| FORUM | ARCHIVE |                    | TOTAL QUIZ RESULT |


  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - South American Megaliths
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login


Welcome stranger, click here to read about some of the great benefits of registering for a free account with us and joining us in our global online community.


South American Megaliths

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  123>
Author
toyomotor View Drop Down
Moderator
Moderator
Avatar

Joined: 15 Feb 2014
Location: Tasmania, AUST.
Status: Offline
Points: 3569
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote toyomotor Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: South American Megaliths
    Posted: 25 Feb 2017 at 08:53
For some years I've been interested in the technical skills employed in the construction of ancient South American cities.

The buildings, including the ziggurat style temples, roadways and aquaducts were built with such skill, that the means by which they were constructed defies modern belief.

The precision used in the cutting of huge blocks of stone, the means by which they were transported and how they were lifted into place still have not been satisfactorily explained by modern science.

That the North Americans never developed these skills is still not explained, when one considers that, in the main, they all arrived in the Americas roughly about the same time. Nor is it explained by the fact that there were probably slightly later arrivals by sea.

To date there is no evidence of visiting Egyptians or middle eastern builders, despite the fact that the temples were very similar to the ziggurats of Mesopotamia.

The buildings, roadways and waterways are only equalled by such civilisations as the Egyptians. Ancient Europe did not have these skills for centuries later.

See World Mysteries at http://s8int.com/phile/page54.html

Does anyone on this forum have any idea where the ideas for their construction came from?




Edited by toyomotor - 25 Feb 2017 at 08:56
I often wonder why I try.
Back to Top
Sponsored Links


Back to Top
Vanuatu View Drop Down
General
General


Joined: 23 Feb 2015
Location: New England
Status: Offline
Points: 782
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Vanuatu Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 26 Feb 2017 at 01:21
http://www.ancient.eu/Inca_Architecture/

Hi, have a look at this link. It's about the Inca and their building methods.

Just an aside- you probably have heard of the famous Egyptologist  Zahi Hawass. He had a series on History Channel, (I think HC) about the building of the pyramids. He has students with him, one of whom believed that aliens built the Pyramids. So Hawass spends nearly a day with these student traveling into the deepest parts of the Great Pyramid at Giza. There he shows them ancient art work depicting the Egyptians using methods very similar to the Inca link. 

He says "here they are cutting the rock, here they are moving the rock, here they are using sand to smooth the rock etc. Then Hawass ( looking so pleased with himself) says to the alien enthusiast "so who built the pyramids?" - "Um, A-Aliens?" Angry priceless.
The root of all desires is the one desire: to come home, to be at peace. -Jean Klein
Back to Top
toyomotor View Drop Down
Moderator
Moderator
Avatar

Joined: 15 Feb 2014
Location: Tasmania, AUST.
Status: Offline
Points: 3569
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote toyomotor Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 26 Feb 2017 at 01:40
Originally posted by Vanuatu Vanuatu wrote:

http://www.ancient.eu/Inca_Architecture/

Hi, have a look at this link. It's about the Inca and their building methods.

Just an aside- you probably have heard of the famous Egyptologist  Zahi Hawass. He had a series on History Channel, (I think HC) about the building of the pyramids. He has students with him, one of whom believed that aliens built the Pyramids. So Hawass spends nearly a day with these student traveling into the deepest parts of the Great Pyramid at Giza. There he shows them ancient art work depicting the Egyptians using methods very similar to the Inca link. 

He says "here they are cutting the rock, here they are moving the rock, here they are using sand to smooth the rock etc. Then Hawass ( looking so pleased with himself) says to the alien enthusiast "so who built the pyramids?" - "Um, A-Aliens?" Angry priceless.

Thanks for that. Zahi HAWASS is, I think, the Head of the Egyptian Antiquities Authority. I've seen some of his programs.

What I was hoping for was some hint as to where the Incas and other South Americans got the ideas for their architecture and civil engineering skills. In many ways like the Egyptians and other Middle Easterners, so radically different from the North Americans, or for that matter, the rest of the world.

Were there visitors from other civilisations who gave them the ideas?

Is it just possible that inter planetary assistance was provided?

There are still many ancient inventions which defy explanation, given the materials available at the time, and what scientists claim was the level of knowledge by ancient man.

My thirst for knowledge is boundless. Help
I often wonder why I try.
Back to Top
Vanuatu View Drop Down
General
General


Joined: 23 Feb 2015
Location: New England
Status: Offline
Points: 782
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Vanuatu Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 26 Feb 2017 at 02:33
Wish someone could answer definitively. I do think hominids would have observed insects, (J.Diamond) after all they ate them must have also learned their habits. Insects do amazing work.

