[HN Gopher] 12,000-year-old sequins hint at a shared culture in ...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       12,000-year-old sequins hint at a shared culture in Indonesian
       islands
        
       Author : diodorus
       Score  : 61 points
       Date   : 2023-08-20 20:38 UTC (1 days ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (cosmosmagazine.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (cosmosmagazine.com)
        
       | prosody wrote:
       | > As well as being genetically related, Langley says it's likely
       | that the people who inhabited these islands in the Pleistocene
       | era, 12,000 years ago, had "an image of an inter-island
       | 'community of practice' with shared values and worldviews".
       | 
       | How can you determine that from a poorly attested material
       | culture? The way it's worded makes me deeply suspicious that it's
       | backporting the doctrine of Indonesian national unity into the
       | Stone Age.
        
         | dmn322 wrote:
         | My impression is that Indonesian people aren't under any
         | delusions that the country matches any specific historical
         | borders. They're well aware that their country's borders are a
         | product of colonization.
         | 
         | That said, it seems to me like there's increasing evidence that
         | the Austronesian expansion was more than just random refugees
         | getting swept to different islands by fluke storms as is
         | sometimes implied. There is wooden pole art all around the
         | pacific rim, DNA evidence in south america, linguistic evidence
         | in south america, and now this. It seems reasonable to suspect
         | that the austronesian expansion was supported by a series of
         | large trade networks and societies that provided logistical
         | support for the expansion.
        
         | [deleted]
        
         | debacle wrote:
         | [flagged]
        
       | [deleted]
        
       | ransackdev wrote:
       | The more we discover about the past the more weird it all is and
       | to me makes less sense overall. People have lived very similar to
       | our societies today, for thousands and thousands of years. Some
       | had plumbing. Some built pyramids. Some did complex math and
       | science. Some made gunpowder and explosives and had rockets. Yet
       | for thousands and thousands of years, nothing was really
       | happening and then within the last 250ish years we went from
       | electric becoming a thing, to super computers in our watches and
       | robots in space. The part that doesn't make sense is why that
       | didn't get kicked off thousands of years ago when there wasn't
       | much of a difference in terms of advancement. Why'd it explode
       | one day almost like we got a helping hand? Shouldn't we be 1000
       | years more advanced now than we currently are, because these
       | things could have just as easily been kicked off then?
       | 
       | I am not at all able to say I know enough history to know if I'm
       | way off base to ask that question. I must be glossing over some
       | significant reasons that couldn't have happened. It's just weird
       | to me.
       | 
       | A quote from Mad Men that helps demonstrate the sharp hockey
       | stick of progress.
       | 
       | "She was born in 1898 in a barn. She died on the 37th floor of a
       | skyscraper. She was an astronaut."
        
         | extasia wrote:
         | Well for one there was no printing press via which to persist
         | knowledge and translate it cheaply through time and space.
         | 
         | Imagine what an individual could achieve technologically today,
         | if they were unable to access any materials or knowledge that
         | was accrued over the history of our species. The result would
         | probably be a subset of the things you describe as originating
         | from before 250 years ago, but they would certainly not be
         | splitting atoms or mapping the human genome.
        
         | adolph wrote:
         | One intriguing conjecture [0] about the difference of now
         | compared to many thousands of years past is that human
         | consciousness as we know it (if we know it) didn't exist until
         | the last 2,000 years. The hardware was there but the thought
         | patterns were not.
         | 
         | 0. _[In The Origin of Consciousness in the Breakdown of the
         | Bicameral Mind, by Julian Jaynes], Jaynes ' idea was that if
         | you went back and you looked at very early historical texts--
         | particularly for him, the Iliad--the way that characters talk
         | about their own minds and their own drives is extremely
         | unusual, or you might say not at all modern. . . . But, what's
         | actually going on, given what we know about the specialization
         | between the hemispheres of the brain, is that essentially one
         | side of the brain, one hemisphere of the brain is really
         | communicating to the other. And, full human consciousness had
         | not really been established at that time._
         | 
         | 0. https://www.econtalk.org/erik-hoel-on-consciousness-free-
         | wil...
        
