Live data from Hacker News

When Orcs Were Real

treeofwoe.substack.com

61–70 of 231 posts

Re: When Orcs Were Real

#61
post #59
post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Acknowledging the weight of passive factors (disease) shouldn't be at the cost of disqualifying the role of active ones like technology (military, political, administrative, trades). The Spanish had plenty of military engagements in the early colonization of the Americas that were easily solved purely because of their overwhelming technological advantages.

That is the biased narrative that we have been told for centuries, and it doesn't match recent research. Diseases happened first, they travel faster. The population affected devolves into chaos as disease often kills 9 in 10 and leave them without ruling and without those with specialised knowledge. Basically society is broken, the traumatised survivors are the ones that face the Europeans. > military, political, adm…

I agree with the majority of what you're saying, but like so many wars throughout history, surely superior weaponry played a huge role in the conquests? Particularly here where the difference is so large. Not the only role, certainly, and maybe not the biggest (compared to disease), but a very sizable one still. I struggle to imagine Spanish success had the weapons been reversed.

Re: When Orcs Were Real

#62
post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I always though that dragons were also sourced from a vague genetic memory passed down from very remote ancestors that met dino descendants.

The other way around is more plausible to me: the way we reconstructed dinosaurs was influenced by the corpus of representations we developed with dragons.

Oh, I never thought of that, but it could explain why the idea of dinosaur with feather sounds weird even though biologically it wouldn't be surprising at all.

Re: When Orcs Were Real

#63

Why do we have to posit non-human monsters as explanations for these myths? After all, there were (and still are) real monsters out there that would kill, rape, kidnap and torture people - people from other communities. Strange danger was serious business back in the day, why could that not evolve into all kinds of boogeymen?

This is what I thought when was evoked cannibalism: what if those were the traces of sapiens festing of neanderthalis (and not neanderthalis eating neanderthalis, as seems to be supposed in the text)?

Re: When Orcs Were Real

#65
post #58
post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Now on the other hand, if Europe had suffered something like 50%+ death from American diseases while indigenous Americans suffered much lower death tolls from European disease - in other words, the reverse of what actually happened - then I figure that all bets would have been off. The Black Plague killed off 50% of the population in quite a few countries and it didn't result in any invasion. I'm not sure the ration…

Because it also hit the Middle East, Asia, and Africa. Where would the invader come from? They were also dying of it too. In China alone there were about 40% dead according to recent estimates. The Black Plague was not restricted to Europe, it came to Europe and it wrecked nations everywhere. You can't have people invading, if these potential invaders are dealing with the same plague.

>Where would the invader come from?

Poland ! I was alluding to the fact that the Plague wasn't uniform and that if demographic depression were an incentive to invade by itself, places that were unaffected (like Poland) would have expanded.

Instead Poland repeated the exact same pattern that had been pioneered in Gaul, then picked up by the Germans : expend East, where the Plague didn't have much effect, into non-Christian land and implement literate administration, centralized religion and feudalism.

The fact is the Black Plague didn't pose an existential threat in Western Europe, and it seems even else in other urban regions. I remember a historian, perhaps Le Goff or Leroy-Ladurie, remarking that the most astonishing thing about the Plague is that it changed nothing. The archives looked the same before and after. Just business as usual. In that sense the Thirty Years War was far more destructive.

All that to say that disease, as large as it gets, in itself isn't enough to sink well established institutions. And it's not a good enough argument to strip the Spanish of any credit in the conquest of the Americas.

Re: When Orcs Were Real

#66
post #4

I'm not sure about the descriptions of Neanderthals presented in this article, but the idea that old tales of orcs and elves originated many millennia ago as descriptions of other human species or other primates isn't that far-fetched.

I always though that dragons were also sourced from a vague genetic memory passed down from very remote ancestors that met dino descendants.

Chinese dragons may be a better depiction of what could be the source of the myth. A Chinese dragon is like a flying snake, although I'm not sure they ascribe fire-breathing to it. But if you combine a flying snake and fire-breathing then there was an ancient device that looked very much like such a creature.

Some ancient armies used long cloth bags as flags or banners, to impress the enemies or maybe to signal the position of themselves for the allies to see. They filled the bags with hot air and the bags rose to the sky as contemporary balloons.

Imagine how it looked from the enemy side: an army is approaching and long snake-like things are flying about the mass of people. And you can glimpse some fire at the end that is close to the ground. Could it be a creature that breaths fire? And occasionally these things detached and flew up to the sky. Perfect dragons.

