Which one most interests you, and why? The Sumerians, the Indus civilization, the Shang, Romans, Greeks, Minoans, Aztecs, Incas, African civilizations?
You don't need to know a lot about them, just say if any have captured your imagination in any small or large way.
For me, the Romans are probably the most fascinating, mostly because I studied their occupation and transformation of Britain at school, and because of films like Ben Hur, Gladiator, Life of Brian etc. My history teacher was a real eccentric who would get very passionate about the battles in particular. I'll never forget his descriptions of the Legions' battle tactics such as the phalanxes (tight rectangular formations of men with shields on every side and above, making them immune to volleys of arrows or spears) and the graphic descriptions of swordplay. The sad thing is that parents today would complain about their (disgracefully spoilt) little Johnny being taught upsetting things (this was even starting to happen when I was there).
I love that the Romans were great engineers and builders and that so much of their architecture still exists, if mostly in ruins. There is a picture of a large model of ancient Rome in one of my books and its mind-boggling how much it resembles a modern city.
However, the Greeks are also becoming more interesting to me now that I am studying science. You can't help but admire them for their intellectual achievements and democracy.
Originally posted by NoEarthlyReasonI am interested in the oldest of the old, Minoan or older. Sumarians are a bit older than the Minoans I think. There was discovered ancient ruins, advanced carvings and such, but dated to something like 12,000 years ago. I mean, that long ago, remnants of Neandertals could have been around, probably not but maybe.
Which one most interests you, and why? The Sumerians, the Indus civilization, the Shang, Romans, Greeks, Minoans, Aztecs, Incas, African civilizations?
You don't need to know a lot about them, just say if any have captured your imagination in any small or large way.
For me, the Romans are probably the most fascinating, mostly because I studie ...[text shortened]... dying science. You can't help but admire them for their intellectual achievements and democracy.
The first Indus people are called Mehrgarh, about 7000 BC, before ceramics.
That's getting back a bit! Still thousands of years into the future of those carvings recently found.
The Gobekli, allegedly 12,000 years old:
Originally posted by sonhouseLook around, my friend.. the Neanderthals are still with us!
I am interested in the oldest of the old, Minoan or older. Sumarians are a bit older than the Minoans I think. There was discovered ancient ruins, advanced carvings and such, but dated to something like 12,000 years ago. I mean, that long ago, remnants of Neandertals could have been around, probably not but maybe.
I remember half-jokingly asking the kid who sat in front of me in an eighth grade (age 13) class, "What is your favorite war?"
I don't remember his answer, but I told him the Carthaginian War (Rome vs. Carthage, B.C. times) was my favorite, because I had been doing some reading on it independent of my history class at school.
The Minoans were pretty awesome. Knossos is very interesting even if most
of it is imaginative renovation. The story of Theseus is partly based on the
Minoan practice of taking youths from Mediterranean states as homage (Hunger Games ???) and training them for "bull-dancing". (Hence the minotaur myths)
If you are interested in ancient warfare then Alexander the Great's dad Phillip is worth a look - revolutionised the phalanx and sowed the seed for his son's greatness!
Originally posted by NoEarthlyReasonI am reading The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire (Gibbon) at present for the second time but I would not say that I find the Romans so interesting despite what they achieved, perhaps its over exposure, the Antoine wall runs through my little town and there are still extant Roman bath houses with mosaic floors to be seen, my taste at present is for the Icelandic sagas and also The Rise and Fall of the Confederate Government, written by Jefferson Davis 😀
Which one most interests you, and why? The Sumerians, the Indus civilization, the Shang, Romans, Greeks, Minoans, Aztecs, Incas, African civilizations?
You don't need to know a lot about them, just say if any have captured your imagination in any small or large way.
For me, the Romans are probably the most fascinating, mostly because I studie ...[text shortened]... dying science. You can't help but admire them for their intellectual achievements and democracy.