I have thought about the alien explanation and if that's the case and wormholes work both ways-maybe we humans are visiting our own past. Is time linear or cyclical? 

On the Egyptians, where you see the headdress that depicts the cobra coming through the top of the forehead (crown) that is the symbol for wisdom through a process called kundalini.  A kind of enlightenment and creative dynamite. 

Maybe there's a psychic link to a parallel universe that allows an information exchange. The markings at Gobekli Tepe , Australia , Lascaux and so many other sites suggest an intervention possibly an interior revelation that becomes exterior as with Plato's cave dweller. The truth was there, only veiled.
The root of all desires is the one desire: to come home, to be at peace. -Jean Klein
Back to Top
caldrail View Drop Down
General
General
Avatar

Joined: 21 Jan 2014
Location: Rushey Platt
Status: Offline
Points: 901
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote caldrail Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 26 Feb 2017 at 13:14
I think we can discount alien visitation in preference to ordinary human ingenuity.
http://www.unrv.com/forum/blog/31-caldrails-blog/
Back to Top
Vanuatu View Drop Down
General
General


Joined: 23 Feb 2015
Location: New England
Status: Offline
Points: 782
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Vanuatu Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 26 Feb 2017 at 14:32
Hi caldrail. Strange things exist right here on earth. Why discount aliens? Did you hear the news this past week? Small star showing the pull of  7 planets 40 light years away. I don't discount the visitor possibility. 

The root of all desires is the one desire: to come home, to be at peace. -Jean Klein
Back to Top
Vanuatu View Drop Down
General
General


Joined: 23 Feb 2015
Location: New England
Status: Offline
Points: 782
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Vanuatu Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 26 Feb 2017 at 14:46
toyomotor, the link has many things I've seen before but the reptile and Yeti figures are new to me, exquisite. It's the Nazca lines and images and the stone age ley lines (Kent to Cornwall- so many others)
that make me hold out before saying no alien influence.
The root of all desires is the one desire: to come home, to be at peace. -Jean Klein
Back to Top
toyomotor View Drop Down
Moderator
Moderator
Avatar

Joined: 15 Feb 2014
Location: Tasmania, AUST.
Status: Offline
Points: 3569
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote toyomotor Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 26 Feb 2017 at 23:41
Vanuatu:

I'm not brave enough to deny the possibility of alien visitation, or to argue whether time is linear or cyclical.

What I do know is that discoveries of ancient artifacts, not only buildings and cities beggar belief when considering what modern scientists say was posible in ancient times.

The Antikythera Machine, being touted as the first computer, has not been explained-it's construction that is. How did a machine as complicated as this exist, and then the knowledge disappears for a couple of thousand years? And it's not the only case.

I mention the South American Megaliths, which, according to all reasonable modern thought, should not have existed in those times, but they did, but by whose design.

I have difficulty accepting that some of the ancient inventions were simply the product of human ingenuity. If they were, fine, but how and why did the knowledge simply die and remain dormant for several thousand years?

Skull surgery, trepaning, was used in ancient times to alleviate pain. The reasons may not have been realistic to us, but the methodology existed, and then died out for quite some time. Why?

I don't believe that things such as the Nacza Lines were made by humans as religious symbols. They can't be seen form earth, only about a kilometre or more above. Who was up there to see them?

And so it goes on. The Megaliths are only a small part, imho, of the hundreds, or more, unexplained constructions and inventions from ancient times.

caldrail: But me no buts. If you can, give me some explanations of the things we've been discussing. Did human ingenuity rise and then fall? If so, how, why?





Edited by toyomotor - 26 Feb 2017 at 23:44
I often wonder why I try.
Back to Top
franciscosan View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke


Joined: 09 Feb 2015
Location: Littleton CO
Status: Offline
Points: 1966
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote franciscosan Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 06 Mar 2017 at 20:58
I had a friend in college that did his anthropology/sociology thesis on UFO cults, he concluded that there was some deep, vaguely racist feelings that motivated people to say, 'this "primitive" people could not have possibly done 'x' therefore, it must have done by space aliens or inter dimensional travelers.'  I tend to agree on that with Caldrail, that we under-estimate human ingenuity.  Each era has its Sistine Chapel/Lascaux/great pyramids/Notre Dame, something amazing that humans did, that we might be able to imitate, but that we would not be able do from scratch.  We tend not to doubt the modern or western versions of these great projects, but we do sometimes doubt the ancient or non-western ones.  Do they really merit consideration as the interference of non-human cultures?  Or do we just have hang ups about admitting that, say, Incans had great abilities in stonework and architecture?

