| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Dark Cloud
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
|
|
Dark Cloud
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
 Posted - December 23 2005 : 1:39:50 PM
|
So far......
Well, in Europe early on relatives were buried in graves or tombs till a few generations were gone and the tomb space needed and then the bones went to sleep with their fathers in ostuaries. Skulls here, femurs there, etc. People will their bodies to science, burn them, burials at sea, etc.
Many Indians left them on scaffolds for the wolfs, birds, bugs, anything, and desecrated each other's dead.
There is resistence to DNA studies, I read, because of that case where it was an older skeleton than Indians were thought to have been here, and that the dna wasn't Indian, and looked southeast Asian or Polynesian and here before the land bridge.
I think people are pretty much the same, and concerning anscestor worship, probably the percentages in all people break down about the same to where their feelings lie. What NA's are scared of is a theory that they are NOT the original inhabitants, and that they are, say, Babylonians and not Sumerians. They see that as a slippery slope and losing their claims. With reason.
I find it hard that people get sincerely worked up over burial of a thousand year old relative not a famous person, but maybe. I'd credit it to false sentiment.
But the skeletons of two hundred year old known people, and with relatives still living in museums (Osceola's head on a kid's bedpost....), and all that would upset anyone, and isn't that long ago. Bone near fossilized is different, I'd think.
Dark Cloud
copyright RL MacLeod
darkcloud@darkendeavors.com
www.darkendeavors.com
www.boulderlout.com
Go to Bottom of PageGo to Top of Page
AZ Ranger
Sargent
USA
Status: offline
Posted - Today : 09:39:02 AM Show Profile Reply with Quote
quote:There is resistence to DNA studies, I read, because of that case where it was an older skeleton than Indians were thought to have been here, and that the dna wasn't Indian, and looked southeast Asian or Polynesian and here before the land bridge....
What NA's are scared of is a theory that they are NOT the original inhabitants, and that they are, say, Babylonians and not Sumerians. They see that as a slippery slope and losing their claims. With reason.
I both agree and disagree with some of the premises for your statements. First the above quote I totally agree. If some others were here first, whomever and wherever, then the whole NA argument is less substantive. I have always wondered if the land bridge was the only way that people got here than why were South American structures so advanced. Also why wouldn't people who sailed such as the Phoenicians or Vikings have not ended up on this continent either.
Secondly the below quote. Giving your fine ability to phrase sentences in such a manner that makes it hard to argue such as "I find it hard" I will attempt to argue the postulate that people, in this case Indians, get worked up over the burial of a thousand year old relative. I believe they do. Though you state it is a false sentiment. Sentiment is not yours to define whether it true or false. Sentiment is a thought. For it to be false one have to pretend they had the thought. Currently in Arizona there is a lawsuit to prevent the use of reclaimed water to make snow on the San Francisco Peaks. There is a lot of sentiment about the Peaks being sacred and this would desecrate them. If the Navajo Nation prevails in the lawsuit they gain nothing financial but preserve their sacred mountain. The Peaks are a lot older than any bones being discussed here. My conclusion is although I may not understand it, sentiment is defined by individuals and groups of individuals in their own thought processes. Getting worked up about the burial of a thousand year old relative can be credited to sentiment. True or false is up to the individual.
quote:I find it hard that people get sincerely worked up over burial of a thousand year old relative not a famous person, but maybe. I'd credit it to false sentiment.
SEMPER FI
Go to Bottom of PageGo to Top of Page
Dark Cloud
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline
Posted - Today : 12:38:07 PM Show Profile Visit Dark Cloud's Homepage Reply with Quote
I agree that it is presumptuous of me to judge others' feelings, but I cannot help myself being The World's Foremost Authority, and all. I'm just cynical. And apparently exhausted and incoherent when I wrote the post that last night given there's at least one sentence that makes no sense to me at all right now.
In full cynic mode, I suspect that the sacred mountain debate isn't about religion or sentiment but housed in that old legal warhorse "stare decisis," precident rules. They want to establish they can tell the feds/state to go stick it based on religious claims for land now theirs. Or, maybe it's a trade with the Sioux.