Originally posted by robbie carrobieAnd all that other recent stuff🙂
I am reading The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire (Gibbon) at present for the second time but I would not say that I find the Romans so interesting despite what they achieved, perhaps its over exposure, the Antoine wall runs through my little town and there are still extant Roman bath houses with mosaic floors to be seen, my taste ...[text shortened]... ic sagas and also The Rise and Fall of the Confederate Government, written by Jefferson Davis 😀
I am interested in learning about how mankind got smart 100,000 years ago or further back in time.
There was work done uncovering a site in Spain on the coast where they think they found the last Neandertal hideout and all the tools they made and shells and such. That would be an awesome movie, the Last Neander......
Originally posted by sonhousegot smart 100,000 years ago? they only managed to learn to write about 5000 years ago which is as far back as recorded history is alleged to have gone, maybe even less.
And all that other recent stuff🙂
I am interested in learning about how mankind got smart 100,000 years ago or further back in time.
There was work done uncovering a site in Spain on the coast where they think they found the last Neandertal hideout and all the tools they made and shells and such. That would be an awesome movie, the Last Neander......
Originally posted by robbie carrobieMankind got smart a long time before the invention of writing. Farming began in the Fertile Crescent about 10,000 years ago (and was independently discovered elsewhere not too long afterwards), and stone tools were made long before. The oldest known jewellery dates from 100,000 years ago, and containers used for mixing paint have also been found of a similar age (although the oldest visual art yet found is about 40,000 years old). Writing (the first was cuneiform) coincided with the development of cities, I think, the earliest of which can be traced to about 3,000 BC. The greatest among them would probably have had populations of about 30,000, i.e. the size of a mid-size town today. Writing became necessary at first for adminstratative purposes, such as keeping track of wages and pots.
got smart 100,000 years ago? they only managed to learn to write about 5000 years ago which is as far back as recorded history is alleged to have gone, maybe even less.
Originally posted by NoEarthlyReasonand yet only thought it prudent to start writing things down as recently as 4000 odd years ago, interesting, that I would allege is not very smart at all. Had they written things down before this then the knowledge could have been shared much quicker than it actually was and progress accelerated, but then again what passes for smart is a matter of conjecture. Yes we understand the theory why writing was evidently invented, these ideas are well known and yet some of the most complete and oldest texts we have are religious. Ooops sorry, thats a dirty word, my bad.
Mankind got smart a long time before the invention of writing. Farming began in the Fertile Crescent about 10,000 years ago (and was independently discovered elsewhere not too long afterwards), and stone tools were made long before. The oldest known jewellery dates from 100,000 years ago, and containers used for mixing paint have also been found of a ...[text shortened]... became necessary at first for adminstratative purposes, such as keeping track of wages and pots.
Originally posted by robbie carrobieI think what is believed on the basis of the evidence is that humans 100,000 years ago were evolutionarily pretty much the same as modern humans (indeed our species evolved 250,000 years ago). So if you could somehow invent a time machine and bring some back to the present, their children would be able to read and write, play chess and music, become engineers or journalists (or priests!) and so on.
and yet only thought it prudent to start writing things down as recently as 4000 odd years ago, interesting, that I would allege is not very smart at all. Had they written things down before this then the knowledge could have been shared much quicker than it actually was and progress accelerated, but then again what passes for smart is a matter of c ...[text shortened]... e most complete and oldest texts we have are religious. Ooops sorry, thats a dirty word, my bad.
And I didn't say religion is a dirty word—far from it, so don't feel bad. I don't take part in the religion-bashing/atheist-bashing that seems to go on so much on the internet today.
Originally posted by NoEarthlyReasonhow refreshing 😀
I think what is believed on the basis of the evidence is that humans 100,000 years ago were evolutionarily pretty much the same as modern humans (indeed our species evolved 250,000 years ago). So if you could somehow invent a time machine and bring some back to the present, their children would be able to read and write, play chess and music, become ...[text shortened]... part in the religion-bashing/atheist-bashing that seems to go on so much on the internet today.