[HN Gopher] Archaeologists find ancient Egyptian warship sunk ne...
___________________________________________________________________
Archaeologists find ancient Egyptian warship sunk near Alexandria
Author : diodorus
Score : 261 points
Date : 2021-07-24 01:47 UTC (21 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (arstechnica.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (arstechnica.com)
| sanatgersappa wrote:
| How do you write "Ever Given" in heiroglyphics?
| prox wrote:
| This is a good question for r/AncientEgyptian
| JudgePenitent wrote:
| Fitting that Diodorus should post this to hn.
|
| "So far, archaeologists have explored less than five percent of
| the ancient city." So still much more to come.
|
| The story of Heraklion is a great example of climate change and
| its impacts on human civilization.
|
| The other story of Heraklion is its great multiculturalism; it
| exhibits both Greek and Egyptian influences. I am always
| fascinated when I hear other nerds describe the process of
| learning Western history as "begin with the Greeks." And we often
| base Western civilization upon Greek thought, Roman law. At the
| same time, I am reminded of the story of Thales who supposedly
| learned his mathematical talents from Egypt. The interconnection
| between the two worlds seems obvious to me today, and I often
| wonder the reasons Westerners usually begin (and, for some, end)
| with the Greeks.
|
| Hopefully Heraklion/Thonis can teach us more about the
| interrelations between Greece and Egypt; not only how they
| traded, but who they sat in between, how long this city had been
| here, did the Sea-Peoples (Phoenicians if you ask me) trade here,
| and were the populations of Greece and Egypt far closer in
| cultural heritage than we acknowledge today.
| opportune wrote:
| The problem here is that Egyptian culture/connection to the
| rest of the world changed in massive amounts over time. If you
| looked at really ancient Egypt you would not find much that
| could be extrapolated to the "Western civilization" compared to
| the Greeks.
|
| The period of time where Egypt produced many scholars who we
| still know by name, and their works and how influential they
| are, was in the Hellenistic period during which they
| essentially were culturally Greek. It was a result of conquest
| and increasing Greek economic/cultural influence across the
| Mediterranean. Yes it's likely much of that knowledge was due
| to a kind of syncretization of Egyptian knowledge stretching
| back Millenia and it finally being recorded and disseminated
| across the Greek speaking world in a way that was preserved
| until know, but that's what makes it history. We simply don't
| have a lot of records about ancient Egyptian scholarship before
| the Hellenistic period.
| JudgePenitent wrote:
| >>We simply don't have a lot of records about ancient
| Egyptian scholarship before the Hellenistic period.
|
| Agreed. As robbiep mentioned, this is probably because of
| Alexander in general.
|
| >>The period of time where Egypt produced many scholars who
| we still know by name, and their works and how influential
| they are, was in the Hellenistic period during which they
| essentially were culturally Greek.
|
| It is interesting to me, how as soon as the Greeks came on to
| the scene, this process of identifying thought with
| individuals (the Socratic method, Platonic dialogues,
| Pythagorean theorem etc) becomes the standard in the West. I
| personally believe that this is one of the great achievements
| of Greece, but at the same time, it has blinded us to the
| ways that civs tended to create and maintain knowledge in a
| much more communal process.
|
| >>If you looked at really ancient Egypt you would not find
| much that could be extrapolated to the "Western civilization"
| compared to the Greeks.
|
| I agree in general it is easier to relate to the Greeks. I
| suppose I tend to find very deep civilizational roots from
| the period 6K~ BCE to about 2k~ BCE, an era which included
| the rise of the first mega civs like Egypt and Sumer among
| others. Its the broad outlines that fascinate me; mass
| religions, class structures, very long distance trade,
| massive monuments and urban environs, etc. I suppose I tend
| to see much in common in the broad outlines. (and for me,
| broad outlines always have a greater impact than any Homerian
| epic)
| dalbasal wrote:
| >> am always fascinated when I hear other nerds describe the
| process of learning Western history as "begin with the Greeks."
|
| A good example of frames being "made up," in the sense that
| they can be constructed multiple ways.
|
| Another frame might be that Greeks were not "Western" at all.
