Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Ancient kids’ toys have been hiding in the archaeological record

sciencenews.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 29 posts

Re: Ancient kids’ toys have been hiding in the archaeological record

#11

Post by pavel_lishin »

saul_pako wrote: post #3
megaman22 wrote: post #2

> “Hey, what’s this?” asks the first guy. “I dunno, probably a toy … or a religious object,” says the second. > Archaeologists have long tended to choose the second option One of the many reasons archaeology frustrates me. If you can't figure out why somebody built something in the past, its always for ritual reasons, rather than more mundane reasons. For example, I went to Chichen-Itza last week. If something happen…

For sure there are great difficulties in understanding what has passed when primary sources är long gone and we only have silent artefacts. But don't you think the remains of today, compared to the now considered ancient, due to todays obsession with and more long lasting documentation?

> due to todays obsession with and more long lasting documentation?

I'm not sure it's longer-lasting. I've got VHS and audio tapes I don't have the equipment to play. I've got two voice recorders - each one requiring proprietary software to extract the audio from. The last time I checked, a few years ago, the software was no longer maintained, and may not run on modern Windows machines.

If I put in the effort, I could probably figure out how the files are stored, and how to decode them, but it's not exactly a casual task.

Re: Ancient kids’ toys have been hiding in the archaeological record

#12

Post by dmix »

happy-go-lucky wrote: post #7

As kids growing up in a village, my friends and I played with button whirligigs and we made them out of broken pieces of clay pots discarded by our parents: Take a piece, rub its boundary on a hard irregular surface until it is smooth and discoid, make a hole in the center (take care not to break the object), pass a thread through this hole and keep the thing at the midpoint of the thread. Hold the two ends of the th…

That brought me down some interesting Wikipedia journey, this former farm machine repairman built a whole collection of Whirligigs for two decades after he retired:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u89j6-FI6fk

He was hard-worker his whole and he couldn't sit around all day, so he spent 6-days a week (except Sundays) building some really creative "kinetic art" from old machine parts.

The town of Wilson, NC has turned it into a park after he died:

https://www.wilsonwhirligigpark.org/

Re: Ancient kids’ toys have been hiding in the archaeological record

#13

Post by Someone »

megaman22 wrote: post #2

> “Hey, what’s this?” asks the first guy. “I dunno, probably a toy … or a religious object,” says the second. > Archaeologists have long tended to choose the second option One of the many reasons archaeology frustrates me. If you can't figure out why somebody built something in the past, its always for ritual reasons, rather than more mundane reasons. For example, I went to Chichen-Itza last week. If something happen…

”it’s always for ritual reasons, rather than more mundane reasons.”

In common English the definition of “ritual” is a lot more restricted than in sociology and archaeology. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ritual:

”They include not only the worship rites and sacraments of organized religions and cults, but also rites of passage, atonement and purification rites, oaths of allegiance, dedication ceremonies, coronations and presidential inaugurations, marriages and funerals, school "rush" traditions and graduations, club meetings, sporting events, Halloween parties, veterans parades, Christmas shopping and more. Many activities that are ostensibly performed for concrete purposes, such as jury trials, execution of criminals, and scientific symposia, are loaded with purely symbolic actions prescribed by regulations or tradition, and thus partly ritualistic in nature. Even common actions like hand-shaking and saying hello may be termed rituals.”

With such a definition, it isn’t much of a stretch to call about anything that isn’t clearly a tool ritualistic in origin.

Re: Ancient kids’ toys have been hiding in the archaeological record

#15

Post by quickben »

megaman22 wrote: post #2

> “Hey, what’s this?” asks the first guy. “I dunno, probably a toy … or a religious object,” says the second. > Archaeologists have long tended to choose the second option One of the many reasons archaeology frustrates me. If you can't figure out why somebody built something in the past, its always for ritual reasons, rather than more mundane reasons. For example, I went to Chichen-Itza last week. If something happen…

But that thing, is a toy. We played with similar things as kids. Tons of fun.