The dog is snoring, it is hilarious:)  life is good.

Now don't get me wrong, UFOs could have reasons for contacting "primitive" people, that would not be applicable to modern people.  And as far as stories of UFOs being responsible for the pyramid or Nazca lines or British chalk figures, they are a lot of fun and help us focus our amazement at such things.  Earlier civilizations had the same thing when they said that giants did the cyclopeian walls of Mycenae or Tiryns or Apollo and Poseidon did the walls of Troy.  So the impetus to ascribe great past feats to a supernatural force, is present in antiquity as well as in Von Daniken.  I just think that the natives should get credit, or the native gods as the case might be.  We should also realize that just because we are more technologically sophisticated than "primitives" are doesn't mean that they did not have (double negative) techniques, developed over centuries, that we are still not able to imitate (or even recognize).  If all you had was flint, then you got pretty sophisticated at napping flint for tools over the ages.


Edited by franciscosan - 06 Mar 2017 at 21:26
Back to Top
toyomotor View Drop Down
Moderator
Moderator
Avatar

Joined: 15 Feb 2014
Location: Tasmania, AUST.
Status: Offline
Points: 3569
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote toyomotor Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 06 Mar 2017 at 23:23
Nevertheless, there has been no rational reason given for how/why the meticulous ancient crafts were;

a. Confined to certain regions; and

b. Why those skills "disappeared" for centuries.
I often wonder why I try.
Back to Top
franciscosan View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke


Joined: 09 Feb 2015
Location: Littleton CO
Status: Offline
Points: 1966
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote franciscosan Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07 Mar 2017 at 02:05
I don't know, perhaps thousands or tens of thousands of year of tradition and custom teaching skills from father to son.  I mean the reason why there are such magnificent Greek temples is because they built a lot of them, it was culturally important to do it right, and they developed and refined the skills over generations.

And then "the waters changed," and no longer those kinds of Greek temples were being built.  How many trades have been lost when technology did away with buggies, or conastoga wagons?  How many cathedrals were built during the Middle Ages?  Do you think that we could build such cathedrals today, at the same rate?  We couldn't do it, even with "modern technology."


Edited by franciscosan - 07 Mar 2017 at 02:07
Back to Top
Vanuatu View Drop Down
General
General


Joined: 23 Feb 2015
Location: New England
Status: Offline
Points: 782
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Vanuatu Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07 Mar 2017 at 03:58

Maya self destructed and were finished off by weather and deforestation. 

http://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/why-did-the-mayan-civilization-collapse-a-new-study-points-to-deforestation-and-climate-change-30863026/

Scholars and laypeople have proposed countless theories accounting for the collapse, ranging from the plausible (overhunting, foreign invasion, peasant revolt) to the absurd (alien invasion, supernatural forces). In his 2005 book Collapse, though, Jared Diamond put forth a different sort of theory—that a prolonged drought, exacerbated by ill-advised deforestation, forced Mayan populations to abandon their cities. That hypothesis has finally been put to the test with archaeological evidence and environmental data and the results published this week in a pair of studies.





The root of all desires is the one desire: to come home, to be at peace. -Jean Klein
Back to Top
toyomotor View Drop Down
Moderator
Moderator
Avatar

Joined: 15 Feb 2014
Location: Tasmania, AUST.
Status: Offline
Points: 3569
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote toyomotor Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07 Mar 2017 at 04:43
Originally posted by Vanuatu Vanuatu wrote:

Maya self destructed and were finished off by weather and deforestation. 

http://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/why-did-the-mayan-civilization-collapse-a-new-study-points-to-deforestation-and-climate-change-30863026/

Scholars and laypeople have proposed countless theories accounting for the collapse, ranging from the plausible (overhunting, foreign invasion, peasant revolt) to the absurd (alien invasion, supernatural forces). In his 2005 book Collapse, though, Jared Diamond put forth a different sort of theory—that a prolonged drought, exacerbated by ill-advised deforestation, forced Mayan populations to abandon their cities. That hypothesis has finally been put to the test with archaeological evidence and environmental data and the results published this week in a pair of studies.


My question still is why the didn't skills survive and get passed on?

Why didn't the North Americans ever develop such skills?

Did the knowledge and skills originate in the South Americas, or were they imported?

If they were imported (i.e. international travellers), by whom and when?

