153 replies to this topic

[kmt_sesh]

kampz, on 01 January 2013 - 04:02 AM, said:

I've have a question regarding technology back in ancient times. Shouldn't humans have all the same capabilities that we always have had since our first appearance? I mention this because they're chariots and wheels involved in the story. So what? It's wood in a form of a box. I can use a card board box and make one.

You might not understand how sophisticated and complicated chariots were. They were cutting-edge technology for their time—and they were considerably more than a wood box stuck atop wheels. The box was usually not even wood, which would've been too heavy, but cane or other sturdy plant materials. Think of the many things involved. What would be the best type of wood for the draught-pole, so that it was light enough but still suitably strong? What of the wood for the wheels, and how many spokes should it have? How many people should the carriage carry, what would be their specific functions, and how many horses should pull the device? How do you train the horses to do so? Et cetera.

Answering these questions has enabled scholars to understand how the chariot developed in the ancient Near East and how it spread—even it's been my own research experience that there's no universal agreement on who first invented the chariot. Answering such questions also enables us to identify the specific culture who used a given chariot, considering they tended to be unique in design to individual cultures.

So in summary, no, not all things are equal. Someone comes up with an idea and it spreads. All ancient Near Eastern civilizations—and the rest of the world's civilizations, for that matter—freely helped themselves to the ideas of others, and frequently improved upon them. The Egyptians, for example, invented neither the chariot nor the khepesh sword, but they adopted them to great effect.

[docyabut2]

Aristotle of 322 bc didn`nt know any more of Atlantis then the other greeks.The tale was Egyptian, a record of a deed of war lost in a Greek destuction.


   And this deed was unknown to you, because, for many generations, the survivors of that destruction died, leaving no written word.


,This I infer because Solon said that the priests in their narrative of that war mentioned most of the names which are recorded prior to the time of Theseus, such as Cecrops, and Erechtheus, and Erichthonius, and Erysichthon


Cecrops 1582bc

Edited by docyabut2, 01 January 2013 - 05:00 AM.

[kampz]

kmt_sesh, on 01 January 2013 - 04:15 AM, said:

You might not understand how sophisticated and complicated chariots were. They were cutting-edge technology for their time—and they were considerably more than a wood box stuck atop wheels. The box was usually not even wood, which would've been too heavy, but cane or other sturdy plant materials. Think of the many things involved. What would be the best type of wood for the draught-pole, so that it was light enough but still suitably strong? What of the wood for the wheels, and how many spokes should it have? How many people should the carriage carry, what would be their specific functions, and how many horses should pull the device? How do you train the horses to do so? Et cetera.

Answering these questions has enabled scholars to understand how the chariot developed in the ancient Near East and how it spread—even it's been my own research experience that there's no universal agreement on who first invented the chariot. Answering such questions also enables us to identify the specific culture who used a given chariot, considering they tended to be unique in design to individual cultures.

So in summary, no, not all things are equal. Someone comes up with an idea and it spreads. All ancient Near Eastern civilizations—and the rest of the world's civilizations, for that matter—freely helped themselves to the ideas of others, and frequently improved upon them. The Egyptians, for example, invented neither the chariot nor the khepesh sword, but they adopted them to great effect.

In 10,000 BC do you think a wagon of wood existed? Forget Atlantis.

Edited by kampz, 01 January 2013 - 04:32 AM.

[cormac mac airt]

kampz, on 01 January 2013 - 04:02 AM, said:

I've have a question regarding technology back in ancient times. Shouldn't humans have all the same capabilities that we always have had since our first appearance? I mention this because they're chariots and wheels involved in the story. So what? It's wood in a form of a box and so are boats. I can use a card board box and make a chariot. Rocks in Flintstones are wheels. Use some wood. I'm saying Humans were smart compared to everything else on Earth right from the very start I assume. I just hope the damn island didn't appear and disappear if it ever existed.

Having the physical capability is not the same thing as having a need for the various later technologies. Particularly since many of them weren't put into use until the rise of domesticated crops and livestock which allowed a much more sedentary lifestyle. Also, it should be noted that the human population consisted of much, MUCH smaller groups so many of the early technologies had to be mobile or semi-mobile.

cormac

[kmt_sesh]

Proclus, on 31 December 2012 - 11:01 PM, said:

...

