[HN Gopher] Aboriginal ritual passed down over 12,000 years, cav...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Aboriginal ritual passed down over 12,000 years, cave find shows
        
       Author : speckx
       Score  : 270 points
       Date   : 2024-07-02 18:48 UTC (1 days ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (phys.org)
 (TXT) w3m dump (phys.org)
        
       | rhplus wrote:
       | I'm surprised by how tenuous the link is between the cave find
       | and the archival find. Is the bar really that low for claims in
       | archaeological papers or am I missing something? It's a
       | compelling story, but surely Occam's razor would conclude that
       | poking sticks into dead animals and fire pits is just what people
       | have done for thousands of years? Where's the evidence that there
       | was chanting and a healing ceremony?
       | 
       | Edit: full paper is freely available on Nature here:
       | 
       | https://www.nature.com/articles/s41562-024-01912-w
        
         | gerdesj wrote:
         | "Each one was found in a separate fireplace around the size of
         | the palm of a hand--far too small to have been used for heat or
         | cooking meat.
         | 
         | The slightly charred ends of the sticks had been cut specially
         | to stick into the fire, and both were coated in human or animal
         | fat."
         | 
         | That's rather more than circumstantial evidence. Granted the
         | ritual might have changed a bit over 12,000 odd years but where
         | else have you seen people poke sticks into tiny hearth's?
        
           | bena wrote:
           | It's all circumstantial evidence because that's all we get.
           | 
           | Circumstantial evidence is not "weak evidence", it is
           | evidence concerning the circumstances.
           | 
           | For instance, DNA is circumstantial evidence. It's evidence
           | that can imply a connection between events, but it is not
           | proof of such a connection. Fingerprints: circumstantial.
           | Call logs: often circumstantial.
           | 
           | The opposite of circumstantial evidence is direct evidence.
           | Direct evidence is rarer and often not as useful. Direct
           | evidence would be an actual witness to the event. To call
           | back to prior examples:
           | 
           | Fingerprints are direct evidence someone touched something.
           | But they are circumstantial evidence they then used that
           | object in commission of a crime.
           | 
           | Here, the direct evidence is that things were burned and
           | sticks were sharpened. The circumstances in which they were
           | found implies the rest.
        
           | ertgbnm wrote:
           | Archaeology is almost exclusively circumstantial evidence...
        
             | tengwar2 wrote:
             | It varies a lot. Later European archaeology is generally
             | quite well-founded as it ties in to a historical record.
             | While I don't have any familiarity with the Colosseum, I
             | have heard that there are records of payments to sailors
             | for manipulating the shades.
             | 
             | If you get further away from historical records, it does
             | get more tenuous, but there is often a solid basis of
             | scientific or technical evidence. My own doctorate is in
             | use of physics for dating by thermoluminescence and
             | optically stimulated luminescence, which together cover a
             | lot of ground for stuff that cannot be dated by C14. There
             | are several quantitative techniques like that, for instance
             | for isotopic analysis which can be used for deducing trade
             | routes. There are also many qualitative and semi-
             | quantitative techniques, varying from traditional trenches
             | and ground penetrating radar to pollen analysis (which
             | gives you information on climate and ground cover).
             | 
             | However all of this has to be tied together in to a picture
             | of human culture. That necessarily has a large element of
             | interpretation. This is not unique - you can see the same
             | pattern in fields like astronomy. Generally I think
             | archaeologists are reasonably good at knowing when they are
             | on uncertain ground. If I may give an example: in Scotland,
             | mainly on the north west coasts, there are the remains of
             | pre-historic buildings called brochs. The biggest stands
             | 40' high, and it is possible to walk up through the stairs
             | between the double walls to the top. We know roughly when
             | they were built, but not why. There are several theories,
             | but I find it interesting that there is an absence of
             | dogmatic assertion that one particular interpretation is
             | true, and it is still possible to have a sensible
             | discussion about a "fringe" theory (my own idea is that
             | some of them may have been for excarnation) which will
             | centre on what evidence you might need to search for (bone
             | fragments in this case).
        
           | gwern wrote:
           | If they had been doing the ritual regularly enough to
           | preserve it for over 12,000 years in a relatively small
           | range, it seems surprising that the excavations didn't turn
           | up way more instances than it did. They can find 2 perfect
           | instances within centuries of each other 12kya in the same
           | excavation, then it just teleports without a trace to the
           | 1880s?
           | 
           | This sounds more like a birthday paradox. There are _so_ many
           | rituals and superstitions in indigenous peoples over the
           | millennia that it would be shocking if you could never find
           | cases of things that looked vaguely similar when reduced to
           | an archaeological residue and you cast a net as wide as
           | 'anything which anyone has ever described which sounds
           | similar no matter how many millennia'.
           | 
           | (I would also note that 'fat smeared on stuff and involving
           | fires' is not nearly as rare as it might sound. Fat is
           | important and used in many sacrifices or medicines - eg
           | Homer, with all that fat wrapped on or stacked on top of
           | bones in a holocaust to the gods.)
        
         | mistermann wrote:
         | Have you ever watched US State Department press briefings, _and
         | paid close attention to how they use language_ (ie:  "X is
         | _linked to_ Y ")? Or, heard the public subsequently discussing
         | what was said in them (say, right here on HN)?
         | 
         | Humans are a story based species...always have been always will
         | be. Stories are our weak spot, the ultimate attack/control
         | vector.
        
           | walterbell wrote:
           | _> Stories are our weak spot, the ultimate attack /control
           | vector._
           | 
           | Stories (and LLM 'story models') can be fine tuned and A/B
           | tested against humans with live neural monitoring to evaluate
           | narrative effectiveness.
        
             | mistermann wrote:
             | "Evaluate", on what scale?
             | 
             | Donald Trump can tell a story (which is what all humans run
             | on) adequate to motivate thousands of people up to no good
             | to descend upon the nation's capital, do you think LLM's
             | (science, etc) can compete in that _specific_ arena
             | /domain, at that level? (To be fair though, the Normies
             | have been motivated to do more than a few silly things
             | themselves by their trainers. Donald is good, _but he ain
             | 't the best_.)
             | 
             | There are readings of brain activity, and then there is
             | brain activity that causes humans to do particular things
             | with their bodies. One of these is more powerful than the
             | other.
             | 
             | (Pardon for the vitriol, no offense intended.)
        
               | walterbell wrote:
               | 12 years ago, https://www.motherjones.com/criminal-
               | justice/2012/04/departm...
               | 
               |  _> FY2012 budget states a plan to "initiate
               | investigations into the relationship
               | between...neurotransmitters such as oxytocin, emotion-
               | cognition interactions, and narrative structures."_
               | 
               | What has transpired since then is left as an exercise for
               | the reader.
        
         | busterarm wrote:
         | Have to agree here. Also just kind of doesn't pass the common
         | sense test. We all learn the "game of telephone" as a kid and
         | how information can change even just being passed once.
         | 
         | In fact I've heard archaeologists in the past specifically say
         | that no oral tradition can survive intact more than 100 years.
         | Usually this statement is in reference to certain creation
         | myths being relatively modern inventions.
         | 
         | A claim of 12000 years needs strong evidence. Given what I've
         | seen from the field lately I have a counter-theory, but I'm not
         | really comfortable sharing.
        
           | cess11 wrote:
           | Where I grew up "game of telephone" didn't include repetition
           | over and over and over again. It also didn't include meter or
           | rhymes.
        
             | busterarm wrote:
             | Okay. Take Shakespeare then.
             | https://thegreatthinkers.org/shakespeare-and-
             | politics/biblio...
        
               | cess11 wrote:
               | Confirms what I'm hinting at, through tradition a version
               | is consolidated that becomes the consensus and can reach
               | a very long-lived stability.
        
           | alfiopuglisi wrote:
           | Please do share! Often those are the most interesting ones :)
        
           | danans wrote:
           | > In fact I've heard archaeologists in the past specifically
           | say that no oral tradition can survive intact more than 100
           | years. Usually this statement is in reference to certain
           | creation myths being relatively modern inventions.
           | 
           | Maybe you meant 1000 years?
           | 
           | If you really meant 100 years, there's an obvious
           | counterexample: The "Happy Birthday Song", published in 1893.
           | Arguably no one learns it by reading the words and notes from
           | a page.
           | 
           | Furthermore, considering that until pretty recently in
           | history most people were illiterate, the stories they learned
           | were transmitted to them orally (even if read from a book).
        