The architecture and civil engineering skills needed to built the South American cities have only been seen in Egypt, Rome and Mesopotamia is the same or similar era. These people had canals and cities while Europeans still ived in caves. Why?

I suppose similar questions could be asked in relation to the ancient Britons, why didn't they learn from the Roman occupation and continue building roads and public facilities?


I often wonder why I try.
Back to Top
Vanuatu View Drop Down
General
General


Joined: 23 Feb 2015
Location: New England
Status: Offline
Points: 782
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Vanuatu Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09 Mar 2017 at 00:10
By the time Lindisfarne happened the Britons didn't remember the Romans unless they were part of the religious or royal crowd. 

These people were awesome. 80% of Native Americans have the unique mix of east Asian and west Asian markers, no other people have theses two markers.

They either came over the Atlantic or Pacific. The Pacific crossings, when you think of what it means is just overwhelming. The catamaran is still considered to be one the best navigational crafts ever invented. There are a few South Pacific mariners who can navigate the ocean without maps or instruments by using the stars.  It's a spark for humanity like Egypt. 
The root of all desires is the one desire: to come home, to be at peace. -Jean Klein
Back to Top
toyomotor View Drop Down
Moderator
Moderator
Avatar

Joined: 15 Feb 2014
Location: Tasmania, AUST.
Status: Offline
Points: 3569
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote toyomotor Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09 Mar 2017 at 08:51
Vanuatu wrote 
Quote By the time Lindisfarne happened the Britons didn't remember the Romans unless they were part of the religious or royal crowd.

Although we're deviating from the OP, I can't understand that.

The Romans left very advanced reminders of their occupation-

1. Roads/highways;
2.Aquaducts;
3.Bath houses and
4. Other buildings far more advanced than those of the Britons.

Granted the Viking raids on Lindisfarne and other British towns were some centuries later, about five hundred years, the Roman structures existed through the centuries. So why wasn't the architecture and technology copied and even improved upon?




Edited by toyomotor - 09 Mar 2017 at 08:52
I often wonder why I try.
Back to Top
Vanuatu View Drop Down
General
General


Joined: 23 Feb 2015
Location: New England
Status: Offline
Points: 782
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Vanuatu Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09 Mar 2017 at 12:02
If the Church runs everything they will commission what work is to be done. Average people had stories about Giants. Even have an entry in the Anglo Saxon Chronicle that talks about exhuming the Giant King Arthur.

Educated people knew better but who besides the King and the Church had any power over resources?

Also the land has a number of kingdoms/kings the only uniting force is the Church. People knew what god wanted them to know.Wink
The root of all desires is the one desire: to come home, to be at peace. -Jean Klein
Back to Top
Vanuatu View Drop Down
General
General


Joined: 23 Feb 2015
Location: New England
Status: Offline
Points: 782
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Vanuatu Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09 Mar 2017 at 15:36
There were estimated 200,000 earth mounds and structures from the woodland culture.The mounds mostly destroyed but especially in Ohio, Virginia, Georgia and Minnesota there are examples preserved.

And Giants!
http://www.sott.net/article/256712-A-giant-mystery-18-strange-giant-skeletons-found-in-Wisconsin-Sons-of-god-Men-of-renown
The root of all desires is the one desire: to come home, to be at peace. -Jean Klein
Back to Top
franciscosan View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke


Joined: 09 Feb 2015
Location: Littleton CO
Status: Offline
Points: 1966
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote franciscosan Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 10 Mar 2017 at 02:01
The Mayans are still there, their society collapsed and they abandoned the cities and went back to the land.  It is called, "unsustainability."  A society overextends itself, and then dies back.  Who cares about building giant statues or pyramids, when you are just worried about getting food or clean water?  It could be that society was top-heavy, but I don't know that.  Too many chiefs (or priests) and not enough Indians, so to speak.  But, you know, Elk will do the same thing, eat up all the forage in the valley, until disease and starvation kill them off.  Adding wolves can actually help the Elk and make thing sustainable for the Elk and other animals.
Back to Top
toyomotor View Drop Down
Moderator
Moderator
Avatar

Joined: 15 Feb 2014
Location: Tasmania, AUST.
Status: Offline
Points: 3569
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote toyomotor Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 10 Mar 2017 at 04:20
Originally posted by franciscosan franciscosan wrote:

The Mayans are still there, their society collapsed and they abandoned the cities and went back to the land.  It is called, "unsustainability."  A society overextends itself, and then dies back.  Who cares about building giant statues or pyramids, when you are just worried about getting food or clean water?  It could be that society was top-heavy, but I don't know that.  Too many chiefs (or priests) and not enough Indians, so to speak.  But, you know, Elk will do the same thing, eat up all the forage in the valley, until disease and starvation kill them off.  Adding wolves can actually help the Elk and make thing sustainable for the Elk and other animals.