First, Atlantis is not presented as a "couple of parables" but as plain truth.
Sorry, but it's not presented as a tale. It's presented as logos, a high-quality standard of proven truth.
Then, it depends on how close the distorted historical traditon comes to the point Plato wants to make or not.
If yes, then we can talk of the real Atlantis.

I wanted to comment on this, too. A "logos" was not really a presentation of hard historical fact. It belongs to a tradition going back far in time in Classical Greece and was simply little more than a writing down of events as they were believed to have happened. There was usually no deeper historical investigation than that. Numerous logographers are known from Classical Greece. They also embodied ethnographic, geographic, and mythographic matters.

This is what makes Herodotus so significant. Although his Histories is riddled with errors, Herodotus is rightly called the "father of history" because he appears to have been the first to take the work of logographers one step farther by searching out deeper meanings as well as cause and effect in historical accounts.

Quote

[I do not want anybody to "believe" in Atlantis. Just to accept that it is an open question.

(Where are all the Atlantis believers? I see a lot of stubborn skeptics here!)

LOL The believers are probably as burnt out right now with Atlantis as we skeptics are. I know you're new, Proclus, but if you do a thorough review of the forum's history, you might be mildly shocked by just how many Atlantis discussions have happened at UM. There have been times when three or more separate Atlantis or Atlantis-related discussions have occurred simultaneously. We skeptics are a tenacious lot but if we come across as abrupt or grumpy, it's only because we've pretty much already heard it all before. Many, many times before.

Right, cormac?

[cormac mac airt]

kmt_sesh, on 01 January 2013 - 04:31 AM, said:

I wanted to comment on this, too. A "logos" was not really a presentation of hard historical fact. It belongs to a tradition going back far in time in Classical Greece and was simply little more than a writing down of events as they were believed to have happened. There was usually no deeper historical investigation than that. Numerous logographers are known from Classical Greece. They also embodied ethnographic, geographic, and mythographic matters.

This is what makes Herodotus so significant. Although his Histories is riddled with errors, Herodotus is rightly called the "father of history" because he appears to have been the first to take the work of logographers one step farther by searching out deeper meanings as well as cause and effect in historical accounts.



LOL The believers are probably as burnt out right now with Atlantis as we skeptics are. I know you're new, Proclus, but if you do a thorough review of the forum's history, you might be mildly shocked by just how many Atlantis discussions have happened at UM. There have been times when three or more separate Atlantis or Atlantis-related discussions have occurred simultaneously. We skeptics are a tenacious lot but if we come across as abrupt or grumpy, it's only because we've pretty much already heard it all before. Many, many times before.

Right, cormac?

Unfortunately you're right. This horse has been beat, buried, exhumed, re-beat and reburied more times than I can keep up with.

cormac

[kmt_sesh]

kampz, on 01 January 2013 - 04:28 AM, said:

In 10,000 BC do you think a wagon of wood existed?

If we're talking that far back, I would doubt it. This was around the transition from the Paleolithic to the Neolithic, as I recall. Although the first clear indications of intensive agriculture would start appearing within a couple of millennia, during which wheeled carts would've been practical, a point in time farther back would've meant no real practical need for wheeled carts.

I'm talking strictly practical needs here. And the first need would've been to make life easier, once agricultural efforts were underway on a large scale in Mesopotamia, the Levant, and Anatolia. Small-scale, seasonal agricultural activities are attested before that time, but hunting-gathering was still an integral part of life.

As far as carts in warfare are concerned, it is considerably less likely. One of the earliest attested examples of evidence for "war carts" is on the Stela of the Vultures from southern Iraq, which dates to around 2600 BCE.

[kmt_sesh]

cormac mac airt, on 01 January 2013 - 04:38 AM, said:

Unfortunately you're right. This horse has been beat, buried, exhumed, re-beat and reburied more times than I can keep up with.

cormac

Isn't there a way just to mummify the damn thing, dump it in a hole, and forget it forever?

