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

Some ancient narratives contain remarkably reliable records of real events

sapiens.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 59 posts

Re: Some ancient narratives contain remarkably reliable records of real events

#11

Post by creep »

WalterBright wrote: post #5
ajbetteridge wrote: post #2

It always amazes me why historians and researchers start with the assumption that any tale from the past is fanciful until proven otherwise. We have little to no proof that our very distant ancestors sat around making up stories for the fun of it and then passing them on to future generations, when they'd surely be more likely to pass on useful information that keeps the tribe alive. Yes there will be embelishments,…

For just one of endless examples, do you believe the ancient Greek gods were real? Some stories may indeed have persisted for millenia. But how does one separate those from the fanciful ones? With corroboration. Because some are true does not mean all ancient stories and myths are true, and one must be careful to not impute meaning that isn't there, i.e. finding pictures in clouds.

I don't have evidence the Ancient Greek gods were/are not real. I do believe they are real in a sense. At least in collective unconscious, they will influence humankind.

Re: Some ancient narratives contain remarkably reliable records of real events

#12

Post by rdtsc »

ajbetteridge wrote: post #2

It always amazes me why historians and researchers start with the assumption that any tale from the past is fanciful until proven otherwise. We have little to no proof that our very distant ancestors sat around making up stories for the fun of it and then passing them on to future generations, when they'd surely be more likely to pass on useful information that keeps the tribe alive. Yes there will be embelishments,…

Unless we think gods, talking animals, totems, spirits are real we've learned that many stories are embellished.

Another way to look at it that boring factual recipes and rules were not fun to tell and remember but the ones with drama and extra flourish were. So those are the ones that survived better.

Re: Some ancient narratives contain remarkably reliable records of real events

#13

Post by irrational »

ajbetteridge wrote: post #2

It always amazes me why historians and researchers start with the assumption that any tale from the past is fanciful until proven otherwise. We have little to no proof that our very distant ancestors sat around making up stories for the fun of it and then passing them on to future generations, when they'd surely be more likely to pass on useful information that keeps the tribe alive. Yes there will be embelishments,…

What I was taught is that ancient peoples did not look at history the way we look at it. When I open a book by a modern historian, I assume the book will be about things that actually happened, how they actually happened, why they actually happened, the correct order in which they actually happened, etc. I expect the historian will tell me when there is ambiguity or uncertainty.

Ancient historians would think this is nonsense. The point of writing history is not the events themselves, it is not to get down on paper what actually happened. What kind of idiot would want something like that? No, the point of writing history is to share a message. Often they would draw parallels between two events to explain something. Now they might need to greatly fudge, exaggerate, change the order, etc. of those two events in order to make everything to fit, but that is fine. The actual events that happened is not important, it is the truth (i.e., the point the historian is trying to get across) that is what is important. The events themselves are not the message, the message is served by the telling of the events, even if the telling is not 100% accurate (as we would see it).

Re: Some ancient narratives contain remarkably reliable records of real events

#14

Post by irrational »

tralarpa wrote: post #4
ajbetteridge wrote: post #2

It always amazes me why historians and researchers start with the assumption that any tale from the past is fanciful until proven otherwise. We have little to no proof that our very distant ancestors sat around making up stories for the fun of it and then passing them on to future generations, when they'd surely be more likely to pass on useful information that keeps the tribe alive. Yes there will be embelishments,…

There is a difference between a useful story and a true story. If some distant ancestors sat around making up a story of how women were created from men, then this story was certainly useful to them in some way and reflected their truth (social structure etc.), but it wasn't a true story.

Well, it depends on what you consider a true story. We think a story is true if it accurately represents what actually happened (as if a camera was filming the event). Ancient peoples would think this is ridiculous. A true story is one that gets the "true" message you want to impart across to the listeners. A person who changes names, places, events, etc. to fit their message is not a liar, they are a historian. Of course we look at that and think its nonsense, just as they would look at the works of our historians and think its nonsense. Which one is right? Of course, we are biased to think we are right.

