Thread View: net.nlang.celts
3 messages
3 total messages
Started by Eli Liang
Wed, 12 Feb 1986 19:56
europe vs the middle east in 2000 BC
Author: Eli Liang
Date: Wed, 12 Feb 1986 19:56
Date: Wed, 12 Feb 1986 19:56
17 lines
1365 bytes
1365 bytes
How was it that a rather primitive people such as the celts could design
and implement such a powerful astronomical "computer" as Stonehenge, when
far to the east, much more advanced people, the Egyptians (who were well into
their Middle Kingdom period) never developed anything comparable? Of course,
as far as architecture goes, the Great Pyramids, built > 1000 years earlier
exceeded Stonehenge in engineering level. Yet, those were simply glorified
tombs, while Stonehenge was much more. Anyone have any comments?
-eli
--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Eli Liang ---
University of Maryland Computer Vision Lab, (301) 454-4526
ARPA: eli@cvl, eli@lemuria, eli@asgard, eli@mit-mc, eli@mit-prep
CSNET: eli@cvl UUCP: {seismo,allegra,brl-bmd}!umcp-cs!cvl!eli
Re: europe vs the middle east in 2000 BC
Author: Don Steiny
Date: Thu, 13 Feb 1986 04:38
Date: Thu, 13 Feb 1986 04:38
26 lines
1787 bytes
1787 bytes
In article <1217@cvl.UUCP>, eli@cvl.UUCP (Eli Liang) writes: > > How was it that a rather primitive people such as the celts could design > and implement such a powerful astronomical "computer" as Stonehenge, when > far to the east, much more advanced people, the Egyptians (who were well into > their Middle Kingdom period) never developed anything comparable? Of course, > as far as architecture goes, the Great Pyramids, built > 1000 years earlier > exceeded Stonehenge in engineering level. Yet, those were simply glorified > tombs, while Stonehenge was much more. Anyone have any comments? > This is a good example of how the word "primitive" is misleading! If you start with the premise one society is primitive and the other advanced, you are going to run into logical problems. On what basis, specifically, do you make such a judgement. Were the Olhone of California "primitive?" They did not need to develop technology beyond the technology they developed because they had everything they needed. They had a social system and oral tradition that was plenty "advanced". Certainally their oral tradition is far more "advanced" than ours. -- scc!steiny Don Steiny @ Don Steiny Software 109 Torrey Pine Terrace Santa Cruz, Calif. 95060 (408) 425-0382
Re: europe vs the middle east in 2000 BC
Author: Jack Jansen
Date: Mon, 17 Feb 1986 00:07
Date: Mon, 17 Feb 1986 00:07
17 lines
1456 bytes
1456 bytes
In article <1217@cvl.UUCP> eli@cvl.UUCP (Eli Liang) writes: > >How was it that a rather primitive people such as the celts could design >and implement such a powerful astronomical "computer" as Stonehenge, when >far to the east, much more advanced people, the Egyptians (who were well into >their Middle Kingdom period) never developed anything comparable? Well, obviously the Celts knew more about magic than the Egyptians. Also, it is a misunderstanding that they had trouble aligning Stonehenge, since what they did was first drop the stones whereever they liked, and then tilt and move the earth to get all those nice features. This tilting, by the way, caused some serious inconvenience in other parts of the world, nowadays usually referred to as "the Flood". -- Jack Jansen, jack@mcvax.UUCP The shell is my oyster.
Thread Navigation
This is a paginated view of messages in the thread with full content displayed inline.
Messages are displayed in chronological order, with the original post highlighted in green.
Use pagination controls to navigate through all messages in large threads.
Back to All Threads