No, sadly, I know it's not possible. As long as fringe authors spin out their half-baked books and diminished venues like the History Channel proceed to spew out ridiculous, dimwitted programming, endless misconceptions about Atlantis will go on indefinitely.

But I'm not bitter. Right?

[cormac mac airt]

kmt_sesh, on 01 January 2013 - 04:42 AM, said:

Isn't there a way just to mummify the damn thing, dump it in a hole, and forget it forever?

No, sadly, I know it's not possible. As long as fringe authors spin out their half-baked books and diminished venues like the History Channel proceed to spew out ridiculous, dimwitted programming, endless misconceptions about Atlantis will go on indefinitely.

But I'm not bitter. Right?

Too late for mummification since bone-chips are all that's left of the poor horse. It probably didn't get that much of a beating when it was alive.

cormac

[kampz]

kmt_sesh, on 01 January 2013 - 04:39 AM, said:

If we're talking that far back, I would doubt it. This was around the transition from the Paleolithic to the Neolithic, as I recall. Although the first clear indications of intensive agriculture would start appearing within a couple of millennia, during which wheeled carts would've been practical, a point in time farther back would've meant no real practical need for wheeled carts.

I'm talking strictly practical needs here. And the first need would've been to make life easier, once agricultural efforts were underway on a large scale in Mesopotamia, the Levant, and Anatolia. Small-scale, seasonal agricultural activities are attested before that time, but hunting-gathering was still an integral part of life.

As far as carts in warfare are concerned, it is considerably less likely. One of the earliest attested examples of evidence for "war carts" is on the Stela of the Vultures from southern Iraq, which dates to around 2600 BCE.

Like you said, we needed to make life easier. Say I appeared here and they're a few thousand others that suddenly appeared around the World. First thing I do is get food. During my time looking for food, I discover rock and wood and yada yada, now I got drugs and sex with those words. Happy New Year.

Edited by kampz, 01 January 2013 - 05:06 AM.

[kampz]

cormac mac airt, on 01 January 2013 - 04:29 AM, said:

Having the physical capability is not the same thing as having a need for the various later technologies. Particularly since many of them weren't put into use until the rise of domesticated crops and livestock which allowed a much more sedentary lifestyle. Also, it should be noted that the human population consisted of much, MUCH smaller groups so many of the early technologies had to be mobile or semi-mobile.

cormac

Yeah Plato and Atlantis sucks. I don't feel like explaining how an island capitol city can disappear as in vanish into mid air back in 9,600 BC after accomplishing what Plato said. It's a giant stretch and it's all assume.

Edited by kampz, 01 January 2013 - 05:08 AM.

[cormac mac airt]

kampz, on 01 January 2013 - 04:59 AM, said:

Yeah Plato and Atlantis sucks.

I wouldn't say either sucks, but Plato's tale was never meant to be taken so literally, as many people want it to be. It was meant to teach a lesson and has since been blown all out of proportion.

cormac

[kampz]

cormac mac airt, on 01 January 2013 - 05:04 AM, said:

I wouldn't say either sucks, but Plato's tale was never meant to be taken so literally, as many people want it to be. It was meant to teach a lesson and has since been blown all out of proportion.

cormac

You assume.  

Or we assume but I'm not 100% there but I feel I should be. I'm 99.9% there.

Edited by kampz, 01 January 2013 - 05:12 AM.

[kmt_sesh]

kampz, on 01 January 2013 - 04:54 AM, said:

Like you said, we needed to make life easier. Say I appeared here and they're a few thousand others that suddenly appeared around the World. First thing I do is get food. During my time looking for food, I discover rock and wood and yada yada, now I got drugs and sex with those words. Happy New Year.

Drugs and sex are prohibited at UM but yada yada is allowed.

Happy New Year...to everyone!

[cormac mac airt]

kampz, on 01 January 2013 - 05:10 AM, said:

You assume.  

Or we assume but I'm not 100% there but I feel I should be. I'm 99.9% there.

....it had a purpose other than being an interesting piece of fiction. Yep, but Plato and others were known for weaving a good tale.  

cormac