             | busterarm wrote:
             | You are aware that the Happy Birthday Song has dozens upon
             | dozens of variations (and not just the parody ones), right?
             | 
             | The Happy Birthday Song isn't even the Happy Birthday Song!
             | It's Good Morning To All! Happy Birthday lyrics didn't even
             | make it into print until 1912 and that's not even the
             | version that we use today. That version was first published
             | in 1924 by Robert Coleman. The copyrighted version that
             | even credited the Hill sisters with the melody (from Good
             | Morning to All, in 1893) didn't come around till 1935.
             | 
             | As for peoples' literacy, yes, that's the point. That
             | history is often unreliable. We even have disputes between
             | early _written_ historians writing about the same events
             | and have to compare them and also evaluate whether they
             | were alive at the time of the events and what their sources
             | were. Often we can discount what those people wrote today
             | based on what we've learned from the past.
             | 
             | I said 100 years and I meant it. If you really think about
             | it deeply, it should be obvious. Hell, I don't know who my
             | father is and my own mother couldn't manage to stay
             | consistent between tellings of that story...
             | 
             | You expect a complicated tradition to stay the same for
             | 12000 years? I went to Catholic Church my whole childhood
             | and I couldn't even tell you beat-for-beat what happens at
             | mass if you put a gun to my head.
        
           | Ar-Curunir wrote:
           | Several cultures have developed techniques to error-correct
           | and prevent these kinds of transmission errors.
        
         | ars wrote:
         | I came to post the same thing. You have a stick from 12,000
         | years ago, and a story from 100 years ago, and they link them
         | because of a similarity "there is fat at the end of the stick".
         | 
         | You could get fat on a stick by roasting a small mouse (so a
         | small hearth), or tons of other ways. This really isn't enough
         | evidence, not without a ton more findings of the same thing at
         | various dates over the timeperiod.
        
           | griffzhowl wrote:
           | If tiny hearths with fat-covered sticks were common
           | elsewhere, this would be a valid objection. But as it is,
           | this seems to be a distinctive practice that is present at
           | the same location separated by 12k years, and the ancient one
           | was buried and so not observed for most of that time. What's
           | the alternative explanation except a common root in a
           | cultural practice?
        
         | griffzhowl wrote:
         | It's actually not that far-fetched when you consider the long
         | view of human history. Hominins have been capable of cultural
         | transmission for millions of years, and during most of that
         | time it made most sense to repeat what the previous generation
         | had done as closely as possible, since they had by definition
         | survived and reproduced well enough to make a new generation.
         | Among all those practices of toolmaking, hunting strategies,
         | herbal knowledge, and whatever we call 'ritual', it wouldn't
         | have been clear to the practitioners which were actually
         | effective at increasing survival and which not, so everything
         | gets repreated over generations (with occasional modifications
         | catching on and producing cultural evolution ofc)
        
       | the-smug-one wrote:
       | Very cool :-). I don't know that much about the natives of
       | Australia and their history, I wonder how many of these oral
       | traditions have been written down. An immediate google gave me
       | this document, seems interesting at a glance:
       | https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/159354575.pdf
        
         | sandworm101 wrote:
         | When I lived on the west coast a native friend of mine spoke of
         | how some elders no longer wanted stories to be written down.
         | They have seen how their oral stories get documented,
         | effectively transforming them from a living secret into a fixed
         | text in a dead book. The book then goes on a shelf, fodder for
         | the endless stream of anthropology classes taught ay
         | universities in distant cities. More people read the story in
         | the book than ever come to listen to the story in person. After
         | a few decades of this pattern, young anthologists are now
         | hearing stories and asking questions about why the story today
         | is possibly slightly different than what was written down a
         | decade prior. There is an old stereotype of western Indians
         | believing that cameras could capture one's soul. That is
         | something to think about when we "document" an oral tradition.
        
           | parasti wrote:
           | I come from a background with a strong folk singing
           | tradition, and this reminds me of the two camps of folk
           | singers within it: the purists who want to preserve the
           | "original" tempo, lyrics, melody as it was recorded and
           | documented a century ago and who frown upon deviation from
           | that, and the modernists who adapt, improvise and reinterpret
           | folk songs as they see fit.
        
           | renewiltord wrote:
           | Interesting. I do like the documentation for immortality but
           | with stories there is an obsession with "the actual" or "the
           | original" and many people equate legibility with originality.
           | "Source? The original documented here is blah blah".
           | 
           | Sampling a continuous process once and describing it as the
           | process.
           | 
           | "The original value of sin(t) is sqrt(3)/2."
        
           | yencabulator wrote:
           | I live near the Navajo Nation, but claim no true
           | understanding of native american culture. Here's what I've
           | heard about their attitudes toward e.g. video recording their
           | rituals:
           | 
           | They welcome you, or any respectful individual, to
           | participate and to "live their rituals" with them. The local
           | college even hosts such events, to help the neighboring
           | communities understand each other better. Any elders will
           | likely tell you many stories, once they see you're actually
           | interested and not just in it for a cheap tourist thrill[1].
           | 
           | They discourage trying to record or explain it to people who
           | did not participate. They consider the first-hand experience
           | to be transformative, and that you fundamentally cannot
           | understand them without it.
           | 
           | [1]: I understand there are some things they're not supposed
           | to mention much, roughly in the sense of "speak of the Devil"
           | in Christian societies, or naming Bloody Mary three times.
           | Those stories you might only hear on special occasions.
        
       | namanaggarwal wrote:
       | Fascinating.
       | 
       | Growing up in a Hindu household, a lot of our festivals involve
       | listening to origin stories of the customs. A lot of those have
       | of course been glorified to add an element of holiness, but it's
       | possible they are actually derived from some small incident
       | happened in the past.
       | 
       | Like a butterfly effect, a small insignificant event leading to a
       | major celebration for billion people continued over centuries
        
         | bl4ckm0r3 wrote:
         | I think you just found out the roots of every religion.
        
           | mistermann wrote:
           | Every _ideology_ would be a more accurate story, though
           | perhaps less satisfying.
        
             | liquidpele wrote:
             | Uh.. no?
        
               | swatcoder wrote:
               | An ideology can be seen as a collection of rituals in
               | action, reasoning, and rhetoric situated among core
               | beliefs about what life is, what the world is, and what's
               | important to them.
               | 
               | And each ideology has a specific history of events,
               | founders, and later elaborators that shape what these
               | rituals and beliefs are.
               | 
               | Many ideologies reject deities or are at least ambivalent
               | about them, but they're not really operationally
               | different than religions.
               | 
               | So for as much as little bits of history linger in
               | relgious rituals, both blurred and resharpened in later
               | years, the same is absolutely true for ideologies.
               | 
               | The capitalism or feminism or humanism or atheism or
               | whatever else you point to today is similar to the one
               | sharing its name in the past, or in some other region,
               | but is not the same, and these differences are all
               | vestiges of little seed events that happened here or
               | there.
        
               | ajkjk wrote:
               | I don't think anybody else would describe an ideology as
               | a collection of rituals.
        
               | swatcoder wrote:
               | FWIW, that's incorrect. It's not at all unusual for
               | ideology to get modeled and analyzed that way in
               | sociology, anthropology, etc
        
               | ajkjk wrote:
               | Do you have an example? It sounds like a complete
               | category error. That or you're using the word very
               | differently than most people do..?
               | 
               | An adherent of an ideology might, like, _have_ rituals.
               | But the ideology isn 't the rituals.
               | 
               | Here are some ideologies off the top of my head:
               | democracy, marxism, environmentalism, libertarianism,
               | atheism, the moral basis of Christianity but not the
               | religion itself, utitarianism, humanism, empiricism.
               | 
               | None of those have, as far as I can tell, a single ritual
               | inherently associated with them.
        
               | swatcoder wrote:
               | If you categorically define an ideology to be a system of
               | pure concepts, independent of any practice of thought,
               | speech, or action by a professed adherent, then you will
               | inevitably see it as a category error, yes.
               | 
               | (You'll also have a hard time enumerating those concepts
               | in a complete and consistent way)
               | 
               | But if you're even a wee bit of a subjectivist, as many
               | (not all) social scientists and social philosphers are,
               | then a definition like that isn't interesting or
               | productive. From that perspective, ideologies are
               | something that people profess adherence to and express
               | statements about and behave in self-identified accordance
               | to.
               | 
               | They gather in elections, they discuss power through the
               | lens of capital and labor, they recycle or avoid eating
               | meat, they recoil at government overreach, they expose
               | fraud in purported miralces, they pray, they trade
               | trolley problem memes unironically, they protest against
               | inequality, etc
               | 
               | If these don't make sense to you as "rituals of
               | ideologies" for people doing cross-cultural studies,
               | that's fine, but then I have a sense that a lot of cross-
               | cultural studies just feels like hogwash to you anyway. I
               | doubt I could change your mind here. :)
        
               | ajkjk wrote:
               | Well, you're right about that. I suppose I don't see the
               | point in calling what you're describing an ideology. Just
               | call it something else so ideology can mean what it means
               | to everyone else..? I see all your examples as like,
               | social behaviors that happen to presently align with the
               | ideologies. But in the past or future they won't, while
               | the ideologies will persist, cause they live in 'idea
               | space'.
               | 
               | (nor would I call any of those rituals, either, but I
               | guess words don't mean what they normally mean in those
               | fields)
        
               | swatcoder wrote:
               | I figured!
               | 
               | If you earnestly wished to "see the point", you're
               | tripping yourself with by taking for granted "what it
               | means to everyone else.." and things like "living in idea
               | space"
               | 
               | There are traditions of study/thought that use ideology
               | the way you mean, and traditions that don't. The variety
               | of use is well-represented and has been since the word
               | came into use. Likewise, "idea space" is a specific
               | concept that some people accept as sensible and others
               | don't. Again, the variety of relationships to it is well-
               | represented (and stretches back millennia, on that one).
               | 
               | You can actually see an example of this kind of
               | differing-perspectives-in-wide-use in the way use used
               | "the moral basis of Christianity but not the religion
               | itself" in your own comment above. While Platonic ideas
               | predate Christianity and have much influence on its shape
               | and study in the West, the that statement would strike
               | most traditional and many modern Christian thinkers as
               | non-sensical. To them, there is no sensible separation of
               | Christianity's "moral basis" from its Church/people and
               | trying to make some distinction is as alien and
               | "pointless" to them as different senses of ideology are
               | to you.
               | 
               |  _And yet_ , of course it's interesting to think about
               | Christianity's "moral basis" as an ideology existing in
               | "idea space" because it lets you relate that part of
               | Christianity to other things that you feel are comparable
               | using techniques that you know how to work with and have
               | confidence in. That's pretty much exactly what's going on
               | with social scientists/philosophers who think about
               | ideology in the way I've been describing above.
        