Re: Ancient kids’ toys have been hiding in the archaeological record

#16

Post by ndnjjfhshhvjj »

megaman22 wrote: post #2

> “Hey, what’s this?” asks the first guy. “I dunno, probably a toy … or a religious object,” says the second. > Archaeologists have long tended to choose the second option One of the many reasons archaeology frustrates me. If you can't figure out why somebody built something in the past, its always for ritual reasons, rather than more mundane reasons. For example, I went to Chichen-Itza last week. If something happen…

The overarching term ist cultic, I believe.

Re: Ancient kids’ toys have been hiding in the archaeological record

#17

Post by coliveira »

blowski wrote: post #6
megaman22 wrote: post #2

> “Hey, what’s this?” asks the first guy. “I dunno, probably a toy … or a religious object,” says the second. > Archaeologists have long tended to choose the second option One of the many reasons archaeology frustrates me. If you can't figure out why somebody built something in the past, its always for ritual reasons, rather than more mundane reasons. For example, I went to Chichen-Itza last week. If something happen…

One example I heard was that, in 1000 years, people may discover strange yellow arches and assume that they had religious significance. But what kind of significance _does_ McDonalds have in today’s society? Is going to the pub followed by burger and chips an important ritual followed by many in modern society?

Many of the things we do in modern society are ritualistic, if we want it or not. For example, the energy and money we spent in watching superhero movies and buying related literature and promotional products can clearly be described as ritualistic. Superheroes are true gods of our generation, even if we don't pray to them.

Re: Ancient kids’ toys have been hiding in the archaeological record

#18

Post by nonbel »

Someone wrote: post #13
megaman22 wrote: post #2

> “Hey, what’s this?” asks the first guy. “I dunno, probably a toy … or a religious object,” says the second. > Archaeologists have long tended to choose the second option One of the many reasons archaeology frustrates me. If you can't figure out why somebody built something in the past, its always for ritual reasons, rather than more mundane reasons. For example, I went to Chichen-Itza last week. If something happen…

”it’s always for ritual reasons, rather than more mundane reasons.” In common English the definition of “ritual” is a lot more restricted than in sociology and archaeology. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ritual : ”They include not only the worship rites and sacraments of organized religions and cults, but also rites of passage, atonement and purification rites, oaths of allegiance, dedication ceremonies, coronations a…

I think that point is that using current methods, future archeologists will think there was a cult that worshiped snowmen.

Re: Ancient kids’ toys have been hiding in the archaeological record

#19

Post by gxs »

happy-go-lucky wrote: post #7

As kids growing up in a village, my friends and I played with button whirligigs and we made them out of broken pieces of clay pots discarded by our parents: Take a piece, rub its boundary on a hard irregular surface until it is smooth and discoid, make a hole in the center (take care not to break the object), pass a thread through this hole and keep the thing at the midpoint of the thread. Hold the two ends of the th…

Interesting, our process was way simpler. Flatten a bottle cap and make two holes in it with a nail.

Re: Ancient kids’ toys have been hiding in the archaeological record

#20

Post by ars »

rhn_mk1 wrote: post #5
megaman22 wrote: post #2

> “Hey, what’s this?” asks the first guy. “I dunno, probably a toy … or a religious object,” says the second. > Archaeologists have long tended to choose the second option One of the many reasons archaeology frustrates me. If you can't figure out why somebody built something in the past, its always for ritual reasons, rather than more mundane reasons. For example, I went to Chichen-Itza last week. If something happen…

In your example, the activities are not religious. However, to me, the tiny pyramids and other trinkets are a kind of modern day ritual - if something that has no clear explanation or practical purpose can be called a ritual. Let's take a moment and think: why do we carry those items home after journeys? I've observed most of the time we toss them in a drawer and smile aftre discovering them 5 years later. We place t…

The problem is not the label "ritual", it's the way the word shuts down all further discussion.

Why? "Ritual." Done.

But that doesn't actually answer "why" it just gives it another word.

Another example in the same light: "How was the world created?" "God" vs "How was the world created?" "Big Bang".

In both cases you have answered nothing. You just used another word. "How was God created?" "Don't know", "How was the Big Bang created?" "Don't know".

Using a scientific sounding word does not actually answer the question, anymore than using the word "ritual" answers the question.

Instead the lack of knowledge should be made explicit, and not hidden behind a "comfort" word. (I.e. a word used to make you feel better about not knowing.)

Post reply on HN