While what you say may be correct, in context, there is no proof, afik, of why the South American civilisations colllapsed and went bush.

This is what I'm asking, why?

Are there any authorative writings to prove the point?


I often wonder why I try.
Back to Top
Vanuatu View Drop Down
General
General


Joined: 23 Feb 2015
Location: New England
Status: Offline
Points: 782
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Vanuatu Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 10 Mar 2017 at 12:28
The article cites these causes for the Mayan collapse. It's suggested that as the drought, famine and political anxiety peaked there would have been more human sacrifice and starving people just taking off, abandoning the whole mess. 

http://www.buriedmirror.com/history/great-collapse.htm

Warfare

Overpopulation and Environmental Damage

Climate Change

Political Vulnerabilities: Resistance and Anomie



Edited by Vanuatu - 10 Mar 2017 at 12:28
The root of all desires is the one desire: to come home, to be at peace. -Jean Klein
Back to Top
Vanuatu View Drop Down
General
General


Joined: 23 Feb 2015
Location: New England
Status: Offline
Points: 782
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Vanuatu Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 10 Mar 2017 at 12:54
Originally posted by toyomotor toyomotor wrote:

Vanuatu wrote  [quote]By the time Lindisfarne happened the Britons didn't remember the Romans unless they were part of the religious or royal crowd.

Although we're deviating from the OP, I can't understand that.

The Romans left very advanced reminders of their occupation-

1. Roads/highways;
2.Aquaducts;
3.Bath houses and
4. Other buildings far more advanced than those of the Britons.

Granted the Viking raids on Lindisfarne and other British towns were some centuries later, about five hundred years, the Roman structures existed through the centuries. So why wasn't the architecture and technology copied and even improved upon?

The Anglo-Saxons were invading when Rome departed, Emperor Honorius needed troops to attack barbarian hordes elsewhere in the empire.
Lots of Saxons settled on the farms and used the stones from Roman buildings to build houses. Nothing was repaired and it crumbled and towns were rebuilt. There are some Roman sites left in Briton.




Edited by Vanuatu - 10 Mar 2017 at 12:55
The root of all desires is the one desire: to come home, to be at peace. -Jean Klein
Back to Top
toyomotor View Drop Down
Moderator
Moderator
Avatar

Joined: 15 Feb 2014
Location: Tasmania, AUST.
Status: Offline
Points: 3569
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote toyomotor Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 10 Mar 2017 at 14:26
Originally posted by Vanuatu Vanuatu wrote:

The article cites these causes for the Mayan collapse. It's suggested that as the drought, famine and political anxiety peaked there would have been more human sacrifice and starving people just taking off, abandoning the whole mess. 

http://www.buriedmirror.com/history/great-collapse.htm

Warfare

Overpopulation and Environmental Damage

Climate Change

Political Vulnerabilities: Resistance and Anomie


Right, yep, OK.

But why didn't the knowledge remain and spread. Surely all of the technical people, the architects, road and acquaduct designers, didn't die without their knowledge being passed on.

While the cities etc were under construction, there would have been understudies to the experts, foremen and leading hands, all of who would have some knowledge worthy of being imparted.

Understand that I'm not attacking you, just posing the questions, to which, so far I haven't received any answers.

It simply doesn't make sense to me that the knowledge didn't spread-unless of course there was some cataclysmic event which wiped them off the face of the earth in one swift blow-and, afik, there's no evidence of that.

(ALERT) I have the same questions about the Romans in Europe and the Egyptians in Africa, although I understand that fairly recently signs of large African towns have been located in mid-Africa as well as in Timbuktu).

I often wonder why I try.
Back to Top
toyomotor View Drop Down
Moderator
Moderator
Avatar

Joined: 15 Feb 2014
Location: Tasmania, AUST.
Status: Offline
Points: 3569
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote toyomotor Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 10 Mar 2017 at 14:36
Originally posted by Vanuatu Vanuatu wrote:


Quote The Anglo-Saxons were invading when Rome departed, Emperor Honorius needed troops to attack barbarian hordes elsewhere in the empire.
Lots of Saxons settled on the farms and used the stones from Roman buildings to build houses. Nothing was repaired and it crumbled and towns were rebuilt. There are some Roman sites left in Briton.