               | vkou wrote:
               | Democracy has rituals that its disciplines believe that
               | if adhered to correctly and reverently they will bring
               | prosperity to their tribe.
               | 
               | Some, but not all of those rituals even stand up to basic
               | scrutiny. Others, not so much.
        
               | ajkjk wrote:
               | I personally don't associate those rituals with the idea
               | of democracy itself, rather just its particular
               | instantiation in modernish society.
        
               | mistermann wrote:
               | I certainly would (not as a _comprehensive_ explanation
               | though of course). The range of forms of
               | conceptualization any one individual is capable of (or
               | not) is strongly influenced by the ideology to which they
               | subscribe (or are captured by).
               | 
               | If you simply consider how the human mind works, this
               | "should" be fairly obvious. But one's ability or
               | likelihood to think about such things is once again a
               | function of the norms and accepted practices of one's
               | ideology. That which is not known of, essentially does
               | not exist.
        
           | kstenerud wrote:
           | Yup. The Epic of Gilgamesh (c. 18th century BC) caused quite
           | a lot of controversy when it was translated in 1870 due to
           | its striking similarity to many parts of the Hebrew Bible
           | (which was written MUCH later).
           | 
           | Similar controversies erupted over the stories of Osiris (c.
           | 25th century BC).
           | 
           | By the 10th century BC, almost all of the story themes that
           | we ascribe to more modern authorship had already been
           | written.
        
             | InitialLastName wrote:
             | The similarity between the EoG and Genesis flood stories
             | can probably be laid to the fact that the first major human
             | societies were built around flood plains of rivers in
             | regions that have otherwise stable climates. When your
             | society spends centuries in that situation, floods are the
             | single most important natural event that happens to you. If
             | would be shocking if they didn't feature prominently in
             | your stories.
        
               | giraffe_lady wrote:
               | There are other similarities between the epic of
               | gilgamesh and genesis beyond just the flood, it's a very
               | interesting subject imo. Ultimately both were originally
               | oral traditions long before they were written anywhere,
               | both emerging out of the ancient east mediterranean/west
               | asian cultural milieu.
               | 
               | IIRC the current scholarly consensus is that the shared
               | parts represent two surviving variants of an even earlier
               | story that was widely told across cultures in that
               | region.
        
               | mqefjh wrote:
               | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_flood_myths
               | 
               | https://www.livius.org/articles/misc/great-
               | flood/flood6-para...
               | 
               | I established this comparison table with ChatGPT:
               | 
               | https://markdownpastebin.com/?id=a97c76a889aa42038b877bf2
               | 5bd...
        
               | whatwhaaaaat wrote:
               | Why do we think peoples of the past would be unable to
               | distinguish between a normal river flooding and a "world
               | ending" flood? What about the ~450 feet of sea level rise
               | in the last 15k years?
        
               | rcxdude wrote:
               | They almost certainly could, but also they would also
               | almost certainly be prone to the same kind of
               | embellishments of such stories as they are passed on.
        
               | neffy wrote:
               | The other quite reasonable hypothesis is that these are
               | tales of the fairly rapid sea level rises that
               | accompanied the end of the last ice age as the breaking
               | of ice dams in the north released massive glacial floods
               | into the North Atlantic and Pacific.
        
               | TeaBrain wrote:
               | These people's "world" would have been a relatively small
               | area.
        
               | mistercheph wrote:
               | The whole premise of our present civilization is that
               | every one before us was a nose picking drooler, and that
               | we have more to say to the past then the past has to tell
               | us about ourselves.
               | 
               | We lack the collective self consciousness to see
               | ourselves through the eyes of the people of other times,
               | thinking through what it means to be understood through
               | artifact, and the distortions it produces.
               | 
               | The closest we come is prophesying that future
               | generations will blame us for the destruction of the
               | natural world and climate of earth. That is a thin mask
               | for our age's narcissistic fixation with producing myths
               | of its own apocalyptic world-ending power.
               | 
               | The people of the future probably won't think of us as
               | bad, evil doers, that destroyed the natural world for
               | future generations with no care but for ourselves and our
               | consumption, if they are anything like us, they will more
               | likely think of us as having one hand digging for gold
               | where the sun don't shine while the other stuffs hot,
               | fresh cheeseburgers into mouth, unibrow freshly dripping
               | with sweat.
        
               | lawlessone wrote:
               | Theres a lot to unpack here...
        
               | jcranmer wrote:
               | At the most accelerated rate of sea level rise, meltwater
               | pulse 1A, sea levels rose at about 1-2 inches per year
               | (about 10 times current sea-level rise rates, FWIW).
               | 
               | While it's commonly used as an explanation for the
               | prevalence of flood myths throughout the world, I just
               | don't buy it. That level of sea level rise just isn't
               | going to come across as world-ending flood; it's going to
               | be noticeable over time, but even sedentary cultures
               | along the coastlines who are the most impacted by the
               | rise are going to easily capable of dealing with it.
               | 
               | To me, the more parsimonious explanation is... it's just
               | extending the metaphor of a flash flood. There's already
               | a pretty consistent metaphor of ritual cleansing among
               | multiple cultures. Flash floods are pretty common in many
               | climates, and especially in an alluvial flood plain, the
               | utter devastation of a major flood is readily apparent.
               | Combine the two of them with a metaphorical story of the
               | world being so wrong that everybody needs to be swept
               | away and... why _not_ use a flood to explain the
               | destruction of the entire world? What other disaster
               | would you choose instead?
        
               | kibwen wrote:
               | _> That level of sea level rise just isn 't going to come
               | across as world-ending flood_
               | 
               | I'm entirely open to being skeptical about meltwater
               | pulse 1A being responsible for the universal flood myth,
               | but I don't agree with this refutation.
               | 
               | Many of our stories do not exist to relate literal
               | events, they exist to explain natural phenomenons. And
               | there are many ways for humans to frame these
               | explanations, but for whatever reason the human brain
               | seems hardwired to prefer stories, so the explanations
               | that survived to be transmitted through the ages were the
               | ones that happened to take the form of stories.
               | 
               | So rather than saying "the pulse event wasn't rapid
               | enough, therefore it can't explain the story" is IMO too
               | hasty. Consider a sedentary people living on the coast,
               | where a child asks her grandmother where their ancestors
               | are buried, to which the grandmother responds by
               | gesturing out at the Persian Gulf where, 60 miles from
               | shore, their village once clung to the coast 500 years
               | ago. It only takes one curious child asking "why?" and
               | one bored grandmother willing to come up with a story to
               | get the ball rolling on a tale that still gets told
               | 10,000 years later (a tale that, indeed, would likely
               | also have been informed by the experience of annual river
               | flooding).
        
               | DiogenesKynikos wrote:
               | The similarities between the Epic of Gilgamesh and the
               | Genesis flood story are far too extensive to be due to
               | chance.
               | 
               | For example, compare the following passages, describing
               | how Noah / Utnapishtim let out birds to search for dry
               | land, after their boats get grounded on a tall mountain.
               | 
               | Genesis 8:6-12:
               | 
               | After forty days Noah opened a window he had made in the
               | ark and sent out a raven, and it kept flying back and
               | forth until the water had dried up from the earth. Then
               | he sent out a dove to see if the water had receded from
               | the surface of the ground. But the dove could find
               | nowhere to perch because there was water over all the
               | surface of the earth; so it returned to Noah in the ark.
               | He reached out his hand and took the dove and brought it
               | back to himself in the ark. He waited seven more days and
               | again sent out the dove from the ark. When the dove
               | returned to him in the evening, there in its beak was a
               | freshly plucked olive leaf! Then Noah knew that the water
               | had receded from the earth. He waited seven more days and
               | sent the dove out again, but this time it did not return
               | to him.
               | 
               | Epic of Gilgamesh:
               | 
               | > When the seventh day dawned I loosed a dove and let her
               | go. She flew away, but finding no resting-place she
               | returned. Then I loosed a swallow, and she flew away but
               | finding no resting-place she returned. I loosed a raven,
               | she saw that the waters had retreated, she ate, she flew
               | around, she cawed, and she did not come back.
               | 
               | Historically, much of Genesis was likely written during
               | the Babylonian exile. It's not surprising at all that the
               | authors of Genesis borrowed a story that was extremely
               | well known in Babylon.
        