Because the Sioux would love the Black Hills back. They run aground when they claim 'ours forever given to us by the Great Spirit,' because archaeology (which they buy totally, to their credit) suggests the Hills belonged to many people before the Chippewa's drop kicked the Sioux out of Minnesota and suddenly 'forever' began a week previous.
If you have not, read '1491' by Thomas Mann. It covers all the new theories about the pre-Columbian world. In short, everything - every thing - I was taught through college about The New World was, in large part, wrong.
Dark Cloud
copyright RL MacLeod
darkcloud@darkendeavors.com
www.darkendeavors.com
www.boulderlout.com
Edited by - Dark Cloud on Today 12:38:46 PM
Go to Bottom of PageGo to Top of Page
Heavyrunner
Lieutenant
USA
Status: offline
Posted - Today : 1:18:39 PM Show Profile Reply with Quote
Here in the Northwest, we experience numerous times the uncovering of Indian graves--very commonly along lakes, rivers, canyons---graves with a view,if you will. Platform burials were/are never as custom in these parts, at least not to my knowledge. As you all know, Kennewick Man caused quite a stir, including claims from Ufologists that he was from another planet. Sigh....
Funerals (I've been, sadly, to many) and burials are both Christian and traditionally tribal, surprisingly, perhaps, without confusion or conflict of religion or culture. The only difference in a reburial is that it is done, as best it can be, in same traditions and rituals as existed in the time of the deceased. As I wrote, these events are every bit as emotional as for the recently deceased and the tears, including my own, are genuine offerings.
As for the land bridge...what a bunch of malarky. People can't seem to credit American Indians with the ability to develop on their own. I'll laugh in the face of some archeologist/anthropologist who tells me that 60 million people from Alaska to the Bahamas trooped over from Siberia. That's even before a discussion about Central and South America... Land bridge? Right. And it had a sign on it--"One Way," going east...
Bob Bostwick
Go to Bottom of PageGo to Top of Page
Dark Cloud
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline
Posted - Today : 2:05:58 PM Show Profile Visit Dark Cloud's Homepage Reply with Quote
I do not see a conflict or relationship between the land bridge - which did exist in some form - and development. Scientists sort of cheerfully currently admit that the Folsom template is wrong, and pretty clearly people came here from Africa and Polynesia and probably sailed from Asia. That the Apache and MesoAmericans and Inuits are probably the earliest known descendents, by DNA (they look alike), and there were later migrations of which Europe was the last.
The big discovery involves the effect, range, speed, and utter catastrophe of the pandemics. There is reason to believe that 95% of the New World population died out due to their extensive trading routes after Columbus got here long before Europeans knew of the existence of these peoples. It is a sad story.
I just cannot get choked up about someone who lived for 109 summers and has been dead for 10k years being found and buried again. Not even if in direct bloodline to myself. I do not think he would choke up about me, either. There is genuine emotion based on personal experience or shared times and experiences none of which would exist. I remain suspicious.
Dark Cloud
copyright RL MacLeod
darkcloud@darkendeavors.com
www.darkendeavors.com
www.boulderlout.com
Go to Bottom of PageGo to Top of Page
Heavyrunner
Lieutenant
USA
Status: offline
Posted - Today : 2:21:02 PM Show Profile Reply with Quote
D.C.,
Your sympathies are your own and I have no argument with them. Indians have deep-seated reasons for their own sympathies, worthy of respect, if not agreement.
As for the land bridge, who says it was one way? Who says boats could sail in only one direction? Civilizations on this continent, lacking horses, were technologically superior to our own European ancestors at the time of contact. No gun powder, either, which might be a signal that civilization developed sans contact or trade.
The land bridge was, in reality, a glacier. As an explanation for the existence of tens of millions of people with vastly disparate cultures, traditions and civilizations, I find it a very cheap cop out.
Bob Bostwick
Go to Bottom of PageGo to Top of Page
Dark Cloud
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline
Posted - Today : 3:40:20 PM Show Profile Visit Dark Cloud's Homepage Reply with Quote
Depends when you're talking. It was there a long time. The new studies, for what they're worth, have pretty good indications of all land into Canada for some stretches, but a glacier works too. The point being they could do it without a boat or losing luggage at Atlanta. I don't think anyone has ever said it was one way, but there is no real evidence of backtracking, but I don't know who'd be shocked or insulted if it were proven true.
