Culture Ancient Civilizations Thread

[miyi]

I love Homer's Illiad and the Odyssey! I can read those stuff over and over!

about Hannibal, from what I remember from history class (damn it's been almost 4 years since I took them)..Hannibal was unmatched, even against more experienced Roman military.

Hannibal was the general of Carthage, and fought during the second Punic Wars against Rome, Italy. Carthage at the time which is south west of Italy, was the rival of Rome, and possibly equal in strength.

Everything Rome threw at Hannibal, Hannibal was the victor. He was a brilliant strategist. In the end, Rome's army was just too many, and they held off long enough to defeat Hannibal. Hannibal being in Rome meant he had to get reinforcements. I think it was because Carthage was unable to give him the reinforcements in time, and so he had to retreat back to Carthage and went on a defensive. It was Rome's Scipio who finally defeated Hannibal, and as soon as that happened, Carthage collapsed into oblivion, Rome's only worthy rival at the time.

You can read more about it here: http://www.thenagain.info/WebChron/Mediterranean/2ndPunic.html

very interesting stuff. In fact, read all about the Punic Wars, there were three of them.

 

[juUnior]

hmm seriously, I'm not really huge fan or just normal fan of ancient civilizations, but I really like films based on such things ^^ Also, a little offtopic, the "Secret Golden Cities" or something like that title of anime, was really nice to watch, it was based a little (or maybe more..) about Incs and Aztecs.

Sorry if it's to big offtopic ^^"

 

[ornis]

Paper, you sound ironic there: like we give them their afterlife or something... take how we study them.

That's so bizarre when you position the intrigue after they've died But seeing it that way, I do guess I'm nutty like that--- I'm so flippin' lost probably ><

I'm high on irony at times---go figure >.>

 

[PaperYomiko]

Thanks for all the info, miyi! I was right, I have studied him before. Just forgot, as usual...but you're right, it's very interesting stuff. And nice to know there's another Homer fan around!

juUnior, nothing wrong with liking the movies...what got me into the Incas was reading Tin Tin, long ago...not to mention Indiana Jones is the best

and ornis, what I've always found really ironic is all the effort people go to during their lives for the sake of their death, like building huge tombs and stuff. The Pope who commissioned Michelangelo to build his tomb for him is a good example. If I could commission Michelangelo for something, I'd want it to be celebratory of life, not death.

but you know, depending on how you look at it, we may actually be the ones to take away their afterlife, since we've disrupted their tombs. That's something I feel very conflicted with. For the sake of knowledge, not to mention art, I am grateful, but I also think that all people, no matter how dead they are, should be respected.

What do you all think about it? Since so much of our knowledge of these civilizations comes from studying their tombs, how do we balance respect for the dead with what it takes to discover that knowledge? Should everything be carted off to a museum, should we just forget about studying them, or is there a way to find a balance? Just curious

 

[MadDog]

I'm actually heading to Peru in a few weeks for a friend's wedding. We're going to visit Machu Picchu. I've always been fascinated by the ancient civilizations/cultures of South America so it should be a good time.

 

[ornis]

@ Paper

So we take their afterlife away and try to replace it with our philosophy and our want to glorify their works---art, history, everything. I've never thought about that before. But I have wanted to know why we forget each other for material essence---or rather abandon our humantity for anything... what has history remembered artists for?

Is it for the painting's value or for the painter's meaning?

Do we at times critique painters as insane because the pictures they paint give us a right to look through their art, their eyes, and into their souls?

What man can define a man?

Knowing the name of everything is a powerful tool for man. But are we able to understand it's power? Do we know what language is? It's all abstract and often used because it can be and I am frustrated because something so easy to use is dissected when I use it "impractically" just to show that point---and I feel limited in the end... and vent my issue immaturely.

Then people who never ask me about my problem, redirect my own concerns.

I am given direction without being understood.

Departed artists often receive the same. And they can't explain themselves. But I can, though choose not to in a reasonable way---because one day, when I'm dead I cannot promise hope for my dignity to be respected.

That's it, then. The only way we may respect the dead is perhaps to escape death. Is to say the dead who passed before us are in their place, and life is for us separate from them---forever.

It would be respect in a sense. Like "I've got mine, alive, and you have yours, dead; Keep to yourself, Death, and I will keep to me."

Though if we lived long enough, we'd pine to join the ground, I bet. This is all about escaping limits, I believe.

So, if we were to teach that stealing from Tombs limits our appreciation of the people in those chambers... maybe we could escape our foolishiness with a common goal---to beat what limits us.

