- This topic has 3 voices and 4 replies.
-
Posts
-
Here is an interesting article about a Flute believed to be 35,000 years old that was found in a cave in southern Germany.: Prehistoric flute in Germany is oldest known I wonder if the ancients made other instruments and what their music sounded like. I also find it curious that they assert that the discovery of the flute means that it's makers lived in an advanced culture. This also begs the question of what attributes anthropologists ascribe to an advanced culture? From the tone of this article living in caves and making flutes means you are creative and thus advanced. ??? But despite finding relics from this age we do not know any details of this supposed culture. What was their language like? What was their familiar structure, if any? What did their socital groupings look like? We dont have GOOD answers for any of these questions, but a flute means they must have had culture. I bet they were great conversationalists and would fit into any Parisian salon.It is assertions like this that casue me to take anything said by an anthropologist or archaeologist with a grain of salt. Things can give us an idea of people's physical condition but we cannot learn anything about the people themselves. unfortunately, these early humans did not anything that gives them a true voice. That is why the era before the ancient Sumerians is called pre-history.
I agree Scout sometimes these items are just so dated the use is indiscernable. The article(very good by the way)says that cognitive, social advancement is marked by items like:
carved objects including musical instruments, personal decorations and figurative art
Modern humans still engage in this cultural activity. I do see this sort of thing as advancement because the antropologist/archeologist is usually comparing neolithic humans to ape-like humans, in which case it does seem advanced. There are some remarkable finds around Kiev, 8-9th century, of the then newly assimilated Russ, Viking tribe, and earthen mounds containing whole funerary arrangements including chieftan, ship, horse, dog, slave and coins minted in Baghdad are remarkably well preserved in blue clay earth. They even found a toilet kit, made of iron. It consists of one metal ring with an ear wax remover, nail clipper and tweezer. Now that is advanced culture!
I wondered, too, about what “advanced” means in the article. It seems to me that when historical discoveries are written about in articles, they talk about how older civilizations were much more “advanced” or “complex” than previously thought. What this tells me is that there is a tendency for people to think that we live in an “enlightened” age and that those who came before us were simpletons who didn't know much.
I wondered, too, about what "advanced" means in the article. It seems to me that when historical discoveries are written about in articles, they talk about how older civilizations were much more "advanced" or "complex" than previously thought. What this tells me is that there is a tendency for people to think that we live in an "enlightened" age and that those who came before us were simpletons who didn't know much.
That is how I take it too. They talk and write as though modern society is the pinnacle of societal development and they are amazed when any of our predecessors showed any signs of what academics consider advanced thinking. This is post-modernism at its worst.
I am very surprised! haha I thought I sensed an increasingly humanistic tone among scientists when referring to people of the past. At least they have stopped saying “primitive” and “savage.” For the most part, and I follow archeology pretty regularly, I perceive awe and reverance for ancient civilizations.Maybe this is a distinction only professional historians would pick up on, here I am just reading as a fan.
http://hnn.us/articles/88232.html
Most people have difficulty divorcing their own morals from the morals of the past, for example, in the 2006 book Imperialism, Art, and Restitution, the authors Dr. Michael Brown from Williams College and Margaret Bruchac from University of Massachusetts, Amherst wrote: The implementation of NAGPRA prompted anthropologists to examine their profession with a critical eye, to weigh the thoughtless and sometimes shameful behavior of anthropology?s intellectual ancestors against more recent efforts to set matter right.Past anthropologists have been facing this retroactive judgment since the 1960s. Although some anthropologists conducted research that has not held up in the years (such Dr. Samuel Morton?s phrenology studies, which involved telling the character of an individual by the shape of the skull and face), other anthropological research has withstood the test of time, such as studies that show the increase of infectious disease rates with the adoption of agriculture. Early studies were not about disrespect and many continue to serve a purpose today. Studies conducted at the beginning of the twentieth century on thigh bone differences between ethnic groups, for example, still help forensic anthropologists identify crime victims. Other early studies have helped us to understand that many of our differences are in part due to climatic differences and this in turn has given us an understanding where people came from. Information gained from studies as early as 1917 has provided anthropologists with a foundation for our new more sophisticated studies, such as those that enable activity pattern reconstructions using bone diameters.
I realize there is considerable respect here for people and places of the past, and that sentiment is expressed more and more among anthropologists and archeologists. You certainly have reason to question methods of the past but the current trend reflects a sense of responsiblity when handling and studying ancient remains. In my opinion.
