SG-1-Use of Myth and Culture Thread

[Iffy]

The only source that claims that Cortes was hailed as Quetzalcoatl happen to be Cortes' own writings. Self-flattery at its most shameless. It is VERY doubtful that it actually happened.

There's this peculiar tendency to underestimate the intelligence of the people who lived before us. The Aztecs may not have had iPods and microwaves, but they were also not the fools that the Spaniards portrayed them to be. They could tell a human from a god quite fine.

Very true the Aztecs were not a simple culture. It was a very sophisticated ethnic gruop. I'm always skeptical when learnign the source it the person in question or one of their lackeys.

And I agree with Womble. A people's 'primitivism' is always exaggerated by the conquerors. People would have stronger suspicions, and they wouldn't go away, if they took on an existing figure. And it seems from the descriptions that peoples in the show have given, that they invade a planet through force and then establish themselves as a god of their own making. Whereas in that case Ra would have been just going along with the locals, and always double-covering his deception. He would have certainly manipulated aspects of their existing beliefs to his gain, but not to that extent, I think. It's much more effective to overwhelm them entirely and imprint a belief onto them in the aftermath of that-although I do agree that there would have been some taking and manipulating of what was originally there. Lovely folks, those Goa'uld

Especially w/ European accounts as they are completely ethnocentric. It's pretty across the board for dismissing "native" cultures as not so bright and less developed than Europe was just because it did not resemble. It's a bit like the monk's account of the tree sacrafices you just have to put a question mark there, though w/ that story there is other evidence of blood rituals. hmmmmm..... Wonder what would happen if you got the Aztec, Mayan, and Norse together for a party uh yes back to topic *cut's tangent off*

You do not have to imprint a large area. All you really need is to traumatize one city, take over, crack down and make it yours. Than you can spread the word from one centralized point of power. Which in someays makes sense in the Stargate Universe w/ other Goa'uld coming in as the farther away from the centralized power center one gets the weaker one's hold on them. Can't remembr what the model is actually based on, but it seems I did learn something in Anthro 101 *giggles*

[kaylar]

One of the issues with history of the America's, (and
I assume that is why so many people stay away from using
Aztec/Mayan/Inca mythology, is not merely the fact that
a lot of serious research is only just going on..(say last
thirty years compared to the hundreds re Egypt)...

But also the question....

If one had never seen anything like columbus, then
immediate attack and running away would be predicated.

After all, if I live here, and only see my neighbors
and then one day see this incrediable unbelievable
contraption approching, I don't think I'd put on a
fresh pot of coffee.

So the question, which Van Certima explored, is 'they
came before columbus'; where he postulated arrivants
from Africa, (Heyerdalh has Phoenicians), others have
Oceanic people) which would explain the lack of terror
by those who encountered Columbus.

I know in Jamaica the Taino were not afraid of him.
Which probably led to their genocide by the Spanards.

Now if people were terrified; i.e. seeing a Goa'uld ship
land today would cause some serious panic, the enslave
part means chase them and catch them.

And of course, this means constant warfare.

Even without technology you dig a deep hole, you
cover it, they drop in, etc.

To worship the Goa'uld as gods, considering they weren't
particularly nice to the people, suggest to me their
the portrayal of gods who were in existence.

As to Ra's arrival...I assume then...by the time of Ra
the use of Jaffa as incubators and then humans were
found to be excellent hosts, and exported.

(we're an export crop!)

It makes sense.

[Iffy]

The people of the Americas did not live in isolation or a vacum. I think it's igonorant to assume that there was no contact pre-Columbus. There are boats and folks do seem to get around one way or another. There were trade systems in place that ran South to North, and vice versa. There is a very nice Mayan Ballcourt in the southwest (garh cannot remember the ruins it's w/) just lovely and very very recognizable for what it is, if you know what you are looking at.

One of the issues with history of the America's, (and
I assume that is why so many people stay away from using
Aztec/Mayan/Inca mythology, is not merely the fact that
a lot of serious research is only just going on..(say last
thirty years compared to the hundreds re Egypt)...

