.com

21–30 of 82 posts

Re: Indigenous civilizations are far older and more complex than history suggests

#21
post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How was it “downhill” from there? The great pyramid is rather simple as far as art and cultural complexity goes. I would actually say it is quite crude, and later middle and new dynastic period works are much more impressive, even if they are less gargantuan in scale.

> The great pyramid is rather simple as far as art and cultural complexity goes. That may be so, but it remains as a feat of project unmatched in their history, the one great wonder that survived. I am not sure how many would be able to name the pyramids that came after. There's a huge amount of precision involved and a huge amount of effort required of the culture to complete. Similarly you could argue that with spa…

> What’s most going to be remembered of our culture in 5000 years?

There is a good chance that computers will have an uninterrupted existence for the next 5000 years, and we’ll be remembered for creating the first network with 1billion+ users, similarly to how the Romans are remembered for their roads and aqueducts. This is a particularly exciting case because large amounts of data we generate could survive!

In the case that history is largely forgotten, similarly to how we have a heavy fog around knowledge of society 5000 years ago, I can imagine future archeologicists being very surprised to find large piles of fissionable materials. This has the potential to be very sensational in future pop culture.

Re: Indigenous civilizations are far older and more complex than history suggests

#22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It doesn't seem likely Khufu had actually built the pyramids, but modified them into his own vision. We still don't know what the pyramids were originally designed for, but it seems unlikely the previous owner had intended it to be a tomb.

AFAIK that’s a YouTube myth. The burial chamber is built into the structure of the pyramid, not mined out of it; there is no evidence of retrofitting. We’ve uncovered and dated work sites and living areas for the people who constructed it, which coincide with known old kingdom chronology. That theory also doesn’t explain why there happens to be exactly three major pyramids at that site with minor pyramids in numbers…

If that is a myth, it is older than Youtube.

Unfortunately, unless we invent time travel or discover an important find, it is anyone's guess as if what you wrote (the established history as written by British archeologists) is correct.... it merely is the most popular theory at the moment.

Re: Indigenous civilizations are far older and more complex than history suggests

#23
post #4

Aren't all civilizations far older and more complex than history can account for? We don't really know how the pyramids arrived, or a detailed history of England back very far -- who created Stonehenge? It's interesting that the migration out of Africa and over to the Americas happened so much longer ago than previously thought, but it doesn't change what happened when the European settlers arrived. The author seems…

Natives where peaceful. Land belongs to the great spirit. They were conquered by the invaders..

Re: Indigenous civilizations are far older and more complex than history suggests

#24
post #4

Aren't all civilizations far older and more complex than history can account for? We don't really know how the pyramids arrived, or a detailed history of England back very far -- who created Stonehenge? It's interesting that the migration out of Africa and over to the Americas happened so much longer ago than previously thought, but it doesn't change what happened when the European settlers arrived. The author seems…

The justification frequently used for western colonialism/conquest is the principle of “Terra Nullius”, in short, the native peoples with their primative technology are not fully utilising the land, and we’re doing them a favor by conquering them. it turns out after the fact that in many respects, particularly with regards to agriculture, land management, diplomacy, and some areas of engineering, the native people we…

Also, somehow "Terra Nullius" only gets applied after the fact.

I imagine violently chasing off the owner of a deer lease to convert it to more efficient use would not be smiled upon. Even though deer hunting is exactly what Native Americans were doing with the land originally.

And building housing on someone else's golf-course or occupying and building on a long empty city lot you don't own are both unimaginably illegal.