               | ars wrote:
               | > Historically, much of Genesis was likely written during
               | the Babylonian exile.
               | 
               | That's very very unlikely, there's too much other stuff
               | linked with it that is older than that. You might be able
               | to claim that when it was set to paper, but there's no
               | way Genesis itself is only from then.
               | 
               | According to Genesis Abraham lived at the time that
               | Gilgamesh was recorded, with Noah living a little before
               | then. It's quote possible Gilgamesh was written down from
               | their stories, rather than the other way around. Genesis
               | records how Abraham traveled widely telling his story,
               | including to kings.
        
               | DiogenesKynikos wrote:
               | There are many linguistic and historical hints that the
               | early chapters of Genesis were written during or after
               | the Babylonian captivity: things like mentions of "great"
               | cities that only became great during that era, borrowed
               | Babylonian phrases, various stories borrowed from the
               | Babylonians, etc.
               | 
               | There were certainly earlier stories that were included
               | in Genesis, but the actual writing occurred long after
               | those stories supposedly took place.
               | 
               | > It's quote possible Gilgamesh was written down from
               | their stories, rather than the other way around.
               | 
               | The Epic of Gilgamesh was written down long before there
               | was even a Hebrew language. It's one of the most ancient
               | written works.
        
               | Amezarak wrote:
               | At least portions of the Pentateuch certainly date prior
               | to the Exile, because we have direct archeological
               | evidence in the form of dated, physical scrolls.
               | 
               | At any rate both the Babylonians and the ancient
               | Israelites were Semitic peoples, so obviously they had a
               | shared background long before the Exile.
               | 
               | There are also many references in early Genesis that do
               | suggest it originates in traditions much older, including
               | references to great cities and powers that were long,
               | long gone by the Exile. This actually sent me quite
               | recently down some rabbit holes.
        
               | IncreasePosts wrote:
               | But if the floods are a yearly phenomenon, why would you
               | necessarily write about a single big flood?
        
               | anthk wrote:
               | Hint: end of the Ice Age.
        
               | InitialLastName wrote:
               | For the same reason people in places where it snows every
               | year still remember the really big blizzards: some floods
               | are worse than others. Any given generation will have a
               | flood they recall that set the (ahem) high water mark for
               | comparison to future floods.
        
               | IncreasePosts wrote:
               | I don't know, if I know it floods every year, and there
               | is a really big flood, I don't think I would act like the
               | flood was something completely out of the blue. I would
               | probably mention how it was much bigger than the normal
               | floods.
               | 
               | For that reason, I think an event completely different
               | from the yearly flooding is more likely, for example the
               | Minoan eruption or Black Sea deluge hypothesis.
        
               | lebuffon wrote:
               | I have often wondered if these flood stories document
               | something much larger that might have occurred as the
               | major ice sheets collapsed and raised the sea levels to
               | unseen heights.
               | 
               | But the one that is most intriguing IMHO is the
               | mediterranean sea event that happened but it is 6M years
               | ago. Could ancestors of genus Homo have passed that story
               | long for all that time even across speciation???
               | 
               | https://www.uu.nl/en/news/first-direct-proof-of-mega-
               | flood-i...
        
               | griffzhowl wrote:
               | If it's based on a real flood, they presumably follow a
               | power law distribution, where you have relatively
               | frequent "normal" floods, and progressively larger floods
               | are rarer and rarer, till you get an occasional
               | gargantuan one.
               | 
               | My guess though is it's probably a plot device where the
               | storyteller takes a known phenomenon and just exaggerates
               | it to magical-mythical proportions, which may contribute
               | to the story being repeated as it strikes the balance
               | between the relatability of the real phenomenon and the
               | attention-grabbing otherworldliness of its exaggerated
               | version.
        
               | brightball wrote:
               | You'd love watching Ancient Apocalypse on Netflix. It
               | essentially tracks this experience globally.
        
               | Ar-Curunir wrote:
               | And is completely made up nonsense pseudoscience
        
               | willy_k wrote:
               | The show itself sure, but Graham Hancock just happens to
               | be the loudest proponent of this theory, there is solid
               | evidence to support it, from Randall Carlson and a few
               | other people I'm not remembering atm.
               | 
               | https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Younger_Dryas_impact_hypo
               | the...
               | 
               | "Although initially sceptical, Wallace Broecker--the
               | scientist who proposed the conveyor shutdown hypothesis--
               | eventually agreed with the idea of an extraterrestrial
               | impact at the Younger Dryas boundary, and thought that it
               | had acted as a trigger on top of a system that was
               | already approaching instability."
        
             | ars wrote:
             | You would be interested to know that Abraham lived at the
             | time of the Gilgamesh epic, and he traveled widely telling
             | his story.
             | 
             | I'm aware there is no direct archeological evidence of
             | Abraham, except for Gilgamesh, so now you need to decide
             | which direction the knowledge flowed.
        
               | kstenerud wrote:
               | > You would be interested to know that Abraham lived at
               | the time of the Gilgamesh epic, and he traveled widely
               | telling his story.
               | 
               | Did he, though? There is archeological and contemporary
               | written historical evidence of an actual Gilgamesh. Not
               | so with Abraham.
               | 
               | The Abrahamic tradition was orally transmitted by a
               | people who for generations lived in Babylonian captivity
               | (1300 years after the earliest surviving copy of the Epic
               | of Gilgamesh in Old Balylonian, with the earliest partial
               | texts appearing 1600 years before), and was finally
               | written down 3 generations after they left Babylon.
        
           | red-iron-pine wrote:
           | King Arthur was probably an actual Welsh guy, who fought the
           | Romans (and/or maybe Saxons).
           | 
           | Few hundred years later they give him a magic sword and a
           | round table. Same idea, but with other cultures, religions,
           | etc.
        
           | Aerbil313 wrote:
           | Not at all. Islam can be verifiably traced back to a single
           | source, and mainstream Islam belief today is the same as it
           | was 1400 years ago.
        
       | cschmidt wrote:
       | Another article on the same topic:
       | 
       | https://cosmosmagazine.com/history/archaeology/indigenous-au...
        
       | discordance wrote:
       | Hopefully Rio Tinto don't blow it up:
       | 
       | https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2020/may/26/rio-t...
        
       | RoboTeddy wrote:
       | > slightly charred ends of the sticks had been cut specially to
       | stick into the fire, and both were coated in human or animal fat.
       | 
       | Wait, what? Where did they get human fat from...?
        
         | 4star3star wrote:
         | I also found this concerning.
        
         | alecst wrote:
         | In two books I've read recently ( _Conquistador_ about Hernan
         | Cortes, and _Civilized to Death_ which contrasts the lives of
         | modern humans with ancient ones) the authors mention how fat
         | was often poached from the dead -- animals and people alike. It
         | was used like a grease for all sorts of things, including
         | filling wounds to prevent infection. Pretty interesting stuff.
        
         | hbossy wrote:
         | Australians practiced ritualized cannibalism and infanticide as
         | late as XIX century.
        
       | delichon wrote:
       | I'm from a Jewish family that has been unable to pass down its
       | rituals over the past few generations. My great-grandparents were
       | observant on both sides. I have no religion or inherited rituals
       | to speak of.
       | 
       | So how does a ritual get successfully passed down for something
       | like 500 generations? What must the observer get from it that
       | motivated them so strongly to pass it along with the necessary
       | vigor? Was it something in the ritual itself, perhaps an altered
       | state drug experience? Or was the motivation just cultural?
       | 
       | Is there anything in our culture that could possibly have such
       | staying power, or is our cultural temperature so high that
       | nothing can survive for long?
        
         | troupo wrote:
         | > So how does a ritual get successfully passed down for
         | something like 500 generations?
         | 
         | There's literally nothing else but this.
         | 
         | > motivated them so strongly to pass it along with the
         | necessary vigor?
         | 
         | There's no vigor. There are almost no outside influences.
         | There's almost no rebellious thought. You're raised into this
         | life, and you know the rituals by heart from a young age.
         | 
         | > Is there anything in our culture that could possibly have
         | such staying power,
         | 
         | Any isolated/primitive culture with no outside influences.
         | Throughout the 20th century ethnographers collected thousands
         | of such rituals before they disappeared after contact with the
         | outside world.
        
         | pvg wrote:
         | You can still go to or host, say, a Seder, no? That kind of
         | cultural transmission doesn't rely on individual families but
         | in the case of the rituals of Judaism and lots of other
         | religions it seems to have been fairly effective.
        