Even so, what do we want to appreciate them for and how do we find out? An honest question. For peace, for balance, for what?

And how can we appreciate people for more than the sake of appreciating? Please feel welcome to respond.

EDIT: Let's call the above frustration some edited form of... "stream of consciousness" ---I'm sorry for "spitting" my mind like that >.>

 

[miyi]

Thanks for all the info, miyi! I was right, I have studied him before. Just forgot, as usual...but you're right, it's very interesting stuff. And nice to know there's another Homer fan around!

juUnior, nothing wrong with liking the movies...what got me into the Incas was reading Tin Tin, long ago...not to mention Indiana Jones is the best

and ornis, what I've always found really ironic is all the effort people go to during their lives for the sake of their death, like building huge tombs and stuff. The Pope who commissioned Michelangelo to build his tomb for him is a good example. If I could commission Michelangelo for something, I'd want it to be celebratory of life, not death.

but you know, depending on how you look at it, we may actually be the ones to take away their afterlife, since we've disrupted their tombs. That's something I feel very conflicted with. For the sake of knowledge, not to mention art, I am grateful, but I also think that all people, no matter how dead they are, should be respected.

What do you all think about it? Since so much of our knowledge of these civilizations comes from studying their tombs, how do we balance respect for the dead with what it takes to discover that knowledge? Should everything be carted off to a museum, should we just forget about studying them, or is there a way to find a balance? Just curious

ok, I could be totally wrong here, so don't take my word on this one..

recalling from vague memory what I learned from history class:

During the Renaissance (17th Century), it became a common practice, especially among the elites, such as the Medici family (they were a wealthy family of bankers in Florence, Italy who sponsored the arts), to build a piece of art (whether they are sculptures, paintings, or tombs) that will represent who they are.

For example, before I die, I'll build a monument to represent who I am.

The purpose of these kind of self-representation projects, is so that they will live on forever, at least to those that are living. It was this idea of "immortality" through the arts that they were aiming for.

Today, we learn from ancient civilizations based on archeological finds, through their tombs, paintings, sculpture, etc. Had they not done this, their memory would have been lost forever.

So in this sense, I think it isn't an injustice that we are digging their tombs, because we aren't doing it out of disrespect, instead we are doing it to learn from them, and to perpetuate who and what they were. We are doing them a favor by popularizing them not only in our generation, but in future generations.

Besides, we aren't necessarily "destroying" these artifacts, we are simply "preserving" them and placing them in museums.

I wouldn't mind at all if in the future, some archeologists put my skull in a museum, in fact I would be flattered. But then again, I cannot speak for everyone. So I think as archeologists and historical scholars, we all have an obligation to respect the dead, and "study" them in a way without disturbing their peace, and I think so far we are doing well in that regard.

Then there are others, such as the thieves in Egypt, that "robbed" the treasures in the tombs of some Pharoah's, so this is an example of "desecrating" the dead.

 

[ornis]

ok, I could be totally wrong here, so don't take my word on this one..

recalling from vague memory what I learned from history class:

During the Renaissance (17th Century), it became a common practice, especially among the elites, such as the Medici family (they were a wealthy family of bankers in Florence, Italy who sponsored the arts), to build a piece of art (whether they are sculptures, paintings, or tombs) that will represent who they are.

For example, before I die, I'll build a monument to represent who I am.

The purpose of these kind of self-representation projects, is so that they will live on forever, at least to those that are living. It was this idea of "immortality" through the arts that they were aiming for.

Okay, is it really immortality to you---I mean, when I read a history book, how do I know exactly how these civilizations lived? And then, how can I give them another life through my memory when I don't really know them---the interpretation of ancient civilizations is not very reliable to me >.>

What is your opinion on the immortality bit, Miyi?

There's a great ambition to learn about ancient civilizations, but we can also lose ourselves in what we want to say about them... before we know what they did.

We can corrupt their meaning with impressions we give ourselves about objects they made. But they no longer belong to the dead. Yes we could leave them be or understand the creators by studying their creations... but who can stop nature from erasing man and the man-made?

We try. But we often ignore the purpose for the creation of those artifacts. And ironically we replace Nature's role, there. While we may end up only challenging nature's tendency to let dust return to dust, we actually take over, and the mind becomes a new tomb for the dead. Our perspective's and our art galleries---celebrate a cultural coffin.

But life and death go hand and hand... one man's tomb is another's phoenix.

 

[miyi]

What I meant by "immortality" is that, these people purposely made a lasting impression of themselves, in this world, so that they will be remembered in future generations.

