Quote from: jhkim;1072704This narrow thinking can lead to major misconceptions, like the supposed great mystery of Stonehenge and other sites. Because they rarely used stone, many thought that the society around Stonehenge were unsophisticated primitives - and it was a great mystery that they could arrange the stones. But it is possible to have an organized, powerful, and thriving society without significant stone structures. That people consider it a deep mystery and suggest aliens or the supernatural reveals flaws in our thinking rather than anything about the site.

Fair enough - and I'm not totally against the view that there have been several relatively advanced pre-Classical Era cultures in Europe, judging by what we know, with relatively high density populations at times - parts of the Scottish Highlands may have had more people several thousand years ago than today. I also think there's plenty of evidence for several waves of violent invasions.

Quote from: S'mon;1072660Using 'civilisation' to refer to any culture, or to any culture with permanent settlements, tends to risk obscuring the very large gap between actual civilisations such as Greece, Rome, Egypt, Babylon, China, India, Assyria, Persia; and non-civilised societies such as northern Europe until the High Middle Ages.

I remember going to the British Museum many years ago to see the relics of "Anglo Saxon civilisation", mostly from Sutton Hoo. The best stuff the Anglo-Saxons had to offer. I pass through the vast monuments of ancient Egypt, Greece, Rome and Assyria, I go upstairs - and there are these tiny pathetic bits and bobs, relics of a clearly barbaric society. I'm sure they had things going for them, but they were in no way comparable to the Civilisations.

Greetings!

LOL! S'mon! Indeed. I'm reminded of the *awe* that Celtic and Germanic barbarians--nobles of course, either taken as hostages/guests by the Romans, or as legitimate allies--felt when they first experienced the city of Rome. Heated floors? Glass Mirrors? Hot and cold bathhouses? Fine clothing? Finely cooked, and spiced hot food? Fresh water piped in at will? Yeah, it all blew their minds!

In the primary texts, as well as historical commentary, there's often this discussion of the cultural tension, and the barbarian's growing resentment over the Roman's *cultural* influence over their native societies. In the end, the barbarians essentially lost. I pondered why? Having some notable experience with women, I reflected on the potential social pressure placed upon the barbarian tribe's chieftains and warrior elite--both by the general populace, but most especially the women.

Imagine the German and Celtic wives chattering to their husbands at night about the Roman settlement's bathhouses, running water, and other fineries. Think about the stupid importance of having routine access to fucking *soap*. Hot water to bathe in, and so much more. I recall listening to one scholar--I think it was either Simon Schama, or Michael Wood, musing on how persuasive the mercantile and cultural influence of Roman technology and commerce must have represented. Of course, the barbarians *could* access much of this through long, difficult trade, or even through their own efforts--but all of that represented much more expense, effort, and difficulty--and even when achieved, was largely limited to the aristocracy. Bowing to Rome meant that *everyone* could enjoy hot and cold water, fresher, hot food, clothing, perfume, and so on much easier, more reliably, and on a mass scale never dreamed of by the barbarians. Trade and cooperation with Rome really *did* mean that your entire standard of living took an enormous jump upwards. I watched a video of some historians talking about Cologne, Trier, and some German cities--Roman cities--on the Rhine border. New excavations showing vast bathhouses, neat houses, plumbing, and so on--they said during peaceful times, there was a constant flow of barbarian peoples in and out of the Roman frontier--marrying Roman Legionnaires, trading, enjoying the Roman cities, as the Romans did not restrict them, and in fact encouraged them--how all of that must have had a huge impact not only on every barbarian that experienced such--but also how they, in turn, influenced their families back across the Rhine.

Going down the checklist of enormous attributes of Roman civilization, I then looked into the various political struggles throughout the barbarian world, some nobles bitterly arguing for resistance against Rome, with others demanding that the tribes submit to Rome, and become friends of Rome. I could just imagine the arguments going on around the hearth fires in the barbarian camps! I can also see how insidiously the Roman luxury undermined the barbarian's will to resist. When you think about how the barbarians were actually living, compared to what was available to even an ordinary Roman, the overwhelming feeling of such an enormous conflict can be seen, and at the same time, an incomprehensibly powerful seduction on so many levels to embrace joining the Romans. Powerful stuff!

"I like taking hot baths and smelling nice! Don't you want me to smell nice? Don't you want me to be clean?" LOL. I can also see why so many Celtic and German girls were so eager to marry a Roman Legionnaire. It instantly raised their social status, besides entirely changing their entire way of life and standard of living.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

Quote from: Jaeger;1072665They don't. Pure Speculation.

Combined with a lot of wishful thinking when "interpreting" artifacts they do not understand.

Without any written records it's all guess work.

Greetings!

Yeah, the conclusions seem to be quite a stretch, to my mind. However, Gimbutas was also an expert in anthropology, and art history, so she pioneered various works in understanding artifacts and objects--and the information gleaned from them--apart from actual written texts. I think there is *some* merit to this--after all, anthropologists and archeologists have deciphered a whole lot of information from cultures precisely through such methods. Of course, there is an importance to not merely what is *said* but also by what is *not said*. In the field of Communications, we can see some of this borne out by how somewhere like 65% of all communication between people is *non-verbal*. So it seems there is some merit to gleaning knowledge from symbols, art, artifacts, physical buildings, tools, and so on--by what is found, and by what *isn't found*. I think that's where they are coming from with this stuff.

In the matriarchy thing, they cite the absence of weapons, armour, no signs of fighting, no glorification of warrior culture--found in so many other cultures--and the prominence of women in all of the art work, female symbology, as well as burial goods and such, all showing not merely noble women, but ordinary women, enjoying high status, participating in activities along side men, and more--all of which is *different* from what they have found in male-dominated, warlike, "patriarchal" societies. I can see how women would in such a culture have a higher status, or be more egalitarian, though I don't see how that means that men would somehow not be politically involved. Why would women have all of the power? The supposition that the culture as a whole was egalitarian, women centered, so therefore everyone embraced such, so there was apparently no warfare, and no need for warriors, and they had a society without heirarchy. Hmmm...yeah. It does seem quite utopian to me. LOL.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

Quote from: jhkim;1072704I know little about the Minoans, but I think there's a tendency to project modern interpretations onto matrilineal / egalitarian societies, esp. that more egalitarian means more like modern feminism.

Oh, yes, there's a lot of projection going on. It is often striking how people see a lot of these "peaceful" and "egalitarian" societies in cultures that existed before writing, or whose writings are hard to decipher. Then, the moment we understand the sources and history a bit better, they are gone.  

But I think the Minoans have been particularly attractive to people projecting their own views on them. And I can see why, they are enigmatic in many ways. The Maya is an example of a culture in which the rosy view has been completely debunked.

There is a whole shitload of ridiculous pseudo-scholarship going on here.

We still have ZERO proof that all those fat-"venus" statues weren't children's dolls or some kind of magic ward against morbid obesity or ugly and dangerous feminists.

Quote from: RPGPundit;1073266There is a whole shitload of ridiculous pseudo-scholarship going on here.

We still have ZERO proof that all those fat-"venus" statues weren't children's dolls or some kind of magic ward against morbid obesity or ugly and dangerous feminists.

Greetings!

LOL! Don't you just love the fat "Venus" statues? LOL.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

Quote from: RPGPundit;1073266There is a whole shitload of ridiculous pseudo-scholarship going on here.

We still have ZERO proof that all those fat-"venus" statues weren't children's dolls or some kind of magic ward against morbid obesity or ugly and dangerous feminists.

There's no context whatsoever other than "we found this here and the strata reveals it was buried at this time."  Damn things could be stone age porn for all we know.