         | ozmodiar wrote:
         | I assume by unable you mean they had to stop due to
         | persecution? It sounds from this article that this practice
         | that had survived so long also hit an abrupt stop when faced
         | with persecution from colonizers (at least that's why I'm
         | assuming they have to go by records from 1880 and not just ask
         | the current practitioners). I think this says more about the
         | ability for persecution to shut down a cultural practice more
         | than any quality that practice has to have to survive.
        
         | Publius_Enigma wrote:
         | Australian Aboriginal people, have very advanced social and
         | cultural structure. Australia is comprised of several thousand
         | different aboriginal groups and territories. Acceptance into
         | another community relied on endorsement from the elders of the
         | community you were leaving. Family bonds and ties are extremely
         | strong.
         | 
         | Hence, one explanation may be that participation was
         | essentially mandatory to be considered part of the community at
         | all, and to be recognised as an adult.
        
         | bitcoin_anon wrote:
         | Hmm, I'd say this is a problem that Jesus, the Rastafarians,
         | the Amish and your own tradition grappled with.
         | 
         | Jesus was in the world, but not of the world.
         | 
         | Rastafarians step one foot at a time out of Babylon.
         | 
         | The Amish have removed themselves for the most part, but they
         | are still somewhat free riders on the greater society.
         | 
         | Jews celebrate the sabbath. In this way, 6 days a week they are
         | of the world, and can share in its prosperity, but one day is
         | reserved for keeping the traditions.
        
         | Qem wrote:
         | > So how does a ritual get successfully passed down for
         | something like 500 generations?
         | 
         | Probably some combination of of a large pool of rituals in
         | traditional societies (so the probability of any of them
         | carrying over 500 generations is greater than that of a single
         | given one), high fertility (so if you don't feel inclined to
         | carry it, some of your siblings/cousins do) and utility (some
         | rituals may increase surviving odds of people that follow
         | them). This particular ritual don't seem very useful, but maybe
         | it has some unexpected benefical side effect, say, the plant
         | they traditionally picked the sticks from, when burned, could
         | shoo away insects that were potential vectors for disease
         | (completely made up example, just to make the point clearer).
        
         | swatcoder wrote:
         | > What must the observer get from it
         | 
         | The compulsion to raise and seek answers for questions like
         | this has a lot to do with it.
         | 
         | Over the last couple centuries, increasingly much of the world
         | has been inducted into a culture that looks at life from the
         | perspective of an individual, looks at that individual's life
         | through the lens of economy and benefit, and invites the
         | individual to approach that life as some engineer seeking
         | optimization.
         | 
         | For many, this way of seeing the world as economic individuals
         | is even projected onto the people of elsewhere and elsewhen,
         | taking for granted that they must have been doing the same
         | thing whether they knew it or not.
         | 
         | A different perspective sees ritual and tradition as the blood
         | and flesh of a community or legacy, and sees the community and
         | legacy that lives for hundreds or thousands of years as the far
         | more important thing than the individual that arrives and
         | leaves over the pittance of just a few decades.
         | 
         | For a community, carrying forward a ritual is like breathing,
         | and an individual who fully understands themselves as a
         | fleeting little lung cell in this long-lasting community
         | implicitly fulfills their role of perpetuating the community's
         | life by practicing the ritual.
         | 
         | But what's interesting is that asking questions framed like
         | yours is itself a kind of ritual, perpetuating a different (and
         | much more recently birthed) community, and there are countless
         | other rituals of "modernity" that we implicitly peform. These
         | rituals are so natural to us that we barely even recognize them
         | as something outside of us... the same, most likely, your
         | great-grandparents with theirs.
        
         | hbossy wrote:
         | The story of Pleiades might be as old as 100 000 years.
        
         | ekidd wrote:
         | > _So how does a ritual get successfully passed down for
         | something like 500 generations? What must the observer get from
         | it that motivated them so strongly to pass it along with the
         | necessary vigor?_
         | 
         | I think small, pre-literate societies on the edge of survival
         | rely heavily on "traditional" knowledge, and for very good
         | reasons.
         | 
         | One of my anthropology professors told me a story about a
         | village (I forget his source for this, but it sounded like he
         | had one). They had an old woman, probably in her 80s,
         | toothless, partly blind, and mostly immobile. She only survived
         | because of a significant ongoing effort of the village.
         | 
         | Then the village had a bad year, a famine. And the old woman
         | said, "This happened when I was a child. What you need to do is
         | take the leaves of such-and-such a plant. They're poisonous.
         | But if you beat them with rocks, soak them, and let them age a
         | bit, then they're disgusting but edible." And so the village
         | remained fed. The old woman was contributing to the village's
         | survival, because she was a source of mostly-forgotten
         | knowledge.
         | 
         | Similarly, we know that modern hunter-gatherers might be able
         | to find and identify 47 species of edible mushrooms in their
         | local climate. This knowledge base can easily be the equivalent
         | of a college education focused just on finding food.
         | 
         | Now, inland Australia is famously one of the most inhospitable
         | places in earth. Early European explorers noticed just how
         | difficult it was to survive there. But the locals someone
         | managed just fine. They knew all the tricks.
         | 
         | So my guess is that the kind of society which can remember how
         | to find and prepare 47 kinds of edible mushrooms, or which can
         | survive a famine that occurs every 75 years, or which can
         | survive inland Australia, is a society with significant respect
         | for ancestral knowledge. Learning the rituals may often be a
         | matter of life and death.
         | 
         | The modern world is different because we have books, and
         | science, and high division of labor. If we forget how to do our
         | grandparents' jobs, someone else will still learn. Or the
         | nature of work will change so much that a new generation needs
         | to learn a new way of working.
        
         | ars wrote:
         | The main thing is you need to live near other people with the
         | same rituals.
         | 
         | I suspect your grandparents moved to the US after the holocaust
         | and settled somewhere far from other Jews. Judaism can not be
         | practiced in isolation, it was not setup that way.
         | 
         | Also, nothing stopping you from finding a Chabad near you and
         | reclaiming at least a portion of your heritage.
        
       | empath75 wrote:
       | > "Australia kept the memory of its first peoples alive thanks to
       | a powerful oral tradition that enabled it to be passed on,"
       | Delannoy said.
       | 
       | > "However in our societies, memory has changed since we switched
       | to the written word, and we have lost this sense."
       | 
       | I sort of think that this is a "what's water?" thing, because a
       | lot of our ancient prehistorical traditions and practices that
       | continued into the historical era and beyond are so embedded with
       | how we see how ourselves and act and behave that it's impossible
       | for us to even notice them. There's a lot that we have looked at
       | in ancient sites and have just known what the purpose was for
       | because we still do the same thing now, or at least we had
       | recorded uses for it from historical texts, it's just said to be
       | "obvious" and not really worth commenting about how interesting
       | it is that we preserved these oral traditions.
       | 
       | There's a kind of exoticism/noble savage thing going on here, I
       | think.
        
         | tivert wrote:
         | Yeah. I can think of one ritual that's probably even older:
         | burying the dead.
         | 
         | However what interesting about this tradition is the degree of
         | specificity that was preserved with this ritual (e.g. stick of
         | same type of wood, coated with fat, put in a small fire to
         | break), none of which has any real practical purpose.
        
       | spacecadet wrote:
       | Its always awesome to read about finding early human tools and
       | techniques. But, could the sticks have been 12,000 years old, but
       | the event far less?
       | 
       | Lots of people asking how they had human fat... you poke
       | someone's wound with a hot stick, there is probably fat on it
       | after. So they may have been using cauterization.
       | 
       | They may also have been cooking small animals while trying to
       | avoid the light, smell, and smoke plume a larger fire creates.
       | Which would attract predators.
        
         | dudeinjapan wrote:
         | It had kangaroo fat too, leading me to infer that they were
         | trying to create a super-race of human-kangaroo hybrids.
        
       | sambeau wrote:
       | It occurred to me recently that tig/tag has probably been passed
       | down through oral tradition from child to child for millennia.
       | It's possible that it's older than homo-sapiens, older than the
       | taming of fire. Millions of years of tradition.
       | 
       | And it still being passed on orally, child-to-child.
        
         | psychoslave wrote:
         | What is tig/tag?
        
           | BurningFrog wrote:
           | My parents failed me too on that!
        
           | popol12 wrote:
           | I guess https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tag_(game)
        
             | angstrom wrote:
             | My three-year-old daughter plays this with cat. It's a
             | cross-species thing that is possibly part of mammalian
             | brain development in origin.
             | 
             | The cat is less than one year old. Our 17 year old cat does
             | not engage in this at all and hisses at the kitten for even
             | trying to start a game of tag. This makes me wonder if that
             | origin is more related to predator/prey.
        