It might help to know that during the 17th century (period of the Renaissance), there was this sort of cultural revival of the ancient civilizations of Rome and Greece. Scholars who studied and tried to learn from these past civilizations, embraced, popularized, and tried to emulate them.

Even after several hundreds of years after the fall of the Romam Empire, we see in the last 500 years copycats of Rome culture, for example, King Louis XIV of France, who considered himself (as evident in some of his self-portraits and sculptures), as a Roman Emperor. Or Napoleon, despot of France, who in Egypt tried to emulate Alexander the Great.

Cosimo de Medici (a member of a wealthy banking family) sponsored the arts, and in his city, he commisioned expensive massive building projects, to "beautify the city". In essence, he was practicing a Roman-like custom of "beautifying" or giving back to the city. Cosimo understood that by doing this, he will be remembered forever. That was what I meant by "immortality".

When we study the past through archeological excavations, we are not so different from the Renaissance Florentines. We, too, are learning a lot from the past. In fact, a lot of literature, science, medicine, math, can be attributed to studying the past. We wouldn't have algebra if it weren't for the contributions of Arabic mathematics.

This process of digging in the past is part of human nature. We do have obligations to respect the dead, and I think we are doing that just fine. At the same time, it would be a waste not to dig in the tombs, etc., because these things are meant to be discovered, learned, and perpetuated, so that these civilizations aren't lost in oblivion.

 

[ornis]

Math is a great example, miyi. Thanks. I see immortality a bit better now. We honor the Egyptians through algebraic trades or crafts. It's like Egyptians actually breathe every time we engineer a building.

 

[amar_kun]

does anyone study the dark age? because i've been to a seminar which talked about the so-called dark age of the world.. it seems that latest discovery from the historians shows that while the western civillization are undergoing dark ages, there is another civillization is achieving golden age at that time. however the fact kinda got kept secret for some political purposes.. however many leading historians nowadays is working hard to uncover the hidden civillization which is kept secret for the past centuries by our previous historian..

 

[TechnoMagus]

well while western europe was "struggling in the dark", the torch was very bright in the byzantine empire, china, the americas and the arab world was poised to become the brightest of them all at his time period....

 

[the_hellbringer]

I can't believe nobody is speaking about the Incas.

It was a very big ancient civilizzation, tath arose from the highlands of Peru in 13th century. They conquered almost every south america.
The Tawantinsuyo (tawa=four suyo=region), wich was the name of the Incas Empire included part of the territory of what is now Clombia, Ecuador, Chile, Bolivia, Argentina and of course, Peru.
The apital of the Tawantinsuyo was in Peru, in a city called Cusco, qich means bellybutton.. because for the Icas, Cuzco was the center of the world.

Notice that I've written Cusco and Cuzco. That's because the Incas language, the Qechua, doesn't have writing, so nowadays, the people write it just like the words sounds.

They considered themselves as sons of the sun and they worshiped verything in the nature, so the lived in peace with the nature and with each other.

They were a peacefull society and they only had 3 rules. Ama sua, Ama quella, Ama Llulla. Don't be a thief, don't be a lier and don't be idle.
Everybody had to work for the Inca, but also for themselves and for their comunity. There where no money, you paid thing with other things or with work.

ne of the most impresive things about the Incas is their knowledge of engineering and their building abilities. They didn't know the wheel, but they carried really big stones for great distances. And they build great constructions without using any kind of cement.

Here's an example.

Here's one of the big rocks of Saccsayhuaman... it goes 3 meters below the ground

Spoiler

This is a part of the wall of the fortress of Saccsayhuaman

Spoiler

Their constructions where antiseismical. They used trapezoidal architecture so the walls wouldn't fall. Teir architecture was so much better than the architecture that the conquistadors brought with them.
An example of taht is in the Qoricancha, wich was one of the biggest temples and it was dedicated to the Inti, the sun. Qori means gold and cancha means patio. Tat was beacause the walls were covered with gold, because gold represented the sun.
When the spanish came to Peru and brought the christianism, they build churches ontop of the temples to impose their religion.
The Santo Domingo (saint dominic) church was build on top of the Qoricancha, but their was a big earthquake on 1650 and then again in 1950 and the curch fell down... but the remanins of the Qoricancha stood still.