Precisely my point, [quote]"There are some Roman sites left in Briton.

There were intelligent, educated men in England when the Romans left. Surely they would have had some idea of how to preserve the Roman buildings etc. and to copy them. But they didn't. Why?

Instead, they seemed to have retreated to the time before the Romans, ignoring all of the technology, architecture and civil works created by the Romans. Why?

Again vanuatu, I'm not having a go at you or Franciscosan, but I'm not getting answers. Nor can I find any answers in the research that I have been able to do. Please bear in mind that I live in a state with a population that has just reached 500,00, and research materials are not that easy to come by, with the exception of the Internet which we all know is not always accurate.

Perhaps you could mosey on down to the Library of Congress and have a wee peek? LOL


I often wonder why I try.
Back to Top
franciscosan View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke


Joined: 09 Feb 2015
Location: Littleton CO
Status: Offline
Points: 1966
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote franciscosan Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11 Mar 2017 at 01:11
Sorry Toyomotor, "why?" is not really a useful question.  "Why did the chicken cross the road?"  I am not sure what you are really looking for.  We could talk about roads, byways and throughways, chicken psychology and motivation, the chicken-as-such (essence of chickens), our subjective experience, our objective experience, the chicken's objective/subjective experience, God, so forth, and of course, humor.

Let me give you a simple definition and then show how it proliferates:
"Man is a rational animal."  Aristotle.
a common definition implicit in a lot of our thinking, with its priority on reason.
Is this true?
Well, if your going to ask whether man is a rational animal, you have to know what:
1) rational means.
2) animal means.
Do you see the problem? one question leads to two, which leads to ???
So you ask why, and we give you replies which you are not satisfied with, we don't know the criteria under which you _would_ be satisfied.  But really we wouldn't know the criteria under which any question would satisfy.  Except whether you are satisfied or not.  With "how" the question is "can it be replicated?"  With "what" the question points to something and basically says, "that."  "Why?" is kind of an open ended question which has no set criteria for its satisfaction.
So you ask, "why do civilizations collapse?"  Well, you are presupposing that you know what a civilization is, which you know 'about' a civilization (ours/yours), but frankly 'civilization' is too big of a thing to really understand, for anyone.  So first of all, answer me what is a civilization? and then answer me what collapse is.  However, let me warn you that what I need is a definition that is both necessary and sufficient.  Secondly, what is collapse, with the same qualifications, necessary and sufficient.  If I can come up with an example of civilization (including hypothetical examples) that doesn't fit the definition, then it is not sufficient.
But to answer your question.  I will give you two answers, sunspots, and God.  Of course with both answers I am not _explaining_ anything, but then again I think that why is an emotional utterance, that ultimately defies answering anything 'useful.'  One can always ask, "why?' but one never gets a conclusive answer.  I am not sure what else you expect, and because I don't know what you mean, I don't know how to answer, (and I am not sure anyone else would know either.) 
Back to Top
toyomotor View Drop Down
Moderator
Moderator
Avatar

Joined: 15 Feb 2014
Location: Tasmania, AUST.
Status: Offline
Points: 3569
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote toyomotor Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11 Mar 2017 at 01:32
I thought my questions were too basic.

1. Why? Is there some recorded reason why the technology apparently died out?
If not, OK then, it will continue to be one lifes great mysteries.

2. Why? Why was the architecture and sophisticated civil engineering  as in the South Americas, Egypt Rome etc, not spread to other countries such as North America and Europe? Is there a good reason that this didn't happen?
What is that reason?
If there is no recorded reason, see 1. above.

3. Why? Are there recorded reasons why the Britons and Saxons didn't take up the Roman way of doing things over a period of centuries?
Again, if not, see 1. above.

4. Civilisations-as this is a history forum, I would have thought that the accepted definitions of a civilisation would be agreed upon. If, franciscosan, you have a definition of civilisations, other than that generally accepted, perhaps we should discuss that in another post.

IF, when the dust settles it eventuates that there are no recorded answers or even hints as to why the things I've mentioned did or didn't happen, then, OK, see 1. above.

I'm not really into the philosophy of words, but, at the end of the day, I'm looking for answers. And if those answers are simply not there, as Professor Julius Sumner Miller asked,"why is it so?"  Confused

I taught my children that "because" is not an answer.