               | ViktorRay wrote:
               | In regards to your 17 year old cat...
               | 
               | All mammalian species have something in common.
               | 
               | When mammals are young we all love playing. This is true
               | for humans, dogs, elephants, primates, cats and so on.
               | 
               | But play ends up disappearing as the mammal gets older.
               | Compare a playful baby elephant to an adult elephant. The
               | baby elephant loves playing. Not just with other
               | elephants but with humans and dogs and so on. But older
               | elephants are more likely to watch and less likely to
               | play.
               | 
               | This is why your 1 year old cat loves playing while your
               | 17 year old cat doesn't.
               | 
               | It's a very interesting phenomenon
        
               | llamaimperative wrote:
               | Play is a semi-structured way of learning important
               | skills! Evolution really just has to make it engaging
               | enough for you to learn the skills, not much of a reason
               | for it to persist after that.
        
               | fsckboy wrote:
               | > _not much of a reason for it to persist after that_
               | 
               | for working out and keeping fit!... oh, hmmm, I guess
               | that's glaring evidence that working out and keeping fit
               | are not beneficial after all
        
               | llamaimperative wrote:
               | I am clearly speaking from the perspective of
               | evolutionary pressures. And you're right, there's very
               | little evolutionary pressure on working out, staying fit,
               | staying happy, etc. etc. beyond the bare minimum required
               | to ensure propagation.
        
               | ViktorRay wrote:
               | You don't need to play to stay fit.
               | 
               | Adult lions don't play like baby lions yet adult lions
               | are still fit.
        
               | ajuc wrote:
               | Once you can't reproduce and can't help with reproduction
               | evolution doesn't care if you stay fit.
        
               | bongodongobob wrote:
               | Well that's not the point of play to begin with, it's
               | learning motor skills, so your logic doesn't make any
               | sense.
        
               | triceratops wrote:
               | Dogs seem to want to play until they're physically unable
               | to.
        
               | danans wrote:
               | There's a theory that the domestication of dogs selected
               | for the retention of juvenile behavioral traits into
               | adulthood (non-suspiciousness, playfulness), vs wolves
               | who do not retain those traits.
               | 
               | It's even thought that the first domesticated dogs pre-
               | domesticated themselves to an extent because the less
               | suspicious wolves were able to use human settlements'
               | trash middens as a food source.
        
               | justsomehnguy wrote:
               | It's just knees.
        
               | slibhb wrote:
               | Young squirrels also play tag.
        
               | astrange wrote:
               | The cat might not want to move as much anymore if it has
               | arthritis.
        
               | jjtheblunt wrote:
               | Predator vs prey i thought too
        
           | tivert wrote:
           | The game tag, as in "Tag! You're it!"
        
             | sambeau wrote:
             | In parts of the UK it's often called 'tig'
        
           | dark-star wrote:
           | never heard of it as well. Maybe he means the game of "tag"?
        
           | walthamstow wrote:
           | A name so regional that it featured on the NY Times' UK &
           | Ireland accent/dialect quiz
           | 
           | https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/02/15/upshot/britis.
           | ..
        
           | lawlessone wrote:
           | >What is tig/tag?
           | 
           | the chain is broken..
        
             | grimgrin wrote:
             | The chain never grows without a "tag you're it"
        
               | fsckboy wrote:
               | yes it does: tig, you're it!
        
             | qingcharles wrote:
             | We just repaired the link :)
        
           | sambeau wrote:
           | In parts of the UK it's often called 'tig' in the US and
           | other parts of the UK it's called 'tag'
        
             | mauvehaus wrote:
             | Fittingly, it was a Yorkshireman who discovered you could
             | use inert gasses other than argon for gas-tungsten arc
             | welding.
        
         | notarobot123 wrote:
         | Not quite as old but another example of an enduring child-to-
         | child cultural transmission is the daring right of passage that
         | is Chappy/Knicky-Knocky Nine Doors/Ding dong ditch[0].
         | 
         | [0] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knock,_knock,_ginger
        
           | briankelly wrote:
           | Ring around the roses as well:
           | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ring_a_Ring_o%27_Roses
        
       | openrisk wrote:
       | Its impossible to tell, but the sense of passage of time must
       | have been dramatically different in earlier periods of human
       | development.
       | 
       | Persistent rituals passed on from elders to youngsters, oral
       | transmission of huge poems and other such "low tech" information
       | tools must have given some structure to what otherwise might have
       | felt as an eternal reboot.
        
         | tolerance wrote:
         | The persistency that you're describing is key. I'd like to
         | think that previous generations were far more content with time
         | and what is associated with it. The mundane of the day-by-day,
         | aging, death, etc.
        
         | Anon84 wrote:
         | I read somewhere (don't recall exactly where) that your sense
         | of the passage of time is directly related to how much things
         | change because that impacts how many memories you form.
         | Essentially, when every day is the same, not many new memories
         | are created, so you don't notice time passing (New Years was
         | just a few weeks ago, how can it be July already!), but when
         | things are constantly changing, time passes much more slowly.
         | When you're a child and non-stop learning and exploring, 3
         | months seems like an eternity.
         | 
         | I wonder if technology development has a similar effect. When
         | the world essentially remains unchanged for your entire life,
         | things must seem much faster with days blending together.
        
           | qingcharles wrote:
           | Having been to jail, here's what they say, "the days pass
           | like years, and the years pass like days." Which is a hugely
           | accurate interpretation of what happens. Nothing happens all
           | day, and every day is the same, so the days drag on in the
           | most mind-numbingly tedious fashion. But then you wake up and
           | you notice six months have passed without you being able to
           | name a single thing that happened.
        
         | biztos wrote:
         | Herzog talks about this a bit in his cave-painting movie[0].
         | It's fascinating to think that for thousands of years, our
         | ancestors lived without any significant change to their world.
         | I like to imagine that they were pretty happy with that
         | (subject to the normal animal stresses of survival) -- but as
         | you say, it's impossible to tell.
         | 
         | [0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cave_of_Forgotten_Dreams
         | 
         | Trailer: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wmMUlNeLApU
        
       | mritchie712 wrote:
       | this ritual likely had a real effect on the person (similar to
       | placebo effect). They probably wouldn't have kept it up for 12k
       | years if they weren't getting some tangible improvement.
        
         | xdennis wrote:
         | Multiple religions are thousands of years old and they can't
         | all be true.
        
           | llamaimperative wrote:
           | Placebo effect absolutely can yield effects for all
           | religions. That's pretty much what's interesting about it: it
           | doesn't matter much what stimulus is producing the effect.
        
           | adrianN wrote:
           | They don't have to be true to have an effect on people.
        
             | tgv wrote:
             | I think it argues against the claim that it must have had a
             | (real) healing effect for it to be passed along.
             | 
             | People are quick to call in the placebo effect, as a
             | scientific sounding explanation, but is nobody reminded of
             | faith healing? People get up out of wheel chairs, cast away
             | their crutches and say they've been healed.
        
               | krapp wrote:
               | >but is nobody reminded of faith healing? People get up
               | out of wheel chairs, cast away their crutches and say
               | they've been healed.
               | 
               | That's just common fakery.
        
           | greenhearth wrote:
           | It doesn't sound like anything pure religious, but more of a
           | psychotherapeutic technique, probably coupled with some folk
           | medicine too.
        
       | utkarsh858 wrote:
       | In India, there is a custom of passing ancient knowledge through
       | poetic verses. Every poetic verses is sung in a specific 'meter'.
       | If there is a discrepancy in recitation then remembering and
       | passing knowledge 'letter by letter' can not succeed. Many of the
       | verses are thousands of years old. I read some describing an
       | ancient extinct river ~7000 years ago, later rediscovered through
       | satellite imagery (don't know the right term).
        
         | dyauspitr wrote:
         | The river is the Sarasvati.
        
         | RandomCitizen12 wrote:
         | That's an interesting way to do a checksum
        
           | nsenifty wrote:
           | The metre is a basic checksum, but there are more elaborated
           | systems (pathas) of chanting verses that aids in correct
           | learning and memorization.
           | 
           | Some of it is described here -
           | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vedic_chant#Oral_transmission
           | 
           | An example in action -
           | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KLdq15ptqUs
        
         | swatcoder wrote:
         | Yeah, in language that suits HN, formal poetic structure
         | amounts to error correction in oral tradition.
         | 
         | It dramatically narrows the possibilities of what idea or word
         | or sound or whatever could fit in any particular place in the
         | verse, making it easier to memorize and accurately recite.
         | Clever (and some blundering) poets and changes in language
         | still set up these recitations to evolve away from whatever
         | they originally were, but the original seeds linger a long,
         | long time.
        
           | verisimi wrote:
           | Yes poetry is a sort of decent checksum.
           | 
           | However I think parables are an even better checksum, as they
           | can be translated also, but if the meaning is altered the
           | story fails to be coherent. Parables are imo, the best form
           | of information transference across time, imo.
        