Re: Indigenous civilizations are far older and more complex than history suggests

#25
post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The justification frequently used for western colonialism/conquest is the principle of “Terra Nullius”, in short, the native peoples with their primative technology are not fully utilising the land, and we’re doing them a favor by conquering them. it turns out after the fact that in many respects, particularly with regards to agriculture, land management, diplomacy, and some areas of engineering, the native people we…

For sure. But there are countless other examples of people being conquered too, all over the world, and not just by Europeans. There is no justification needed, other than that's what humans did back then. It was a much more primitive and brutal example of survival of the fittest. And as much as it offends our sensibilities now, it is the very path that leads us to where we find ourselves today. We can struggle to be…

Back then? Hawaii was made a state in 1959. There was still quite a lot of colonization related conflict happening in the 20th century.

Re: Indigenous civilizations are far older and more complex than history suggests

#26
post #4

Aren't all civilizations far older and more complex than history can account for? We don't really know how the pyramids arrived, or a detailed history of England back very far -- who created Stonehenge? It's interesting that the migration out of Africa and over to the Americas happened so much longer ago than previously thought, but it doesn't change what happened when the European settlers arrived. The author seems…

The justification frequently used for western colonialism/conquest is the principle of “Terra Nullius”, in short, the native peoples with their primative technology are not fully utilising the land, and we’re doing them a favor by conquering them. it turns out after the fact that in many respects, particularly with regards to agriculture, land management, diplomacy, and some areas of engineering, the native people we…

> The justification frequently used for western colonialism/conquest is the principle of “Terra Nullius”, in short, the native peoples with their primative technology are not fully utilising the land, and we’re doing them a favor by conquering them.

That is debatable (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terra_nullius#History), the term/concept may not have even existed during the land grabbing periods of colonialism.

Re: Indigenous civilizations are far older and more complex than history suggests

#27
post #23
post #4

Aren't all civilizations far older and more complex than history can account for? We don't really know how the pyramids arrived, or a detailed history of England back very far -- who created Stonehenge? It's interesting that the migration out of Africa and over to the Americas happened so much longer ago than previously thought, but it doesn't change what happened when the European settlers arrived. The author seems…

Natives where peaceful. Land belongs to the great spirit. They were conquered by the invaders..

It might just be me, but those seem like very broad generalizations over a large number of unique cultures.

Re: Indigenous civilizations are far older and more complex than history suggests

#28
post #25
post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For sure. But there are countless other examples of people being conquered too, all over the world, and not just by Europeans. There is no justification needed, other than that's what humans did back then. It was a much more primitive and brutal example of survival of the fittest. And as much as it offends our sensibilities now, it is the very path that leads us to where we find ourselves today. We can struggle to be…

Back then? Hawaii was made a state in 1959. There was still quite a lot of colonization related conflict happening in the 20th century.

The people of Hawaii actively campaigned for statehood in 1959. Not quite understanding the context of your argument here.

Re: Indigenous civilizations are far older and more complex than history suggests

#29

I was looking at some of Egypt's history. Kind of interesting the Old Kingdom figured out pyramids, built the biggest only around 100 years after the first, then it was all downhill from there. Makes me wonder if we hit a high point landing people on the moon, and everything's just going to go downhill for the next few thousand years.

Maybe they undertook pyramids too fanatically altogether, and that that was their downfall. The thought-leaders thought pyramids were the best investment, instead of astronomy.

The downfall may have been an effect of the great thing. Pyramids, sweet! There's a drought coming.

I wouldn't go for the moon landing, not because it wasn't great, but it wasn't an all-consuming investment by civilization. There are a lot stronger modern candidates.

Re: Indigenous civilizations are far older and more complex than history suggests

#30

Major factual error in the article that undermines the significance of these findings: > Like the Meadowcroft site, Monte Verde has been dated to as many as 19,000 years ago. Together the sites are important and do more than help us understand how and when North America was settled; they also show that there were people in North America well before the Bering land bridge formed about 10,000 years ago, throwing into d…

> The Bering land bridge was NOT formed 10000 years ago -- that's when it was covered by water.

You're right that Beringia was most recently waterfree from c30000BCE to c11000BCE but that doesn't really detract from the central theme of the article around Indian - settler interaction.

Post reply on HN