There has been serious research done longer than 30 years but especially in the case of the Maya it was not understanding the records they left behind, that was a huge stumbling block to deciphering anything. Now that's being resolved it makes things much easier. Plus all the Codexs that were destroyed by the Spainards

know in Jamaica the Taino were not afraid of him.
Which probably led to their genocide by the Spanards.

Genocide happened because the dear old Spanards thought they were surperior and had souls while the locals were just souless creatures to be exploited. They did not care at all about the cultures they encountered they were there to conquer and profit. They would have killed them even if they fought back. RC church especially Spain was pretty hardcore and violent when it came to dealing w/ non-christians or protestants.

(we're an export crop!)

yes we were for the Goa'uld lol

[SetMaat]

Hi! I have an interesting video link but it is about the conquest of the Incas...

To watch it here: 1519 AD - THE CONQUEST OF THE INCAS

[kaylar]

When I was in Primary School I recall the teacher saying
"And the Indians lined up when Columbus arrived..."
And I asked;
"How did they know to line up?"
(This was a very big deal to me, as I was just learning
about 'size places' and amazed how a whistle could blow
and all the kids knew where to line up.)

Well, the teacher said something, everyone laughed, and
I never raised my hand again through primary, middle,
high school, two universities and professional school.

However, I read Voyage of the Ra and then Van Sertima's
'they came before Columbus' so am as certain as I can
be that those in this side of the world had been visited
before and virtually said;

"Yo, WE got shoppers, everyone get your stalls in order."

And they lined up with various vegetables and stuff they
were used to trade with others.

Archelogical investigations in Belize, Mexico, etc. have
only recently begun to uncover the culture. As has been
said elsewhere, there was the 'Cortez' reports, there was
in the inability to decipher, and also the belief that
the cultures of MesoAmerica were 'primative'.

If one does research one will find that in the 1950s, for
example, the knowledge of the various cultures of Aztec/
Inca/etc. was extremely limited.

I recall an instructor pooh poohing a Inca society for
they had never 'discovered the wheel'.

Now if you live on the beach or in the mountains, what
are you going to do with wheels? It was this kind of
prejudice/chauvinism that marred the studies of the
various cultures.

[resurgamlaura]

Archelogical investigations in Belize, Mexico, etc. have
only recently begun to uncover the culture. As has been
said elsewhere, there was the 'Cortez' reports, there was
in the inability to decipher, and also the belief that
the cultures of MesoAmerica were 'primative'.

If one does research one will find that in the 1950s, for
example, the knowledge of the various cultures of Aztec/
Inca/etc. was extremely limited.

I recall an instructor pooh poohing a Inca society for
they had never 'discovered the wheel'.

Now if you live on the beach or in the mountains, what
are you going to do with wheels? It was this kind of
prejudice/chauvinism that marred the studies of the
various cultures.


[/SIZE][/FONT]

Exactly. The inability to understand how another society did what it did because they were simply different has marred the study of history almost always. These people would do their research and put three pieces of the puzzle in, and their prejudices would then take two of these pieces right back out again. I discovered this when I studied Sappho last year- an unconnected subject, it would seem- but the amount of sexual and sexist prejudice that infected her interpretation is vast. The concept of the 'barbarian' in western history is an interesting one, and invented by the 'other side', usually. One of my lecturers has actually written a book on the subject, called 'Inventing the Barbarian'.

[Iffy]

Exactly. The inability to understand how another society did what it did because they were simply different has marred the study of history almost always. These people would do their research and put three pieces of the puzzle in, and their prejudices would then take two of these pieces right back out again. I discovered this when I studied Sappho last year- an unconnected subject, it would seem- but the amount of sexual and sexist prejudice that infected her interpretation is vast. The concept of the 'barbarian' in western history is an interesting one, and invented by the 'other side', usually. One of my lecturers has actually written a book on the subject, called 'Inventing the Barbarian'.

What academia ethnocentric and sexist? Never *shoves Malonowski's Sex Life of Savages under couch*

Archelogical investigations in Belize, Mexico, etc. have
only recently begun to uncover the culture. As has been
said elsewhere, there was the 'Cortez' reports, there was
in the inability to decipher, and also the belief that
the cultures of MesoAmerica were 'primative'.