             | Hypomixolydian wrote:
             | This is what Manly P. Hall described as "acroamatic cipher"
             | in his book "The Secret Teachings Of All Ages" [chapter
             | "The Cryptogram as a factor in Symbolic Philosophy"]
        
             | roughly wrote:
             | Meaning is culturally contingent, though - the appropriate
             | "moral" of a parable can change as culture changes around
             | it, which can lead to changes to the parable itself.
             | 
             | For a contrived example, 100 years ago, the idea that one
             | would defy one's parents and pursue one's own dreams would
             | have been frowned upon, and any parables referencing that
             | action would clearly contain the moral that one should
             | listen to one's parents. Today, that would be an almost
             | unthinkable moral - discard your dreams and stick to
             | whatever hidebound business your parents were in? Surely we
             | got something wrong in the translation here.
             | 
             | Written in meter, though, clearly the only word that fits
             | here is "shan't", not "must".
        
               | verisimi wrote:
               | I bet you've not seen a mustard seed, but you still get
               | what is being said, in the parable of the mustard seed.
               | 
               | If the parable is talking to a foundational reality,
               | rather than cultural situations, I think it can endure.
               | 
               | I get what you are saying, but even parables don't have
               | 'the truth'. I would imagine that there may even be
               | parables that argue the opposite position. And both,
               | opposing positions could be right, depending on the
               | context.
        
           | 0_____0 wrote:
           | Poetic structure is such a strong framework that linguists
           | have been able to recover information about the dialect and
           | pronunciation of English in the time of Shakespeare, from
           | Shakespearean works.
        
             | mcguire wrote:
             | Tyger Tyger, burning bright,          In the forests of the
             | night;          What immortal hand or eye,          Could
             | frame thy fearful symmetry?
        
               | kelipso wrote:
               | If you're alluding to the pronunciation of symmetry, I'm
               | pretty sure eye and symmetry was specifically meant not
               | to rhyme in order to throw off the reader slightly. Guess
               | that hints at how difficult recovery of pronunciation can
               | be.
        
           | vlovich123 wrote:
           | But language itself and pronunciation of that language shifts
           | over time. Probably better than hand transcription, but 7000
           | years is a long time.
        
             | endofreach wrote:
             | "A dog walks into a bar and says, 'I cannot see a thing.
             | I'll open this one.'"
        
               | jamiek88 wrote:
               | The old Sumerian joke?
               | 
               | I love reading the posited explanations for that joke in
               | academia and when it's posted randomly people usually
               | have a stab at it too.
        
               | bbarnett wrote:
               | Hmm. Blind people called dogs, because they have to use
               | their nose instead of their eyes?
               | 
               | Not sure how that's funny though.
               | 
               | Makes me wonder, dogs supposedly have evolved to be
               | better companions of humans, and lateral gene transfer is
               | a thing. I wonder of they had much poorer sight 7k years
               | ago, or perhaps, a popular local breed did.
               | 
               | (Naturally, to support my blind hypothesis, and walking
               | into a bar instead of seeing it)
        
               | rnhmjoj wrote:
               | IIRC it's a pun on the "not seeing" verb being literally
               | "having one's eyes closed".
        
         | greenhearth wrote:
         | An example of this may be the healing spells found in the
         | Merseburg charms, which probably came from a common Indo-
         | European origin somewhere in the Eurasian steppes.
        
         | golergka wrote:
         | Isn't that how ancient Greek texts (that are attributed to
         | mythical Homer) have been passed down too?
        
           | mrmetanoia wrote:
           | yes, many cultures had/have oral traditions that include
           | poetics. The Finnish "Kalevala," is another epic written down
           | from an oral poem/song.
        
             | Cthulhu_ wrote:
             | I'm 99% confident (I have no sources because I'm lazy) the
             | written versions of the various bible books were originally
             | orally passed-down stories as well. Weren't the stories
             | about Jesus written down ~70 years after his passing?
        
         | xienze wrote:
         | That's clever and all, but how can you actually be sure the
         | message was completely unchanged over 7000 years without an
         | original written record? I get that special recitation tricks
         | can make it harder to mess up, but I don't think you can
         | definitively say the information never once changed.
        
         | Ar-Curunir wrote:
         | The Saraswati description in the RgVeda is not 7000 years old.
         | The text itself is believed to be only around 3500 years old
        
       | poulpy123 wrote:
       | It's not the first time that I read hypothesis of Aboriginal oral
       | traditions that stayed for much longer than anywhere else in the
       | world. I wonder why it would be the case there and not elsewhere
        
         | brabel wrote:
         | Probably because they were some of the only ones to remain
         | almost entirely isolated from the rest of the world while
         | civilization was happening elsewhere. They never developed
         | writing. The rest of the word was quite likely very similar to
         | them before writing.
         | 
         | The article mentions that because we have invented writing,
         | passing down oral traditions became much less important to us,
         | and hence our societies have "lost" some of the old tales,
         | paradoxically. That's because while people write down things
         | they think is important, they couldn't have known that unlike
         | oral information (which adapts as language evolves, imperfectly
         | but enough to keep the basic structure of the original), the
         | means on which they write decay rapidly, and due to the speed
         | at which language evolves (without modern technology, a few
         | hundred years is enough for isolated regions to develop their
         | own language branches), much of what was written in the distant
         | past would become unintelligible even to people living in the
         | area, even if it managed to survive (though modern techniques
         | using computers seem to have made it easier to do so). Not to
         | mention that in much of the world, civilizations were
         | constantly being replaced by newer ones or migrating to
         | different areas as their neighbors expanded and faded. Much of
         | the ancient texts in any given area would make no sense to the
         | new inhabitants, who would have no qualms about destroying
         | everything (in fact, they probably burned everything down as
         | soon as they conquered a new area).
         | 
         | Basically, the written word turned out to be much less
         | resilient than people probably believed it would be. I think we
         | are making the same mistake with digital information. It may
         | look "eternal" but try to find websites from the early
         | internet, for example. Almost everything is disappearing
         | quickly.
        
           | fsckboy wrote:
           | > _Probably because they were some of the only ones to remain
           | almost entirely isolated from the rest of the world while
           | civilization was happening elsewhere._
           | 
           | and, migrating farthest from Africa (can tell by red-shift :)
           | they git the oldest branch of our oldest stories
        
       | rhelz wrote:
       | Kinda sad that the ritual was a way to curse somebody. 12,000
       | years of hurting each other.
       | 
       | Side Node: computer programing is kinda cool. It is a set of
       | incantations which actually _does_ work.
       | 
       | EDIT: Hello, all you down-voters and people who say I should read
       | the article before commenting :-) I to, don't like it when people
       | just start commenting without reading the article.
       | 
       | I _also_ don 't like it when people take what a pop-sci writer
       | too seriously. In this case, I was interested enough to read the
       | original article in Nature, where it says this practice was for
       | cursing (see quote at the end)
       | 
       | Don't forget Gell-Man's Amnesia :-)
       | 
       | "Howitt described how magic was employed to harm a victim using a
       | ritual fire and a wooden object smeared or attached with a piece
       | of human or animal fat (major sources of lipids): "In all these
       | tribes a general, I may say almost an universal, prac- tice has
       | been to procure some article belonging to the intended victim. A
       | piece of his hair, some of his faeces, a bone picked by him and
       | dropped, a shred of his opossum rug, or at the present time of
       | his clothes, will suffice, or if nothing else can be got he may
       | be watched until he is seen to spit, when his saliva is carefully
       | picked up with a piece of wood and made use of for his
       | destruction..."
        
         | notjtrig wrote:
         | >One ritual involved tying something that belonged to a sick
         | person to the end of a throwing stick smeared in human or
         | kangaroo fat. The stick was thrust into the ground before a
         | small fire was lit underneath.
         | 
         | >"The mulla-mullung would then chant the name of the sick
         | person, and once the stick fell, the charm was complete," a
         | Monash University statement said.
        
         | armoredkitten wrote:
         | Where are you getting that from? The article states it was a
         | healing ritual -- the ritual was something done to someone who
         | was _already_ sick. Presumably...to make them better. I have no
         | idea where you got the idea that it was intended as a curse.
        
         | martin293 wrote:
         | That's not how I understood it. From the article:
         | 
         | > "The mulla-mullung would then chant the name of the sick
         | person, and once the stick fell, the charm was complete,"
         | 
         | Which to me seems like a healing ritual.
        
           | rhelz wrote:
           | Alas, the writer of this pop-sci article got it wrong---see
           | my edited OP which contains a quote from the original nature
           | article.
        
         | PsylentKnight wrote:
         | Where did it say it's a curse? The first line says it's a
         | healing ritual
        
           | rhelz wrote:
           | You have to go look up the Nature article which this po-sci
           | article was written from.
        
         | digging wrote:
         | Well, I read an article once discussing the social good of
         | cursing each other. The essence was this:
         | 
         | Yes, it's an attempt to do harm. You're mad at someone, perhaps
         | they wronged you, and you want something bad to happen to them.
         | So ask a demon to spoil their grain, or to tear their clothes.
         | (In other words, pray that entropy will happen - you can't go
         | wrong!) If you didn't have demons you could ask for help and
         | you were motivated to do them harm, you'd have to take matters
         | into your own hands. By slandering them or harassing them or
         | attacking them. Much better for society that we genuinely
         | believe we can get our revenge by _not doing anything at all_.
         | 
         | Struggling to find the article now though...
        