| They were simply the western fringe of the greater "fertile
| crescent" culture. This frame would have made more sense to the
| Greeks themselves, who considered Egypt the source of much
| knowledge and urban culture. Writers like Plato credited
| scholars visiting egypt (Eg his uncle Solon) for bringing this
| knowledge back, especially during the Athenian golden age. The
| greek alphabet is also derived from the
| phoenician/canaanite/semitic alphabet. Archeology of older
| periods, like the Minoan Greek era, suggest Egyptian cultural
| influence started very early.
|
| "The West" (also near east, and far east) is actually a Greek
| concept, and the directions are relative to Greece. Rome is
| "The West" because its west of Greece. But, both Greek and
| Roman empires were a lot more active in the east than in the
| west.
| jhgb wrote:
| Ancient Greeks _were_ Indo-Europeans, though, unlike any of
| the contemporary Ferticle Crescent cultures. In many ways
| that does make them very much western, e.g. their invention
| of vowel graphemes was one that other western peoples such as
| Latins /Romans who were also Indo-European and needed them as
| well could take advantage of.
| bigbillheck wrote:
| > Ancient Greeks were Indo-Europeans, though,
|
| So were the Hittites, and the ruling class of the Mittani.
| jhgb wrote:
| True, I sometimes forget how far north the Fertile
| Crescent reached. Nevertheless, when the Greeks rose to
| their height the Hittites had already been gone. The fact
| the Hittite language had to be deciphered in the 20th
| century attests to the cultural irrelevance of the
| Hittites for the western world. Compared to that we have
| whole schools of philosophy for Ancient Greece. We've
| never needed to rediscover Greece -- it's always been
| there in the background.
| DiogenesKynikos wrote:
| The Hittites were gone, but languages related to Hittite
| were still spoken throughout Asia Minor:
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anatolian_languages
| wl wrote:
| We also had to decipher Egyptian. I don't think having to
| do so speaks to the cultural irrelevance of a
| civilization.
| jhgb wrote:
| Yes, and the result of that was that _for two thousand
| years_ , Greco-Roman culture was directly influencing
| European cultures while Egyptian was not. That my country
| produced Alexandreis (a vernacular Czech version based on
| a French original by Gautier de Chatillon) in the High
| Middle Ages and _not_ Ramesseis instead is telling:
| Egyptian culture had been irrelevant to us for two
| millennia. You had to wait for the 20th century and Mika
| Waltari to retell the story of Sinuhe.
| wl wrote:
| If we're talking about Sinuhe, that's on the wrong side
| of the Late Bronze Age systems collapse. Other than
| perhaps faint echos found in the Greek epics and the
| Hebrew scriptures, Mediterranean texts from the other
| side of the collapse were undeciphered until the 19th
| century. Ramesses II and Alexander are more than eight
| centuries apart, with Alexander being on our side of the
| collapse.
|
| On the other hand, that Greco-Roman culture that was so
| influential is in no small part Egyptian. Alexandria was
| a major cultural center of the Greco-Roman world. Egypt
| was the first nation to convert to Christianity en masse
| and that influence on Christianity remains today.
| datameta wrote:
| The Persians were just as much descended from Indo-
| Europeans as the Greeks were and they were squarely in the
| Near East by any Greek account. If anything Indo-European
| ancestry is what can point out commonalities rather than be
| a source of categorical division.
| 1123581321 wrote:
| Typically historical books and lessons begin earlier than
| Greece. Greek is suggested over Egyptian for language learning
| due to the number of worthwhile works it accesses and its
| interplay with the next leg of language learning and research.
| Perhaps more immediately move on to Rome than should but that
| doesn't condemn the starting point.
| NotChina wrote:
| See the Amarna letters.
| robbiep wrote:
| Regarding your fascination about western history 'beginning
| with the Greeks' I would say the reason why is fairly obvious
| if you follow the history.
|
| Despite the locus of civilisation being in Mesopotamia and
| Egypt from 5-6000BCE to 500BCE by the time of this discovery
| (1-200BCE) Egypt had been conquered by Alexander and the (Mid
| East and Eastern Mediterranean) world divided between his
| generals. Additionally, whilst there is so much we don't know
| of the thought and philiosophy of the area, what has survived
| to us today in terms of philosophy and law comes from the
| Greeks and Romans.
|
| So for the very early antiquity, you had mathematics and other
| vestiges of civilisation flowing from Egypt and Mesopotamia to
| other parts of the world, and then later the conquest of these
| areas by the Greeks first and then others.