Edited by toyomotor - 11 Mar 2017 at 01:36
I often wonder why I try.
Back to Top
franciscosan View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke


Joined: 09 Feb 2015
Location: Littleton CO
Status: Offline
Points: 1966
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (1) Thanks(1)   Quote franciscosan Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11 Mar 2017 at 04:03
As a rule of thumb, all civilizations have certain basic technologies, and yet the Incans did not have the wheel (except on children's toys).  So if you come up with a definition of civilization, and if someone comes up with a counterexample of some 'society' that does not match the definition, then the definition is incomplete.  So if one defines as civilization something that has, say, writing, and yet one finds a "civilization," say Catal Huyuk or Troy, that didn't have writing, then that definition is inadequate.

It is like defining anything complex, such as religion.  Is religion "belief in God?"  Well, Hinduism believes in a plurality, Buddhism doesn't necessarily believe in deities, and Judaism is more about practice and considers belief as not that important, which is why you can have people who are "culturally" Jewish, but "religiously" atheist.  
Why would hunter gatherers need to know how to build roads and permanent structures?  You seem to be assuming why they wouldn't do it?  Well, why would they?  Why did the aborigines remain hunter gatherers?  Well, probably because it worked for them.  If population density got too high for the carrying capacity of the lands, then either you have collapse or transition to pastoral, or agriculture.  There may be factors preventing that transition, and so you might just hit a wall.  On the flip side, your population density might reach a critical mass, that with other factors, creates specialization.

But there are examples of technology that they could make in the 1800s, that we don't know how to make today.  Look up British Museum electrotypes, used to make exact replicas of ancient coins and other artifacts,  Exact to the molecular level.  Look at Nova on the recreation of an Egyptian chariot.  We can take them apart, and recreate one, _after_ having an example and all our modern technology to reproduce it.  And yet _they_ did not have an example, but put one together in the first place.  Or look at the Manhattan project which created the atom bomb.  Everybody else after that 1) knew it could be done, 2) could get many of the secrets by spying, or "researching" the field of physics or other literature.  the tendency is that one group comes up with an original invention (albeit, usually by putting together diverse areas of knowledge in a novel way), and everybody copies it.

There is an interesting question, if societies get to a certain complexity, and density is a kind of complexity, it either has to become more sophisticated, or collapse.  What happens if a society looses complexity? looses density?  Especially in the sense of not enough workers supporting nonworkers.  Modern technology has somewhat worked as a substitute for labor (robotization).  But can that go on forever?  We don't know, but I suspect we or our descendants will find out.

A object in motion tends to stay in motion, unless resisted by another force.  (or something like that).
But friction is a force that resists the object in motion.  "Friction" is a technical term from Clausewitz, for what complicates any endeavor or effort.  For example, you are setting out on a car trip, but before you can leave the youngest has to go to the bathroom.  And then the wife thinks she might have left the stove on, and needs to go back.  And then you hit traffic, and a rainstorm, flat tire, all these things are possible sources of friction that interfere with your trip.  Military operations go through the same thing, and so do societies, and if things really go wrong, you don't get to grandma's for her birthday.  Or you don't pass on what, for your society, is the high tech secrets of your civilization.  But you seem to assume that these secrets are easy to pass along, _we_ can figure out how to make such joined walls as the Incans, but probably only as a result of a lot of effort, taking a few a part, and maybe some luck.  The last of which may or may not happen in our time frame.  But look at Egyptian war chariots, which are anything but simple.


Back to Top
toyomotor View Drop Down
Moderator
Moderator
Avatar

Joined: 15 Feb 2014
Location: Tasmania, AUST.
Status: Offline
Points: 3569
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote toyomotor Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 14 Mar 2017 at 06:30
WOW!!!

What have I done? I've created a monster.

But, why?

I often wonder why I try.
Back to Top
Vanuatu View Drop Down
General
General


Joined: 23 Feb 2015
Location: New England
Status: Offline
Points: 782
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Vanuatu Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 14 Mar 2017 at 07:23
Originally posted by toyomotor toyomotor wrote:

Originally posted by Vanuatu Vanuatu wrote:


Quote The Anglo-Saxons were invading when Rome departed, Emperor Honorius needed troops to attack barbarian hordes elsewhere in the empire.
Lots of Saxons settled on the farms and used the stones from Roman buildings to build houses. Nothing was repaired and it crumbled and towns were rebuilt. There are some Roman sites left in Briton.



Precisely my point, [quote]"There are some Roman sites left in Briton.

There were intelligent, educated men in England when the Romans left. Surely they would have had some idea of how to preserve the Roman buildings etc. and to copy them. But they didn't. Why?

Instead, they seemed to have retreated to the time before the Romans, ignoring all of the technology, architecture and civil works created by the Romans. Why?

