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

How did people get to Britain 950k years ago?

lithub.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 95 posts

Re: How did people get to Britain 950k years ago?

#41

Post by uberdru »

cnity wrote: post #5
rosetremiere wrote: post #2

As far as I understand, Ian Morris's books are not taken very seriously in the academic world. I've read the first part of /Why the West rules/ and must admit that it reads a bit like trying to push a narrative: spinning up facts the right way to make them support his ideas and asserting universal truths without much backing… but I think I'm biased by the reviews I checked before reading the (first part of the) book.

Genuine question: I've heard this criticism for literally every pop-history book I've read (Guns, Germs, and Steel; Sapiens; The Origin of Consciousness in the Breakdown of the Bicameral Mind, etc). Are there any history books that are taken seriously in the academic world that are actually fun to read? If so, any recommendations? If not, is the issue basically that if you want some history book to be fun, you've got…

I always cite Jaynes' book as having the best title of all time. A good antidote to Sapiens, in particular, is "Against the Grain" by James Scott, who (as was Jaynes) is at Yale. It's a survey of recent archeology and anthropology that has great new evidence and novel interpretations of old evidence. Very accessible and highly recommended.

https://yalebooks.yale.edu/book/9780300240214/against-grain/

Re: How did people get to Britain 950k years ago?

#42

Post by PaulDavisThe1st »

cnity wrote: post #5
rosetremiere wrote: post #2

As far as I understand, Ian Morris's books are not taken very seriously in the academic world. I've read the first part of /Why the West rules/ and must admit that it reads a bit like trying to push a narrative: spinning up facts the right way to make them support his ideas and asserting universal truths without much backing… but I think I'm biased by the reviews I checked before reading the (first part of the) book.

Genuine question: I've heard this criticism for literally every pop-history book I've read (Guns, Germs, and Steel; Sapiens; The Origin of Consciousness in the Breakdown of the Bicameral Mind, etc). Are there any history books that are taken seriously in the academic world that are actually fun to read? If so, any recommendations? If not, is the issue basically that if you want some history book to be fun, you've got…

There's a bit of a generic problem here. "Pop-history" books generally need to be based around some sort of narrative - it's what primarily distinguishes them from their "purely academic" cousins. But the problem that the academic world often has with them is not the facts they contain, but the fact that they try to spin a narrative that the academic world doesn't yet feel "full" consensus on.

Consequently, if you're an author seeking to be absolutely fidelious to the known facts about some period of history somewhere, but nevertheless desire to spin a narrative from them, then frequently no matter what that narrative might be, you're crossing a line that many in academia don't think you should cross.

Re: How did people get to Britain 950k years ago?

#43

Post by ZanyProgrammer »

Turing_Machine wrote: post #36

While it seems clear that Great Britain has had a land connection with continental Europe numerous times, I'm not sure that I agree with the assumption that early humans couldn't have crossed the English Channel by boat. > whatever their other skills, Roger and his kind could not cross 34 km of open sea. We see similar arguments with respect to the Bering Sea land bridge, despite the fact that Siberians and Alaska Na…

I'm not sure the people who might've crossed over to Britain almost a million years ago were literally the same people who migrated over the Bering Strait land bridge (physically, that is). Were they even anatomically modern humans, with the same ability to make tools and think creatively?

Re: How did people get to Britain 950k years ago?

#44

Post by ZanyProgrammer »

__alexs wrote: post #9
brainwipe wrote: post #8

Trick question. They didn't. Britain didn't exist until 1707.

Britain or Britannia has been used as the name of the place since at least the 1st century.

When James VI/I wanted to call himself King of Great Britain, he was basically by himself in wanting to do that.

Re: How did people get to Britain 950k years ago?

#45

Post by chinathrow »

wronglyprepaid wrote: post #16
aaaaaaaaaaab wrote: post #3

On foot. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doggerland

Most people are not aware that the sea level rose with more than 120 meters in the past 20k years: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Post-Glacial_Sea_Level.pn...

Great point.

Most people are also not aware that sea level will rise even more in the coming 20k years if we go on like that.