An example of the Incas architecture in the Qoricancha

Spoiler

A contrast between the colonial architecture of the Santo Domingo church and the Incas architecture of the Qoricancha

Spoiler

One of their biggest citadels was Machu Picchu, it is 1.5km x 1km and it was a sacred citadel dedicated for their religion. It is ontop of the Machu Picchu mountain in the Sacred Valley of the Incas. For unknown reasons the construction of this citadel was never finised. One theory is that a lightning struck the city.. that was a message of their gods to abbandon the city because it wasn't safe anymore.
The conquistadors never foud this city. It was found in 1911 by Hiram Bigham. Wel.. he really showed it to the world.. teh city was never lost. Their were people living in it when Hiram Bigham arrivedm and he payed them to show him the city and shut up.

This city was sacred for a reason. I was near de sky... near to their gods. And they prayed their so their gods can listen. There's a room with two stones with a hollow in the middle, like a biiiig stone contact lens case XD... they used to fill those with water so they can used them to look at the sky. Those stones whre water mirros. It was a sin to look directly into the sky, since the sun was a god (that explains why it hurts to look at the sun)
There's also a circular room with a window, and in the winter solstice the sun rise up between a gate in a nearby mountain and the light enters te circular room through that small window. That prooves that the Incas were also great astronomers.

This is Machu Picchu, and in the background is Huaynapicchu mountain

Spoiler

Thsi is Machu Picchu seen from the top of the Huaynapicchu (there's a very difficult path to the top)

Spoiler

A panoramical view from inside of Machu Picchu

Spoiler

his is the fortress of Saccsayhuaman

Spoiler

This is the fortress of Pisac

Spoiler

And now some free publicity.....

Pease... vote for Machu Picchu to be one of the new 7 wonders of the world.
You can do it by clicking the imagen...

 

[Ichimaru Gin n Tonic]

Wow, thanks for the explanation, Raul!
I'm very interested in the antiseismical construction and the trapezoid stones, how did they ever came up with the idea to make such construction. Awesome!

 

[the_hellbringer]

Not only the stones. Everything was trapezoidal... the rooms, the doors, the windows.
It's like in the key stone of an arc. All the force and weigth goes down straight to the ground and the construction stand still.
I'm not a physicist or an architech so I can't explain exactly how does it work.

The great part is that they did't have computers, calculators, power tools, kwoledge of the wheel, big and strong animals for work (the biggest animal in their is a Llama)... they only had rocks, more rocks, tools made of rock, wood, some metals, an abacus made of wool with knots to represent numbers (it was called Quipu) and their own hands.

I would like to see that somebody trying tou build a thing like that using only those thing today.

 

[Gold Knight]

Cool post, hellbringer, thanks for that. I really should get to reading my Aztec/Inca art history book sometimes (a friend gave it to me for free, at the time we thought that I would have had to take a course on it XD ).

 

[Charlie]

There is a lot of interest about Aztec/Inca/Mayan civilizations. A lot myths concerning the Mayans, as well.

[mod=Charlie]Thread re opened - you can post here again.[/mod]

 

[shaheer]

hmmi am more interested in scandanevian ie viking culture their day to day chores... and on Poetic Edda
say do we have a mythological thread?
i would love to discuss the Ragnarök

 

[Charlie]

hmmi am more interested in scandanevian ie viking culture their day to day chores... and on Poetic Edda
say do we have a mythological thread?
i would love to discuss the Ragnarök

There is, I re opened it now. So go here for the Mythology thread.

 

[steelwingcrash1]

I've watched a certain documentary about the Incas and Mayan civilizations on National Geographic Channel or Discovery Channel. I forgot which between the two.

Anyway, I agree with GoldKnight that religion (gods and goddesses) played a significant role in forming those early civilizations. However during those times (every year, if I am not wrong in recalling), they offer human sacrifices so that their gods will shower them with abundance in their crops.

What happens to the human chosen for sacrifice? They outwardly plunge/stab/smash a sharpened rock deep in the solar plexus, cut open their chest, and then grab the still-beating heart out and raise it to the heavens. Afterwards, the priest assigned for this job flays the "entire" human skin out of the victim. The priest wears that freshly cut human skin still dripping with blood and then shows it in front of a cheering audience.

Also, ancient India had its share on human sacrifices. They called it as suttee. Suttee was the illegal act of burning a woman, who lost his husband, alive. Why was suttee performed during those early times? A woman who had lost her husband must sacrifice herself to the gods so that she herself reincarnates (?) to be a new goddess herself.
How was suttee performed? The body of the dead husband is to placed on top of a heap of sticks. Once the eulogy for the dead has been said by their priest, the woman follows to sit beside her laying husband, and waits as the men lights the fire and completely burns the woman alive.

I guess, with all these told, ancient history has a lot of dark secrets to tell us aside from their contributions in present civilizations. We can then justify that certain inhuman acts were already present during those times.