Again vanuatu, I'm not having a go at you or Franciscosan, but I'm not getting answers. Nor can I find any answers in the research that I have been able to do. Please bear in mind that I live in a state with a population that has just reached 500,00, and research materials are not that easy to come by, with the exception of the Internet which we all know is not always accurate.

Perhaps you could mosey on down to the Library of Congress and have a wee peek? LOL



In the 90 years after the Romans left Briton there were so many attacks and invasions. A huge number of Britons are killed and the Jutes, Picts, Saxons and eventually Danes absorb the Britons.
The root of all desires is the one desire: to come home, to be at peace. -Jean Klein
Back to Top
toyomotor View Drop Down
Moderator
Moderator
Avatar

Joined: 15 Feb 2014
Location: Tasmania, AUST.
Status: Offline
Points: 3569
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote toyomotor Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 14 Mar 2017 at 11:08
Vanuatu wrote
Quote In the 90 years after the Romans left Briton there were so many attacks and invasions. A huge number of Britons are killed and the Jutes, Picts, Saxons and eventually Danes absorb the Britons.

Yes, we were taught early English history when I was in Primary School (years 1-6). We learned all about the Angles, Saxon and the Jutes who invaded England, and then of course the Normans.

But the Normans had experienced Roman occupation, and all of the English scholars, artisans etc weren't killed off. So my question remains, why?

Our friend franciscosan has provided, among some extensive verbage, some explanation, but still doesn't provide the explanation.

As I've written before, if there are no explanations why architecture, civil engineering etc provided by the Romans, wasn't taken up and modernised over the centuries, OK, let's have some links to expert opinions who say that..

Bear in mind that, although the Romans had bath houses and health spas, in the middle and lower English socio-economic levels, an inside toilet was not common in every house, nor were bathrooms, until years after WW2.

These things have exercised my mind for many years.




Edited by toyomotor - 14 Mar 2017 at 11:10
I often wonder why I try.
Back to Top
Vanuatu View Drop Down
General
General


Joined: 23 Feb 2015
Location: New England
Status: Offline
Points: 782
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Vanuatu Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 14 Mar 2017 at 17:15
Originally posted by toyomotor toyomotor wrote:

 

But the Normans had experienced Roman occupation, and all of the English scholars, artisans etc weren't killed off. So my question remains, why?

Our friend franciscosan has provided, among some extensive verbage, some explanation, but still doesn't provide the explanation.

As I've written before, if there are no explanations why architecture, civil engineering etc provided by the Romans, wasn't taken up and modernised over the centuries, OK, let's have some links to expert opinions who say that..

Bear in mind that, although the Romans had bath houses and health spas, in the middle and lower English socio-economic levels, an inside toilet was not common in every house, nor were bathrooms, until years after WW2.

These things have exercised my mind for many years.



Certainly the cathedrals are evidence that Britons used a creative palette and specialized skills. Masons, sculptors all manner of artisans, heavy laborers. Castles, Abbeys, Priories..ruins dating (some lost and forgotten) to 1160- as you say the Normans and William C. Good article-

http://In 1528 Simon Fish published A Supplication for the Beggars. He argued that the clergy should spend their money in the relief of the poor and not amass it for monks to pray for souls. (13) Fish claimed that monks were "ravenous wolves" who had "debauched 100,000 women". He added that the monks were "the great scab" that would not allow the Bible to be published in "your mother tongue". (14) George M. Trevelyan has argued that this work had an impact on the thinking of Henry VIII: "The conclusion reached by the pamphleteer (Simon Fish) is that the clergy, especially the monks and friars, should be deprived of their wealth for the benefit of the King and Kingdom, and made to work like other men; let them also be allowed to marry and so be induced to leave other people's wives alone. Such crude appeals to lay cupidity, and such veritable coarse anger at real abuses uncorrected down the centuries, had been generally prevalent in London under Wolsey's regime, and at his fall such talk became equally fashionable at Court." (15)

The architecture of cathedrals is based on the old Roman basilica. The earliest Christian churches were a lot like Roman basilicas. But the biggest cathedrals are bigger and higher than the biggest Roman basilicas. Early medieval architects built cathedrals in the Romanesque style, and then later (beginning about 1100 AD) they built cathedrals in the Gothic style. You'll find some examples of Romanesque and Gothic cathedrals on the Romanesque and Gothic pages.
The root of all desires is the one desire: to come home, to be at peace. -Jean Klein
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  123>
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 11.10
Copyright ©2001-2017 Web Wiz Ltd.

This page was generated in 0.109 seconds.