|
| Anyway, your comments mark you as being well informed on the
| history so I am sure you don't need a lesson from me, maybe the
| other point I'd make is that the breadth and detail of history
| makes generalisations such as 'western history begins with the
| Greeks' a more palatable launchpad for consumption than
| breaking down the nuance that inevitably unfolds on more
| profound study
| jfoutz wrote:
| If you like, feel free to educate observers of this exchange.
| All I really believe is that the pyramids are absurdly old.
| tephra wrote:
| There's this quote that I think is from Dan Carlin and I
| can't really remember how it goes but something like: "the
| birth of Cleopatra is closer to us in time than the
| building of the pyramids in Giza was to Cleopatra".
| spullara wrote:
| Reminds me that the latest dinosaur period is closer to
| us then the previous ones start. Human intelligence is
| not inevitable.
| throwaway894345 wrote:
| I've also heard that humans are closer to tuna than tuna
| are to sharks. Not sure if it's true, but it offends my
| sensibilities.
| spullara wrote:
| Sharks are extremely old, ~450m years. They are older
| than dinosaurs by ~140m years.
|
| https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn17453-timeline-
| the-ev...
| JudgePenitent wrote:
| >the breadth and detail of history makes generalisations such
| as 'western history begins with the Greeks' a more palatable
| launchpad for consumption than breaking down the nuance that
| inevitably unfolds on more profound study
|
| Absolutely. Your comment on Alexander is correct. It doesn't
| explain why we _still_ do not teach pre Greek /Roman as a
| foundation. Yes Alexander encouraged the severing of
| cultural-historical links; today we can look for and around
| that, as we know a lot about the pre Greek/Roman civs, and
| they were arguably more important for setting the
| civilizational foundations upon which more fortunate
| individuals copied from.
|
| I guess I wish the launchpad was "begin with the Sumerians".
| Archelaos wrote:
| I have been teaching European history (with an emphasis on
| the history of ideas) at university for almost two decades.
| In those cases were I dealt with the origins of "Europe" I
| started even earlier than the Sumerians: with the end of
| the last ice age.
|
| As to the ancient Greeks: I am extremly impressed about how
| fast and innovative they had become from the 6th century BC
| onward. But in almost all fields their culture rested on
| outside precursors: Their mythology includes many stories
| and aspects that can be found in earlier stories or
| pictures from Asia Minor; their alphabet is an advancement
| of the Phoenicians, probably adopted via Cyprus; their
| early sculpture and metal works clearly shows Egyptian
| influences, etc.
|
| History in my view is a discipline to tell interesting
| stories in anwsering interesting questions. And part of
| this story telling is to tell the stories of the
| terminology of the very question. So if someone is asking
| whether the Greeks are the start of the history of the
| Western world, one has already a lot to think about all the
| concept included in the question.
|
| What defined being Greek in those days? -- Interesting
| story: the center of the early Greek culture was the west
| of Asia Minor which become incorporated for the first time
| in the Persian empire in the middle of the 6th century BC.
| Refuges went to southern Italy were they settled in close
| proximity to Etruscian towns. The Etruscians adopted their
| more sophisticated craftsmenship for luxury items. They
| traded it with the Celts from north of the Alps in exchange
| for iron. The economy in Italy benefited. Larger political
| units formed. After many struggles Rome emerged as the most
| supirior.
|
| When does history start? -- Interesting story: People
| argued that it starts with writing and all else is
| prehistory, because it is writing which provides us with so
| much more knowledge about what happend in the past. But in
| recent years we have seen extraordinary progress in
| archeology. Both in an extraordinary number of new
| interesting finds as well as in an extraordinary
| advancement in new or improved research methods like in
| dating or genome analysis. In view of this, is the
| distinction between history and prehistory still
| appropriate?
|
| Is the concept of the Western world in this context really
| so relevant? -- Interesting story: There has been a long
| standing story in Europe about a so-called 'translatio
| imperii', a gradual movement of the cultural and political
| center from the East to the West. But a similar story can
| be told about a movement from Greece towards the East:
| Alexander, the Sasanians, the Greco-Bactrian Kingdom (in
| todays Afganistan), the Indo-Greek Kingdom. And the
| cultural influence did not stop there. The art of the Greek
| statue and especially of the high relief was adopted by the
| Buddhist and Hindu art of India and Southeast Asia and even
| influenced Chinese art indirectly. If Greek culture
| travelled both towards the West and towards the East should
| we not put more emphasis on the Greeks as something that
| unites Europe, Africa and Asia instead of claiming them
| primarily for Europe or a Western world?