If one does research one will find that in the 1950s, for
example, the knowledge of the various cultures of Aztec/
Inca/etc. was extremely limited.

I recall an instructor pooh poohing a Inca society for
they had never 'discovered the wheel'

It's there but there was no way to understand what they had especialy w. the Maya. Not haveing a cultural context really messes w/ interpretation. I completely agree Eygptology is much more developed but than even before deciphering heiroglyphics we had other sources that gave us a framework to understand them.

When I was in Primary School I recall the teacher saying
"And the Indians lined up when Columbus arrived..."
And I asked;
"How did they know to line up?"
(This was a very big deal to me, as I was just learning
about 'size places' and amazed how a whistle could blow
and all the kids knew where to line up.)

Well, the teacher said something, everyone laughed, and
I never raised my hand again through primary, middle,
high school, two universities and professional school

how horrid of that teacher O love how they teach history as myth in primary school. All those nice tidy stories about Natives and Pilgrims, lovely and than you find out, nope not really.

btw, I'm not aiming comments at you personlly, but more at how it's taught and the perceptions that are out there. We get a bit batty and rapid in this thread once our brains warm up

[kaylar]

I fully agree with your assessment. This is why I
basically said 'thirty years', because it is only
recently archeologists/anthropologists step back
from the belief that their culture is the 'norm'
and everyone else is stumbling in the dark.

For example, take ganja. Fishermen have always
said the ganja makes them see in the dark, and
of course, everyone was 'yah'.

Then Dr. WEst, who invented canabasol, a glaucoma
treatment, went out with the Fishermen one night.

He couldn't see a thing. They were moving around
reefs, and submerged stones and he could barely
see his hand in front of his face.

Currently, he's using ganja to work on a treatment
for RP and for Night blindness.

Now of course, America knows ganja as the 'Killer
Weed', so has a serious problem accepting the
medicinal properties.

It's the same thing in other cultural aspects.

So often the West wishes to dismiss something as
myth or allegory, then when evidence
is finally interpreted without bias, it is a
'new' discovery.

[Womble]

Especially w/ European accounts as they are completely ethnocentric.

But then again, whose accounts weren't?

It's pretty across the board for dismissing "native" cultures as not so bright and less developed than Europe was just because it did not resemble.

Well, to be sure, it's not all relative, and the Amerindian cultures WERE less developed than the Eurasian ones in almost every respect. There are geographical and historical reasons why it was so (mainly because they didn't have the luxury of an intercultural crossroad that was the Mediterranian, and so the Native American cultures were largely stewing in their own juice while the Europeans and the Middle Easterners actively traded, fought and otherwise exchanged intellectual baggage) but it is hard to deny that the Native American cultures were stagnating. A mighty empire, especially one as militarized as the Aztecs, does not fall that easily to a handful of invaders unless it is profoundly rotten from within. (And no, the Spanish guns don't explain it; gunpowder weapons of that era were actually inferior to bows in most qualities that counted- from rate of fire to susceptibility to bad weather).

[Iffy]

medicene is the worst they can't see beyond what they know.

[Iffy]

But then again, whose accounts weren't?

They beat it into us in Anthro, not to be ethnocentric. Just about everyone. But Europe and the U.S. take the cake for studly white males conquering or studing indigenious folks.

Well, to be sure, it's not all relative, and the Amerindian cultures WERE less developed than the Eurasian ones in almost every respect. There are geographical and historical reasons why it was so (mainly because they didn't have the luxury of an intercultural crossroad that was the Mediterranian, and so the Native American cultures were largely stewing in their own juice while the Europeans and the Middle Easterners actively traded, fought and otherwise exchanged intellectual baggage) but it is hard to deny that the Native American cultures were stagnating. A mighty empire, especially one as militarized as the Aztecs, does not fall that easily to a handful of invaders unless it is profoundly rotten from within. (And no, the Spanish guns don't explain it; gunpowder weapons of that era were actually inferior to bows in most qualities that counted- from rate of fire to susceptibility to bad weather).

Every empire falls that just how it goes in history. Rome had a more sophisticated war apparatus and got theri bums handed to them by the Goths etc.