           | rhelz wrote:
           | This is a very profound point. We have to actually live with
           | each other, and even for small groups, frictions arise. As
           | the groups get larger and larger, friction intensifies. There
           | has to be some way to blow off steam.
           | 
           | Kind of like how instead of cities fighting each other, we
           | have their sports teams fight each other in a ritualized,
           | ersatz combat.
        
         | mmaniac wrote:
         | It's not a surprise to me that computer programs are so widely
         | compared to magic spells, from SICP to SMT, but it remains a
         | cool observation.
        
         | cess11 wrote:
         | Curses are what you do instead of beating someone with a stick.
         | It's an outsourcing of justice to nature or spirits rather than
         | taking it into your own hands.
        
           | rhelz wrote:
           | This is a very profound point. I suppose it's kind of like
           | what the olympics are supposed to do: how about we all fight
           | each other in a ritualized game, instead of with sticks and
           | stones, strikes and drones.
        
         | greenhearth wrote:
         | It says nothing about cursing. Please read article first before
         | commenting.
        
           | rhelz wrote:
           | I read the original Nature article, not the one written by an
           | underpaid and overworked english major who wrote the popular
           | article.
        
             | greenhearth wrote:
             | Then maybe you cite it? And what a shitty assumption to
             | make of the writer, btw. And also, what the fuck kind of a
             | condescending attitude to have for the English major? Maybe
             | if you were an English major we wouldn't be posting all
             | this nonsense right now.
        
               | rhelz wrote:
               | Mr./Ms. greenheart, whoever you are, life is too short to
               | have hostile conversations.
               | 
               | As far as a condescending attitude---I did say they were
               | underpaid and overworked, didn't I? When you are
               | overworked don't you start to make mistakes as well? I
               | sure do.
        
         | teddyh wrote:
         | Computer programs do _nothing_. It's _computers_ , i.e. actual
         | hardware, which work. We forget this at our peril.
        
           | krapp wrote:
           | If computer programs do nothing, why do we need them?
        
             | teddyh wrote:
             | A computer can run them, and thereby accomplish things.
        
               | krapp wrote:
               | So programs can affect the internal state of the
               | computer, thus resulting in useful work being done which
               | would otherwise not be done in the absence of said
               | program. Which means programs do something, rather than
               | nothing.
        
               | teddyh wrote:
               | This is like claiming books change the world. In one
               | sense they do, but in a a bit more real sense it's
               | _people reading books_ who change the world. A crucial
               | distinction.
        
           | rhelz wrote:
           | _chuckle_ computer programs are the incantations we do to
           | make computers do what we want. Quite a bit like shamans did
           | incantations to get the world to do what they want. Only ours
           | actually works. Or, it does if we can debug them.
        
       | oigursh wrote:
       | Interplanetary Generation Ships might have a chance?
        
       | aadhavans wrote:
       | Slightly off-topic, but I recently learned that the Aboriginals
       | may have had contact with Tamil people from South India.
       | 
       | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tamil_bell?useskin=vector
        
       | pradn wrote:
       | There are a few examples of oral cultures ensuring perfect
       | transmission across a large expanse of time.
       | 
       | One example is the several different recitation styles used to
       | memorize Sanskrit verses. These methods give memorizers multiple
       | ways to remember a line, and also prevent errors like the
       | inadvertent mixing of adjacent words (" euphonic combination").
       | The "checksumming schemes" are far more elaborate than you'd
       | imagine. [1] The result is perfect transmission of text and its
       | pronunciation, including pitch accent.
       | 
       | Another example is a "multi-party verification" scheme in some
       | Aboriginal Australian cultures. "... storytelling among
       | contemporary Aboriginal people can involve the deliberate
       | tracking of teaching responsibilities. For example, a man teaches
       | the stories of his country to his children. His son has his
       | knowledge of those stories judged by his sister's children--for
       | certain kin are explicitly tasked with ensuring that those
       | stories are learned and recounted properly--and people take those
       | responsibilities seriously. ... the 'owner-manager' relationship,
       | requiring a story to be discussed explicitly across three
       | generations of a patriline, constitutes a cross-generational
       | mechanism which may be particularly successful at maximising
       | precision in replication of a story across successive
       | generations". [2]
       | 
       | [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vedic_chant
       | 
       | [2]: "Aboriginal Memories of Inundation of the Australian Coast
       | Dating from More than 7000 Years Ago", Patrick D. Nunn,
       | https://doi.org/10.1080/00049182.2015.1077539
        
         | abc_lisper wrote:
         | I think the harsh conditions in Australia, where there a
         | thousand ways to die, put the onus on truth and preservation of
         | it in the oral tradition. Unlike most other cultures where it's
         | kind of ok to gradually deviate from the truth. It is worth
         | paying attention to the aborigine stories.They have also made
         | astronomical observations that are pretty accurate to the date.
         | https://cosmosmagazine.com/space/australias-indigenous-peopl...
         | 
         | Singing/Ballads are also popular way of preserving information
         | fidelity. Homer's works were based on ballads. We don't put
         | premium on memory now, but before the invention of printing
         | press, memory techniques were widely studied and used.
        
           | kelipso wrote:
           | It kind of feels like a local optima situation where they
           | relied on memory so much that they didn't feel the need for
           | writing. Either that or the fact that there was no writing
           | for so long resulted in them specialising in memory
           | techniques a lot.
        
         | griffzhowl wrote:
         | I've also heard it about the Buddhist tradition, that at least
         | three groups of monks would memorize parts of the canon, and
         | they would preiodically come together to chant it. If one group
         | differed from the other two, they would know that's an error
         | (at least to fairly high probability). This seems to have been
         | an accurate method of transmission since independently written-
         | down versions separated by centuries of oral tradition in
         | Gandhara and Sri Lanka are very similar.
        
           | roenxi wrote:
           | There are worse schemes, but that is barely comparable to
           | Vedic chanting.
           | 
           | 3-pick-2 as a method is quite good but also quite vulnerable
           | to a bunch of transmission errors beyond simple memory
           | issues. Over long periods of time there is a higher risk of
           | group think or status plays leading to wild changes.
           | 
           | Of course the vedas aren't immune, but it is a lot more
           | effort to get them wrong than just a few people thinking "we
           | want to change the story". A group would have to be hugely
           | motivated to successfully change the chant.
        
       | swayvil wrote:
       | When you understand it you call it "science" or "technology".
       | When you don't understand it you call it "religion" or "ritual".
       | 
       | These are smart people. Just like us. Time is money for them just
       | like it is for us. They probably had a very good, practical
       | reason to do this "ritual". As surely as tapping keyboards.
        
         | dudeinjapan wrote:
         | Incorrect. "Science" is "science" because it works in a
         | reproducible fashion--same applies to "technology", "modern
         | medicine", etc. We don't have to fully grok a _how_ a medicine
         | works (example: SSRI anti-depressants) understand basically
         | that it _does_ work. We do need a double-blind study however.
         | 
         | "Rituals" need not have any efficacy at all. Surely burning a
         | stick smeared in kangaroo fat does nothing to cure ailments.
         | It's entirely possible the only reason is "this is what our
         | tribe has always done." Certainly rituals create tribe cohesion
         | and can have a placebo effect, but it is a fallacy to equate
         | these things to science-based medicine. "Tapping keyboards" is
         | not a "ritual"--we are not typing to appease the great silicon
         | gods--we are doing it as means of communication and performing
         | economically valuable work.
         | 
         | Rituals which do seem to work, e.g. plant-based medicine, can
         | be used as an "intuition pump" for scientific study. The fact
         | that a plant has been used for thousands of years is a good
         | sign that it may have some effect, but that effect still needs
         | to be verified.
        
         | dkarl wrote:
         | I think you're assuming they're a lot smarter than us, not
         | "just like us."
        
           | swayvil wrote:
           | Not smarter, just different. People in Germany speak German.
           | I can't speak German. That doesn't make them smarter.
        
       | userabchn wrote:
       | In Indonesia there are 35k+ year old cave "paintings" of hand
       | imprints, and apparently it is still a custom for some in the
       | area to put their hand imprint on their house. It's probably in
       | the same area where just today they announced finding the oldest
       | cave painting: https://www.reuters.com/science/worlds-oldest-
       | cave-painting-....
        
       | jnurmine wrote:
       | One thing that caught my eye was "both were coated in human or
       | animal fat" and "throwing stick smeared in human or kangaroo
       | fat".
       | 
       | I mean the "human fat" part, that seemed strange.
       | 
       | Getting human fat non-lethally is probably impossible using
       | technology from 12000 years ago. If the fat was obtained from a
       | human corpse, it would rule out at least burying the body. But
       | still, wouldn't obtaining the fat from a non-buried corpse
       | disturb the deceased on some religious-spiritual level?
       | 
       | Or was it common to mutilate dead enemies or something like that?
       | 
       | Edit: Oh, OK, I saw others asking the same question and replies
       | which shed light on this.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2024-07-03 23:01 UTC)