| fsloth wrote:
| Well, it's not all greek. For example the glyphs we use in
| this discussion AFAIK are based on egyptian hieroglyphs that
| were simplified by phoenicians into phoenician script from
| which greek and latin writing was then based on.
|
| Greeks did develop their own literacy, but apparently became
| illeterate again circa 1000 bc - and when they again picked
| up writing they use phoenician glyphs.
|
| Greek world _did_ suck up most of knowledge that had
| accumulated and added very much to it, so they _are_ a good
| reference point.
|
| Greek culture predates Rome's rise - and in some ways also
| lives longer since East-Roman emperors again used greek.
| robbiep wrote:
| I don't think we're disagreeing, it's just at what point do
| you try to pick up the threads of history to try to begin
| to understand things?
|
| One of the most fascinating things I find of our history is
| Linear A & B and Minoan civilisation - apparently wiped out
| by the eruption of what is now Santorini. You just gave me
| a few new threads to chase with the loss of Greek literacy
| - my previous understanding was that Minoan civilisation
| was poised to dominate the Mediterranean prior to them
| being wiped out and the vestiges eventually coalesced into
| the greeks, with the minoans acting as the seed
| civilisation. (With aggressive abbreviation and many
| potential mistakes for the pedants out there, I do not
| claim to be a authority here, only a fan)
|
| Another thing I find fascinating is how all the tribes of
| the Italian peninsula basically organised their cities
| around a forum with similar architecture and similar god
| worship well before the romans dominated.... As well as the
| fact that prior to the Punic wars, Rome was really in doubt
| as to whether it would dominate the med.
|
| History is amazing and I truly believe that by better
| understanding it we can better understand ourselves, so
| often I find myself reflecting that had this element of
| history been better known then perhaps we could be avoiding
| this particular aspect of human behaviour... there is very
| little that is new under the sun
| fsloth wrote:
| I don't think we are disagreeing on any points either -
| my intention was to expand the discussion I think. I
| totally agree history is very interesting.
| NotChina wrote:
| Also read the adventures of Wen Amun
| ardit33 wrote:
| Ugh... these comments...
|
| First of all, Greece was not the start of the western
| civilization. Rome was. They borrowed a lot from Greece (which
| they eventually conquered) as Greece was more advanced
| initially. Greeks themselves had borrowed a lot form middle
| east and north african civilizations/cultures, and initially
| from the Minonians.
|
| The city you mention, Heraklion, was a Minionan city, which
| fell on a decline (a volcano/earthquake is thought to be the
| culprit) eventually was conquered by the Myceneans (greek
| percursors), who themselves were initially 'barbaric' indo-
| european tribes/civilization. Greeks were able to adopt, curate
| and evolve a lot of the knowlege of their neighbors and
| eventually ascend into being a prominent cultural place and
| create their own governing system, which was direct democracy
| for the main cities (Athens and Thebe), as Sparta had its own
| weird system, and Macedonia (if you consider it greek) was a
| traditional kingdom.
|
| The flow of knowledge is bidirectional, but some places
| borrowed more from others, and evolved knowledge, which itself
| was borrowed by other cultures:
|
| Early Civilization (Mesopotamia, Babylon) -> Egypt - Hittite -
| Minonian - > Mycenean -> (Bronze Collapse) -> Classical Greece
| -> Rome -> Western Civilization
|
| Of course I left out a lot of other cultures who contributed to
| today's 'western knowledge', from the Phoenicians, to Parthian
| / Persia, to later arabs, and indian and even east asian /
| chinese indirect contributions. But they were secondary to the
| flow I described.
|
| Even after the split of the Roman empire in two, Greece was on
| the Eastern part, so it is are more of a south-east /
| mediterranean culture/civilization, and not necessary western
| pre se, but it gave a lot to the western world.
| jhgb wrote:
| > First of all, Greece was not the start of the western
| civilization.
