Oh didn't you guys know?  The Boy Souts are a paramilitary organization that breeds future domestic terrorists.  Notice they wear brown shirts?  Come on, can't you see the connection to Hitler's Brown Shirts?  Ooooh and they also pledge allegiance to God — we can't have that now can we?  The Boy Scouts of America is nothing but a right-wing Christian Fundamentalist paramilitary organization teaching kids how to be the next Tim McVeigh.It blows my mind that there are people (and government agencies *cough*) that believe this to some degree. 

I think the demarcation of Prehistory to History is fluid as the archeological record reveals newer information.  Since things are in a state of flux, it is more or less a guideline to help simplify and package History into recognizable epochs for concentration.  Writing is obviously the signpost of man's promotion into civilization.  I would say it is the single most important factor in determining where Prehistory ends.  However, it doesn't have to be the only thing.  For historians, the written record is where we ultimately get our knowledge, but for archaeologists, tool making might be their greatest signpost, or agriculture/animal husbandry etc….  Remember that oral traditions are a record of sorts too, but historians cannot verify authenticity, authorship, and accuracy with these kinds of accounts.  Obviously art predates writing, and is yet another form of creative expression that might be used as a marker, but again, authenticity, authorship, and accuracy are much more difficult to pin down.  On a side note, what constitutes the "modern era?"  Where do you draw the cutoff in technological terms?  What was the era before the "modern era?"  It's the same situation isn't it?

I need a dose of that right about now. 🙂

I love me some wool fitted baseball caps sporting my favorite team.  Back in the day I popped for $25.00 a cap, but now I can't afford such luxuries anymore.

I heard a historian mention something about ancient Egypt which was quite interesting.  He said that Egypt in itself was not really all that great as a foundational civilization within the larger framework of Western Civ.  While it impressed other ancient peoples (the Greeks, Romans) with its grand pyramids or whatnot, Egypt did not really make any original, long-lasting contributions to the West.  Contributions that it did make were more like modifications or rehashings of previous contributions made by other peoples.He went on to say that some of the modern-day interest in the "importance" of Egypt has come about because of the rise in black consciousness in 20th century North America.  I think this position argues both that Egyptian civilization was actually "African" rather than "Western" and that it was a foundational civilization.  So basically, if Egypt was both fundamentally-important and African that was later taken over by the West, then Western Civ is built partly on African contributions.Your thoughts?

Greek mythology is based on Egypt's.  The Greeks revered the Egyptians because their civilization was much older than theirs.  Outside of that influence, I'm not sure the Egyptians contributed much else to Western culture.  Often, the Egyptians ended up on the losing side of cultural battles that did influence the West.  They always ended up under the thumb of a foreign power whether it was Persia, Greece, Rome, or Islam.  In all examples, they ended up assimilating into the cultures that came to dominate them.

Paul runs into this in the Book of Acts when he engages the sophists on the Areapagus. The Greeks didn't want to offend the gods (if they were indeed up there on Olympus) to the point that they erected a monument dedicated to the unknown god (basically whomever they might have left out).  Paul marvels at the religiosity of the Greeks and then uses it as a segway into introducing the Gospel.  My point is that even in Roman occupied Greece, devotion still held sway in Greek society. 

If you read Plato, he seems to indicate that the philosophers didn't buy into the mythology of the gods, but saw it as a civic religion beneficial to the structure and order of the state more than anything else.  I'm sure many of the more educated Greeks saw it this way too, and only revered the gods as a cultural tradition more so than a true religion.  The lower classes probably had greater faith in their gods I suspect.  Probably because they were more dependent on the fortunes of nature because their livelihood was closely tied to the sea and land.  Of course everything I just said would be difficult to prove.

If the source offers no real help to your thesis, I would cull it immediately and move on.  If it does help, it has to be corroborated by other sources because it can't stand alone unless it is the only verifiable source that can be cited on the subject (which is rare).