I also think it depends on what time frame you look at and which goegraphic region too. Population was less dense than in Europe and lack of written langauges for the most part (once again regional variances) Teehee it occurs to me, that really it's the lack of taxes in areas w/out written records. Taxes and collection of them is what spurred the begining of writing in Mesopotamia. ack babble on

Mayan mathmatics and astronmy is pretty advanced, we still don't get it.

nothing works like damp gunpowder

[Womble]

They beat it into us in Anthro, not to be ethnocentric. Just about everyone. But Europe and the U.S. take the cake for studly white males conquering or studing indigenious folks.

But isn't that because they were the ones doing most of the studying?

Every empire falls that just how it goes in history. Rome had a more sophisticated war apparatus and got theri bums handed to them by the Goths etc.

But Rome existed for 500 years as a Republic and another 500 or so as an empire. It had a lot of time to rise and decline before it was rotten enough to be knocked down. The Aztec state was barely a hundred years old, and it was already so rotten that Cortes could arrive with less than a thousand men and instantly recruit enough disaffected tribesmen to bring down an empire the size of modern Mexico.

[Iffy]

But isn't that because they were the ones doing most of the studying?


But Rome existed for 500 years as a Republic and another 500 or so as an empire. It had a lot of time to rise and decline before it was rotten enough to be knocked down. The Aztec state was barely a hundred years old, and it was already so rotten that Cortes could arrive with less than a thousand men and instantly recruit enough disaffected tribesmen to bring down an empire the size of modern Mexico.

Their what we see and a lot of what's taught over here. Once you start to enter into the 1950's you know there are others out there we just don't see them. Though we do see females represented more than other areas early on.

There are those who say that Rome ended with the Republic and the Empire was the decline. When you look at other states they change they morph, incest & in breeding, there are civil wars, and invaders who take over. You get an invasion w/ a weak monarch and bye bye kingdom. And really my knowlegde of the Aztec is pretty superficial, Maya have rather been my "new world" interest.

[kaylar]

The development of cultures and societies depends
on many things, including environment.

When one lives in 'paradise' one does not need to
develope those 'necessities' required by harsher
environments.

For example; I live on the beach. Historically,
my property was flooded by the Bull Park River
jumping it's banks and dumping fertile soil
which was covered by sand.

On the beach I grow fruit trees; the palms were
here before me, as were the sea grapes, the almond
mango, avocada, ackee, lime, tomato, carrot, are
mine.

The sea is full of fish and they are not difficult
to catch. The temperature is tropical and a youth
who lives nearby has a knock board house made of
scraps which is good enough save if there is a
hurricane.

There is no reason for us to invent anything as
nature provides. Fire, used for cooking, boats
and nets made for fishing, the calendar could
say 4000 BCE or 1 C.E. or 2007 C.E.

Over time people, unlike the youth who is a transient,
have learned to build hurricane proof houses, but
there is no environmental pressure to do more.

Hence, no reason to invent the wheel, stoves, parkas,
curing meat...(for the indigenous life were coneys and
birds, goats et.al were imported) and the major
technological development was the Maroons who could
'jerk' food, (meaning it was cooked over fire but
without smoke).

The Taino used Cassava poison to dope the fish so
they could collect them in the basket, while using
the non-toix cassava as flour. How they figured this
out is probably trial and error.

But they didn't need more.

They had food, clothing of a form, shelter of a form
and so had no impetus to develope what they didn't
need.

In harshers climes there was the need to build warm
houses, burn fuel constantly, prepare and use skins,
raise animals, store grain, etc.

Most of the indigenous people lived in regions which
were of mild climate. When the climate became colder
some developed other technology, others moved else
where.

Their society worked until incursions by others.
Hence, if the Spanairds never arrived, the youth
who lives in the knockboard shack would be
surrounded by others living the same way.

Once your belly is full, your bed is comfortable,
and the air is warm and sweet, what else would
you need?

[Iffy]

completely off topic but anyways

I was watchign the last hour of 'Troy' the movie (Brad Pitt, Orlando Bloom etc) what did they do to all the male Trojan's hair. Good gads it was horrid

Aneas got a 30 second cameo wife was nowhere in sight just his sweet Pater **gags*