Re: When Orcs Were Real

#67
post #24

> Europeans defeated indigenous peoples throughout history, by superior technology and numbers. Oh boi, not this horrible and flawed argument again. People have learned nothing from recent research into the impact of diseases in that history? Popular books like "Guns, Germs, and Steel", and "1491" give you a view into these matters and provide one with references for their sources for research. This idea of "Europe w…

"Oh boi, not this horrible and flawed argument again" Starting out with your point written like this seems aggressive and patronizing.

"This idea of "Europe won because it is good at tech" really needs to die. " Because you don't like it?

I disagree. Spanish Conquistadors were some of the greatest and most experienced warriors in all of history, and were trained veterans of the reconquest of Spain from the Moors. Why people want to discount the fact that obsidian shatters on steel, Spanish had shock cavalry, dogs, and just the thought of hearing and seeing a gun go off for the first time is wild. Disease catalyzed things for sure, and is definitely one of the biggest factors in the speed in which the conquest of the Americas happned, but to entirely discount The Spanish Empires elite warriors seems like a revisionist cope, because you want to demonize colonizers.

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

168 Spanish vs 3000-8000 Incan warriors

Only one Spaniard was injured and 2000+ Incan warriors were killed, the rest taken prisoner. That probably would nothave happened without cannons, horses, and swords

Re: When Orcs Were Real

#68
post #64

This article also assumes that they were the orcs not us.

By which I mean: if we interbred with neanderthals so would our myths and folklore.

As a hypothetical example: if, say, a neanderthal mother brought up interbred children it would be her myths about monsters that would be likely to be passed on.

Re: When Orcs Were Real

#69
post #24

> Europeans defeated indigenous peoples throughout history, by superior technology and numbers. Oh boi, not this horrible and flawed argument again. People have learned nothing from recent research into the impact of diseases in that history? Popular books like "Guns, Germs, and Steel", and "1491" give you a view into these matters and provide one with references for their sources for research. This idea of "Europe w…

"Oh boi, not this horrible and flawed argument again" Starting out with your point written like this seems aggressive and patronizing. "This idea of "Europe won because it is good at tech" really needs to die. " Because you don't like it? I disagree. Spanish Conquistadors were some of the greatest and most experienced warriors in all of history, and were trained veterans of the reconquest of Spain from the Moors. Why…

> and were trained veterans of the reconquest of Spain from the Moors

Cortes was 7 y.o. when the Reconquista ended...

Re: When Orcs Were Real

#70
A nice fairytale. And like all fairytales it doesn't need to be falsifiable to be worth telling.

>> If early Greek, Roman, Norse, and Chinese mythologies are anything to go by, the legends spun by early humans centre around an heroic human (almost always a man) who is pitted against an ugly, evil cruel monster with superhuman strength…

As a PoGO (Person of Greek Origin) my impression of our ancients' myths and legends is somewhat different. Yes, there was the Titanomachy and the Gigantomachy, but neither Titans nor Giants could be mistaken for "orcs" or "ogres"; the former were nightmare beasts with tentacles and the latter simply had a hundred hands. But most of our mythology is about the sexual lives of the gods, particularly Zeus' transformations to various animals that allowed him to sneak into maidens' beds (no accounting for taste) or the deeds of great heroes like Hercules, who however typically fight chimeric monsters (like the chimera itself, or the sphinx, or the harpies etc) or actual beasts (like the Erymanthian Boar or the Stymphalian Birds) rather than big burly monster men.

Where ancient Greek heroes fight beast-men, those are literally beast-men. The Minotaur is the child of a woman and a bull. The centaurs, who are not evil monsters, are a cross between man and horse. The sirens are depicted as birds with human heads. The Sphinx has a lion's body and a woman's head (there was clearly something going on with bestiality in ancient times). The cyclops Polyphemus and the giant Antaeus, slain by Heracles, are porbably the only examples of "orcs" that could be plausibly identified in Greek mythology. And even those are not very orc-like. Why would memories of Neanderthals be recorded in myths and legends as one-eyed giants?

Now the tale of Antaeus is an interesting one: Heracles wrestles him and keeps winning but everytime Antaeus bounces back. At length Heracles realises that Antaeus is drawing power from the Earth. He grabs him by the waist and crushes him preventing him from touching the ground, and so he wins. There is a clear symbolism there, of victory over an enemy that draws his strength from the land. But what does it mean? Who was this enemy? It doesn't have to be another species: a more ancient tribe that pre-dated the tale will do fine. It's an interesting question but we will never know the answer. As with the Neanderthals, that should not be license to imagine whatver we fancy, though.

Post reply on HN