Re: Some ancient narratives contain remarkably reliable records of real events

#15

Post by [deleted] »

irrational wrote: post #13
ajbetteridge wrote: post #2

It always amazes me why historians and researchers start with the assumption that any tale from the past is fanciful until proven otherwise. We have little to no proof that our very distant ancestors sat around making up stories for the fun of it and then passing them on to future generations, when they'd surely be more likely to pass on useful information that keeps the tribe alive. Yes there will be embelishments,…

What I was taught is that ancient peoples did not look at history the way we look at it. When I open a book by a modern historian, I assume the book will be about things that actually happened, how they actually happened, why they actually happened, the correct order in which they actually happened, etc. I expect the historian will tell me when there is ambiguity or uncertainty. Ancient historians would think this is…

[deleted]

Re: Some ancient narratives contain remarkably reliable records of real events

#16

Post by noetic_techy »

Going to go out on a personal opinion limb here, but I think we dismiss far too much in archaeology and ancient recorded history, even with the evidence all around us. I predict one day there will be a great revival in archaeology as we start to cast off our erroneous assumptions about native peoples stories of their history.

A few Examples that have really stuck in my mind:

The recorded history of the Egyptians says their dynasties go back FAR longer than is accepted by modern Egyptology, yet we dismiss it. The water erosion on the sphynx, as well as the change in flow of the Nile away from some of thier earlier cities, backs up their claim. Techniques to "carbon date" stone have been dismissed largely because they tell us some structures are much older than we think. Not possible therefore the science must be wrong... but what if its the other way around?

Plato describes Atlantis in great detail, which was passed down to him from his elders. We actually know of a site that matches his description exactly in Mauritania, deep in the Sahara, which would have been an island 12 thousand years ago when seas were higher. It has all the exact dimensions he described correct and geography correct, has the same stone color as he described their buildings, has the springs on the central island, is beyond the straits of Gibraltar, and has plenty of artifacts strewn everywhere, yet we still dismiss it as a tall tale and no one will dig there:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richat_Structure

You don't have to be a conspiracy theorist to take this stuff seriously. More than likely they were just a civilization advanced for their time (maybe Roman era advanced) but something happened to them. The Richat is likely a natural volcanic anomaly that they simply built on.

Plenty more where that came from that challenge our recorded history:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gunung_Padang_Megalithic_Site

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gornaya_Shoria_megaliths

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gobekli_Tepe

And to top it all off, I think most likely the Younger Dryas Impact Event described by Randal Carlson (great Joe Rogan Podcast about this out there) is the "Flood" event recorded by multiple cultures and responsible for wiping out traces of civilization past 12,000 years ago. This 12,000 year number recurs over an over when we talk about these sites that defy the narrative that it all started in Mesopotamia:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Younger_Dryas_impact_hypothesi...

Again, personal opinion here, but it sure as hell all lines up.

Re: Some ancient narratives contain remarkably reliable records of real events

#17

Post by biglenny »

noetic_techy wrote: post #16

Going to go out on a personal opinion limb here, but I think we dismiss far too much in archaeology and ancient recorded history, even with the evidence all around us. I predict one day there will be a great revival in archaeology as we start to cast off our erroneous assumptions about native peoples stories of their history. A few Examples that have really stuck in my mind: The recorded history of the Egyptians says…

The whole field is full of dogmatists. The timeline of human history probably looks a lot different than the one we have written in textbooks.

_But_, take any of Graham Hancock's claims with a spoon-full of salt. He's not from a scientific background nor has he published any scientific work. It's easy to be lulled by the grandeur of the tales he tells on JRE.

Re: Some ancient narratives contain remarkably reliable records of real events

#18

Post by ZanyProgrammer »

Ancient writers who estimated population size (sizes of cities/regions/armies/soldiers list in battle) are almost always wrong and almost certainly impossible to have been real. I’m often amazed at is credulous modern people are though when it comes to those ancient estimates (unless it bolsters a modern prejudice).

Re: Some ancient narratives contain remarkably reliable records of real events

#20

Post by princekolt »

noetic_techy wrote: post #16

Going to go out on a personal opinion limb here, but I think we dismiss far too much in archaeology and ancient recorded history, even with the evidence all around us. I predict one day there will be a great revival in archaeology as we start to cast off our erroneous assumptions about native peoples stories of their history. A few Examples that have really stuck in my mind: The recorded history of the Egyptians says…

To be fair the local people seem pretty close-minded about the origins of Gunung Padang. The local scientific community insists most of it is natural, and that because they found later evidence of less advanced technology, it is then impossible there was a more advanced culture previously there. However, this has been known to happen over and over again, with the most known example being the Mayans. At the same time, for a body of scientists, they seem pretty uninterested in finding the truth.
Post reply on HN