I'm unaware in what way Indians were technologically superior to Europeans. Some of them were certainly superior in urban management and farming, and they'd apparently eaten all the horses and mammoths. The pyramid terraces were lovely and all, but there's no St. Peters or art of the European level, by which no representational still life type stuff, and not because they didn't like it, they hadn't learned to do it yet.
Mass slavery like the AMericas had is usually a sign of technological deficiency. The Confederacy is a great example, by the way.
Dark Cloud
copyright RL MacLeod
darkcloud@darkendeavors.com
www.darkendeavors.com
www.boulderlout.com
Go to Bottom of PageGo to Top of Page
Heavyrunner
Lieutenant
USA
Status: offline
Posted - Today : 5:09:31 PM Show Profile Reply with Quote
The advanced civilizations I'm referring to are Aztec, Maya, Inca, Miztec, Toltec, ect.. Yes, I know about the slavery and the human sacrifice, but that was nothing new to the world...Compared to European societies not yet emerged from the Dark Ages, they looked pretty sophisticated..
As for North American tribes, I think I might prefer their social structure to that of medieval Europe--no pogroms, no inquisitions, no black death, no absolute rulers....no crowd pleasers like burning at the stake, drawing and quartering, ect., ect.
I don't think horses existed on this continent except, maybe, in miniature..and prehistorically.
As for art...I disagree. There was plenty in Central and
South America. Most was, unfortunately, destroyed or melted down by the Spanish...Now, that was a civilized bunch.
The land bridge might explain some things regarding the Inuit, Eskimos and even the Salishan tribes on the coasts of the U.S. and Canada...but it might also explain some things regarding tribes on the other side--all the way to China, Korea, Japan, Mongolia.
As for Seminoles and Penobscots, Viking and Phoenician "sea bridges" make more sense in terms of contact and/or trade.
Bob Bostwick
Go to Bottom of PageGo to Top of Page
Dark Cloud
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline
Posted - Today : 6:23:32 PM Show Profile Visit Dark Cloud's Homepage Reply with Quote
Heavyrunner,
By paragraph.
1. But we're not talking superior civilizations. You said: "Civilizations on this continent, lacking horses, were technologically superior to our own European ancestors at the time of contact." I don't see it. Sophisticated in many ways, and healthy, but not, I don't think, technologically superior.
2. Well, we don't actually know that. No writing. No record keeping, and any revolutionaries would have become compost. So we don't know. However, public execution and torture was common here as everywhere. THAT made it on to the stone tablets.
3. Well, we're talking the land bridge, so we're talking prehistorically. There were horses and camels and all sorts of pachaderms and man apparently killed them off. No biggee. They hadn't trained the dog either, and it was kept as a food animal.
4. Well, I wasn't talking about art in general. I was talking about representational art like you find in Italian painting, Greek statuary. Perspective and representational three dimensional flat surface art was little further advanced in the New World than to Egyptians, but the sculpture and paintings they did were impressive, but 'primitive.' It's one thing to be able to do it but choose not to, but they couldn't do it.
5. Like what? They've done the DNA and found no clear sign of regurgitation back.
6. There's no mutual exclusives. I have zero problem with water traffic, and would find it ridiculous to claim that didn't happen a lot along our cooasts. It's what, ironically, makes Columbus look good. He was able to return to the same places and return to Spain often, and showed everyone else how to do it. Whatever contact by ocean there was previously to Africa and China, wherever, it seems to have been by storm, luck, or damnation, because there are no records anywhere of routine traffic till the big CC. Whatever else, Columbus was one hell of a sailor and navigator. It's a bit much to think that because his first return to Europe has proven the fastest route by current and wind that it was coincidence, since he repeated it and others had to learn. He was too good not to know early on that he'd found something new, but I suspect he feared letting that info out till he'd gotten his. Credit where due.
If we're going to chat about this we should have a separate thread.