|
| Possibly, but if the question is "where in the western world
| did history start", Greece seems like a fine answer, since 1)
| it's unquestionably a part of the western world, and 2)
| history starts with writing, and Mycenaean Greeks are (at
| least off the top of my head) the oldest culture in the
| western world the writings of which we can read. So that's
| the beginning of western history, even if not the root of its
| civilization.
| chrisseaton wrote:
| > it's unquestionably a part of the western world
|
| 'Western' means west of... Greece. So Rome, which is west
| of Greece, was when civilisation moved west and when
| western civilisation began.
| jhgb wrote:
| Sure, within Europe, and especially from the perspective
| of the Great Schism, Greece is eastern. From the global
| perspective, not so much. I have yet to meet a person
| who'd argue that the region with Greco-Roman cultural
| heritage somehow excludes Greece, of all places.
| kitd wrote:
| _First of all, Greece was not the start of the western
| civilization. Rome was. They borrowed a lot from Greece
| (which they eventually conquered) as Greece was more advanced
| initially_
|
| Er, QED?
| robbiep wrote:
| I think that what you replied to is the comment _' am always
| fascinated when I hear other nerds describe the process of
| learning Western history as "begin with the Greeks.'_
|
| When I think everyone who is also commenting here recognises
| that that is just a talking point for where to pick up the
| threads of history.
| bboreham wrote:
| Are you confusing the Heraklion mentioned in the article and
| the Heraklion in Crete?
|
| https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heracleion
| https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heraklion
| masklinn wrote:
| > The other story of Heraklion is its great multiculturalism;
| it exhibits both Greek and Egyptian influences. I am always
| fascinated when I hear other nerds describe the process of
| learning Western history as "begin with the Greeks." And we
| often base Western civilization upon Greek thought, Roman law.
| At the same time, I am reminded of the story of Thales who
| supposedly learned his mathematical talents from Egypt. The
| interconnection between the two worlds seems obvious to me
| today, and I often wonder the reasons Westerners usually begin
| (and, for some, end) with the Greeks.
|
| Note that the Greece at the time was not restricted to modern
| geographical greece:
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Archaic_Greece#/media/File:Gre...
|
| It was mostly a coastal entity (not dissimilar to Portugal
| during the age of discovery), but there were greek colonies
| throughout the mediterranean and black seas, with the exception
| of the phoenician south-west (the southern spain maghreb), as
| well as Phoenicia proper (the levant)
| dr_dshiv wrote:
| Western civilization begins with Pythagoras (b. 570 BC) who
| deliberately synthesized a large number of
| cultural/philosophical traditions (Thracian, Syrian,
| Babylonian, Persian, Egyptian and Greek). In other words, from
| the very beginning, Western Civilization was about cross-
| national integration. By 200 BC, Greek was the lingua franca
| from India (e.g., Ashoka pillars written in Greek) to Egypt to
| _Britain_ (reference on request).
| adolph wrote:
| Folks who find this interesting might find the Roman Nemi ships
| interesting. They were likely large scale pleasure barges.
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nemi_ships
| eloff wrote:
| The billionaires yachts of the ancient world. It's a shame they
| were destroyed in WW2.
| sitkack wrote:
| > Recovered from the lake bed in 1929, the ships were destroyed
| by fire during World War II in 1944.
|
| These are fantastical!
| jaclaz wrote:
| I would add that people would likely be interested to the
| drainage tunnel that the Romans excavated (emissarium) which
| is an incredible engineering feat, not only because it has an
| exceptionally accurate (low, 0,8/1% gradient) slope, but
| because it was excavated from both sides of the mountain and
| at the connection there was an error of only a few meters. I
| don't seem to be able to find a dedicated article/site, there
| is a description in this .pdf:
|
| http://soci.romasotterranea.it/image/rassegna_stampa/pdf/12..
| ..
|
| In 1929 the tunnel was re-used pumping in it (with mechanical
| pumps) the water to be able to recover the wrecks.
|
| Also interesting are reports of previous attempts to inspect
| the ships in the 15th, 16th and 19th century:
|
| https://penelope.uchicago.edu/~grout/encyclopaedia_romana/mi.
| ..
| adolph wrote:
| Wow, that was a great read and I'm grateful for the English
| version on the second page.