           | angiosperm wrote:
           | Jaynes is certainly wrong in detail, but it is not too far-
           | fetched to suggest that the notion of "self" was an
           | invention, perhaps at first closely held among shamans, that
           | then gradually spread to the wider population.
        
       | RugnirViking wrote:
       | Makes sense. Is it any surprise? Arent there roman beads found in
       | kamchatka at one point? And roman traders in golden cathay (a.k.a
       | modern day malaysia). The ancients had a much greater degree of
       | interconnectedness than we sometimes imagine
        
         | rabbits_2002 wrote:
         | romans are much less than 12000 years old
        
         | opportune wrote:
         | Not only that, but there was trade and migrations across the
         | Bering straight before Columbus too, as evidenced by the spread
         | of the Yupik people/Paleo-Eskimos.
         | 
         | Indonesia (Makassar) also traded with aboriginal Australians
         | but this started in earnest in the 1700s. Still, it's
         | reasonable to conclude the entire earth was tenuously connected
         | (technologically and historically if not actively) already even
         | in the 1400s aside from some very isolated islands.
        
         | JoeAltmaier wrote:
         | It doesn't take that much, certainly not a globe-spanning trade
         | network. You only have to trade with your neighbor for portable
         | goods like beads to spread/diffuse across a continent for
         | instance.
        
         | angiosperm wrote:
         | European beads were in Alaska pre-Columbus.
         | 
         | Still, active trade networks have meaning.
        
       | tastyfreeze wrote:
       | IIRC all of the island nations around Indonesia were connected to
       | each other and to the mainland during the pleistocene. Hardly a
       | surprise that there was a shared culture when it is all the same
       | landmass with no dividing mountains.
        
         | angiosperm wrote:
         | Yes. Sea level 20kya was 400 feet lower. A million square miles
         | in the region started being inundated then. A common experience
         | of everyone dependent on the sea, 12kya, was seeing their
         | grandparents' villages disappear under water.
        
         | dmn322 wrote:
         | I don't think that's the case across the wallace line... could
         | be wrong.
        
           | angiosperm wrote:
           | We know they had boats, because they had got to New Guinea
           | and Australia tens of thousands of years before. But, yes,
           | the Wallace line was never open land.
        
       | mistrial9 wrote:
       | that is close to the 13,000 year mark when not-yet-clear Big
       | Changes happened.
        
         | angiosperm wrote:
         | I.e. all of North America and much of South burned down, 30+
         | genera extinct, and the Clovis culture obliterated, right
         | around 12,800ya. They have actually identified the exact year
         | from ice cores.
        
           | adolph wrote:
           | Younger Dryas Impact Theory?
           | 
           | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Younger_Dryas
           | 
           |  _The Younger Dryas, which occurred circa 12,900 to 11,700
           | years BP,[2] was a return to glacial conditions which
           | temporarily reversed the gradual climatic warming after the
           | Last Glacial Maximum (LGM),[3] which lasted from circa 27,000
           | to 20,000 years BP. The Younger Dryas was the last stage of
           | the Pleistocene epoch that spanned from 2,580,000 to 11,700
           | years BP and it preceded the current, warmer Holocene epoch._
        
             | angiosperm wrote:
             | It is common to assume the comet strike kicked off the
             | Younger Dryas cold spell, but it could still have been a
             | coincidence. There were other cold spells like it in
             | previous interglacials, and we don't know what caused
             | those. Those _might also_ have been caused by comet
             | strikes; it took us long enough to identify this one. What
             | happens that takes a thousand years to clear up is another
             | mystery on the pile.
             | 
             | We know with certainty there was a comet strike, about the
             | right time, that caused serious havoc, but evidence that it
             | changed the climate is harder to establish. Firm evidence
             | of sharply falling global temperature _before_ the strike
             | would settle the question. If the strike really did precede
             | the cold spell, it may be hard to prove causation. It seems
             | like the way to bet.
             | 
             | Another mystery is how the conflagration spared (just)
             | bison, moose, deer, elk, pronghorn, and grizzly and brown
             | bears.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2023-08-21 23:02 UTC)