Dark Cloud
copyright RL MacLeod
darkcloud@darkendeavors.com
www.darkendeavors.com
www.boulderlout.com
Edited by - Dark Cloud on Today 6:33:30 PM
Go to Bottom of PageGo to Top of Page
Heavyrunner
Lieutenant
USA
Status: offline
Posted - Today : 7:19:27 PM Show Profile Reply with Quote
D.C.,
1, My problem(s) with European civilization is that it was hardly civilized, having considerably stagnated, if not regressed, since the fall of Rome. The Dark Ages were called that for a good many good reasons.. Technologically superior? I may be broad brushing, but at least they understood that the earth wasn't flat and that it revolved around the sun, rather than vice versa.
2, North American tribes were, in my opinion, the first democratic societies on earth. Socialist, probably, but democratically so.
3, I reckon there are plenty of reasons given for the end of the wooly mammoth. I don't recall "we ate 'em" as one of those reasons, although it sounds reasonable enough. I think the only camels Indians ever saw came in packages--cheaper by the carton. Horses, the ancestors of the modern animal, were a foot tall. Dogs served many purposes, including their place in a stew in times of need--still do.
There was magnificent art on both sides of the Atlantic. Like you, I prefer DaVinci, in or out of excommunication.
Like what? Looks, mostly. They're fisherman, just like the folks on the Siberian, or any, coast.
Columbus? We agree. He didn't just do it, he publicized it.
Yes, this thread has gone 'round the world from where it began. Great discussion, though.
Bob Bostwick
Go to Bottom of PageGo to Top of Page
Dark Cloud
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline
Posted - Today : 8:52:58 PM Show Profile Visit Dark Cloud's Homepage Reply with Quote
1. Lots of inferiorities to European civilization, but I don't think you can claim technology as one. By the time of Columbus, hardly anyone, anywhere thought the earth was flat. European contact wasn't in the Dark Ages. Technology isn't that, anyway.
2. Mexico is North America, don't forget. Tribes here as anywhere tended to be be warrior oligarchies. Virtually all tribes had war slaves. Democracy? Socialism? I don't see it, but who knows.
3. Well, the first people here were Indians OR their ancestors according to current claims, so whoever slung the spear into the mammoths and camels and horses were, ergo, Indian. There are no concrete, for sure reasons for extinctions, but we know they were hunted first to last.
4. There was lots of representational art before Leonardo, whom I don't actually prefer, but he had the chops to do anything he chose. I don't think the sculptor of the Mayan temples could produce a David, but Michelangelo could have done those Mayan reliefs without much sweat because they were stylized and easy to copy for an artist.
5. Looks? Don't forget, the two peoples most different by DNA in the world are central Africans and Australian aborigines. And they look, to my caucasian eye, well nigh alike in many ways. In any case, I fail to see how being fisherman on an Asian sea coast suggests Indian Right of Return.
6. Well, yeah, but he could repeat it ad infinatum. That's the secret. Anybody can bungle their way somewhere once. He brought disease and vicious Christians and stole and plundered. But he had his good points. Any Indian tribe that produced him would have worshipped him for the gold and slaves he brought home. Indians fell over themselves to sell each other out to the Europeans. They felt no national or racial or regional unity with each other. Their civilizations were, ipso facto, inferior, and they were doomed. Just like, as I've pointed out, my blood brethren the Scots, and even the Southern States during the CW refused each other help out of jealousy and pettiness and, well, letter sweater stupidity. Inferior civilizations, each.
Dark Cloud
copyright RL MacLeod
darkcloud@darkendeavors.com
www.darkendeavors.com
www.boulderlout.com
Edited by - Dark Cloud on Today 8:54:25 PM |
Dark Cloud
copyright RL MacLeod
darkcloud@darkendeavors.com
www.darkendeavors.com
www.boulderlout.com |
  |
|
|
Heavyrunner
Captain
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - December 23 2005 : 1:57:50 PM
|
| Crap...I lost about 500 words from my last response....which was in concert with your most recent, not the above...I see you've saved much of this, D.C. That makes you technologically superior to me. |
Bob Bostwick |
|
|
|
AZ Ranger
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - January 01 2006 : 01:18:41 AM
|
| DC How did you auto-save? |
“ An officer's first duty is to his horses.”
SEMPER FI |
|
|
|
Dark Cloud
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
Where is Custer now?