Re: How did people get to Britain 950k years ago?

#46

Post by Turing_Machine »

ZanyProgrammer wrote: post #43
Turing_Machine wrote: post #36

While it seems clear that Great Britain has had a land connection with continental Europe numerous times, I'm not sure that I agree with the assumption that early humans couldn't have crossed the English Channel by boat. > whatever their other skills, Roger and his kind could not cross 34 km of open sea. We see similar arguments with respect to the Bering Sea land bridge, despite the fact that Siberians and Alaska Na…

I'm not sure the people who might've crossed over to Britain almost a million years ago were literally the same people who migrated over the Bering Strait land bridge (physically, that is). Were they even anatomically modern humans, with the same ability to make tools and think creatively?

Oh, they were definitely different people.

I was thinking more in terms of the Neanderthals he was talking about later in the article, rather than the million-year-old ones.

I feel confident that Neanderthals could make boats (certainly rafts) if they were of a mind to do so.

Re: How did people get to Britain 950k years ago?

#47

Post by JasonFruit »

PaulDavisThe1st wrote: post #42
cnity wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Genuine question: I've heard this criticism for literally every pop-history book I've read (Guns, Germs, and Steel; Sapiens; The Origin of Consciousness in the Breakdown of the Bicameral Mind, etc). Are there any history books that are taken seriously in the academic world that are actually fun to read? If so, any recommendations? If not, is the issue basically that if you want some history book to be fun, you've got…

There's a bit of a generic problem here. "Pop-history" books generally need to be based around some sort of narrative - it's what primarily distinguishes them from their "purely academic" cousins. But the problem that the academic world often has with them is not the facts they contain, but the fact that they try to spin a narrative that the academic world doesn't yet feel "full" consensus on. Consequently, if you're…

Is it true, though, that academic works don't spin a narrative? That's a large part of what historians do: attempt to reconstruct a consistent version of events, what caused them to occur as they did, and what their effects were — in short, construct a coherent narrative. There might be a difference in emphasis on the average, with pop history focusing more on the narrative and less on facts that might be inconvenient to it, but some of the best and most influential rigorous historical works are those that present an interpretation of historical events that requires reevaluation of the narrative of preceding work.

Re: How did people get to Britain 950k years ago?

#48

Post by ssl232 »

helsinkiandrew wrote: post #32

> Ian Morris on “Proto-Britain” Which Was Once Part of the European Continent (Literally) Isn't Britain still part of the European continent?. Even 10K years ago, Britain was 'connected by land' to the rest of the European continent. https://education.nationalgeographic.org/resource/doggerland

> Isn't Britain still part of the European continent?.

The author is likely referring to what is colloquially known in British English as "the continent", which means the mainland part of Europe.

Re: How did people get to Britain 950k years ago?

#49

Post by mc32 »

rosetremiere wrote: post #2

As far as I understand, Ian Morris's books are not taken very seriously in the academic world. I've read the first part of /Why the West rules/ and must admit that it reads a bit like trying to push a narrative: spinning up facts the right way to make them support his ideas and asserting universal truths without much backing… but I think I'm biased by the reviews I checked before reading the (first part of the) book.

I can't speak to this author or any of the assertions therein, however, Israeli archeologists seem to have found evidence of controlled fire circa 1MM years ago in what is now Israel. So proto-humans have been out of Africa in waves since the beginning of our lineage.

Re: How did people get to Britain 950k years ago?

#50

Post by macintux »

Turing_Machine wrote: post #46
ZanyProgrammer wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure the people who might've crossed over to Britain almost a million years ago were literally the same people who migrated over the Bering Strait land bridge (physically, that is). Were they even anatomically modern humans, with the same ability to make tools and think creatively?

Oh, they were definitely different people. I was thinking more in terms of the Neanderthals he was talking about later in the article, rather than the million-year-old ones. I feel confident that Neanderthals could make boats (certainly rafts) if they were of a mind to do so.

I think the article is less “could someone physically make it to Britain” and more “could there be enough of a presence to sustain itself and leave an archaeological record”.
Post reply on HN