| devoutsalsa wrote:
| How do I get an invite one of those boat parties?! They really
| knew how to party back then.
| Ma8ee wrote:
| The same as today. Be very rich or be young and very
| attractive.
| watertom wrote:
| live in a large metropolis and be a social butterfly, or be
| a social climber.
| NotChina wrote:
| Just because the ship was discovered off the coast of Egypt does
| not mean it has anything to do with the culture and people of
| Modern day Egypt.
| selimthegrim wrote:
| It's funny, I don't think you'd say that about today's Greeks.
| busymom0 wrote:
| I was hoping to see few more pictures of the ship. Does anyone
| have a better link?
| pp19dd wrote:
| High-res of that 'spiral' detail: https://cloudfront-us-
| east-1.images.arcpublishing.com/elcome...
|
| Unfortunately it seems like all that's available is the 3
| pictures disseminated by Reuters. The third is an interesting
| fragment- if those are bore holes, they sure look like they
| might've had a function. Gallery:
| https://www.reuters.com/world/africa/egypt-finds-ancient-mil...
| baxtr wrote:
| _> Some of the techniques used in building the warship are
| clearly Greek, like the mortise-and-tenon joints (ones in which a
| tab from one piece of wood fits into a slot cut into the
| adjoining piece) that hold many of its timbers together. But
| other aspects of the ship's design and construction are
| distinctly ancient Egyptian. Those clues, combined with some
| timbers that had evidently been salvaged and re-used from older
| ships, suggest that the warship was built somewhere in Egypt._
|
| Everything is a remix...
| markus_zhang wrote:
| I read: Archaeologists find ancient Egyptian worship near
| Antarctica, and thought: What? Cthulhu?
| Sebb767 wrote:
| > Clearly, this was no cargo vessel; ships built to haul cargo or
| passengers tend to be wider, built for capacity rather than speed
| and agility.
|
| Wouldn't a wider ship be more agile? Maybe my intuition fails me,
| but to me it would seem like like a longer ship is far harder to
| turn (think of rotating one of those large chef knives in water
| vs a bowl).
| npsomaratna wrote:
| I think that longer = more rowers; less wide = less mass.
|
| Wouldn't that mean a more powerful and agile ship?
| [deleted]
| eftychis wrote:
| Wide relates in the end to drag. And yes the number of rowers
| matters -- a bigger ship requires more rowers, thus more mass
| etc. Generally, there is the "optimization problem" with each
| such system that a bigger vehicle requires bigger engine and
| more fuel which means more mass. But here they mainly refer
| to the ratio of length versus width and from my and above
| posters guess they refer to the profile of the boat in the
| water.
|
| Edit: to amend and clarify: mass in a fluid affects
| displacement (assuming you stay above surface) and thus drag
| and maximum speed. Here is a crude reference about boat
| speeds https://www.boats.com/reviews/crunching-numbers-hull-
| speed-b... -- if I get time I will do more Google fu but I am
| pretty sure anyone can find the complete derivation online.
| julosflb wrote:
| The wave making resistance is generally much larger than
| pure viscous drag/friction on the hull for conventional
| boat.
| coryrc wrote:
| On the water, speed is agility, and speed is limited to the
| square root of length for displacement hulls (which these are).
| Wider means heavier for a given length, taking longer to speed
| up, and more friction to overcome.
| pge wrote:
| wider also means more frontal surface area. Just like a car
| going through air, less frontal surface area means more
| aerodynamic (or hydrodynamic), ie lower coefficient of drag.
| Olympic rowing shells and flatwater kayaks provide good
| visuals of what a fast displacement hull boat looks like -
| long and as narrow as possible.
| coryrc wrote:
| I think GP is thinking about a row boat, how it can turn on
| a dime quickly, which is true, but not useful in a sea
| battle.
| eftychis wrote:
| FYI: The site of the European Institute of Underwater Archeology
| has a lot of information about the site
| (https://ieasm.institute/egypt.php?lang=en).
| JudgePenitent wrote:
| Thanks for posting this!
| state_less wrote:
| Made me think of this song. I'm skeptical of the last line -
| might still be a little love. The ocean is a
| desert with it's life underground And a perfect
| disguise above Under the cities lies a heart made of
| ground But the humans will give no love
|
| -America horse with no name
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2021-07-24 23:01 UTC)