Grave goods and why?

Forum Monk · Post by **Forum Monk** » Thu Mar 01, 2007 11:54 am

IMO HN probably idled away a fair number hours in the caves too. HS had more than cave art. They carved jewelry, they decorated possessions, they tattooed their skin. An artistic species finds many ways of expressing itself. Some will endure, some won't.

Because of the ochre and flowers, some state outright that HE buried their dead cermoniously, but do we have other evidence?

Digit · Post by **Digit** » Thu Mar 01, 2007 11:58 am

Like I said Monk, it depends on how you view the evidence. Also in the areas where the two overlapped could we tell art from HSN from art from HSS?

Post by **Minimalist** » Thu Mar 01, 2007 12:01 pm

http://www.britarch.ac.uk/BA/ba66/feat1.shtml

marduk · Post by **marduk** » Thu Mar 01, 2007 12:05 pm

could we tell art from HSN from art from HSS?

HSS art is all about food sex and power
HN art is all about the tall strange looking bastards who just moved in next door going on all the time about food sex and power

Digit · Post by **Digit** » Thu Mar 01, 2007 12:12 pm

Interesting Min, but I see one flaw. Reverence for the dead, some belief in an after life, etc has got Damn all to do with burial!
Even today many peoples use other methods for disposal of their dead without implying disrespect, and they also have the para normal experiences.
Just how many Hindu grave yards do you know of for example?

Forum Monk · Post by **Forum Monk** » Thu Mar 01, 2007 12:16 pm

Sorry Min, can't look at your link 'til later, the company is filtering it out saying it contains sexual content.

As for telling HN from HS art. It isn't done in a vacuum. There is other lithic evidence that allows dating.

Post by **Minimalist** » Thu Mar 01, 2007 12:17 pm

Yeah, but as they point out, burial is the only form which gives us the opportunity to dig them up.

Cremation or leaving the body exposed yields little in the way of archaeology.

marduk · Post by **marduk** » Thu Mar 01, 2007 12:18 pm

chucking them in the river doesnt imply disresepect ?
maybe you should ask the Hindu river patrol that one
last time i saw a docu with those boys commenting they stated that Hindus dump the dead in the river because they don't want to bother with a proper ceremony

the ganges is said to be sacred because Vishnu (or some other such make believe god) once washed in it
it doesnt say anything about sticking grandma in because the local graveyard charges 50 rupees for a cremation which is the accepted method of disposal

thats why they dont have graveyards
because they scatter the ashes in the river
thats actually allowed
ash never hurt anyone
except those silly bastards who decide a volcano is a great place to build a town

Post by **Minimalist** » Thu Mar 01, 2007 12:20 pm

[quote="Forum Monk"]Sorry Min, can't look at your link 'til later, the company is filtering it out saying it contains sexual content.

[quote]

LOL. I can't imagine why.

marduk · Post by **marduk** » Thu Mar 01, 2007 12:22 pm

LOL. I can't imagine why.

what surprised me is that despite his usual claims Min constantly links to club sites that prove his point
surely thats an oxymoron

Digit · Post by **Digit** » Thu Mar 01, 2007 12:32 pm

We're really humming tonight!
Monk, where lithic evidence allows dating problems must arise where the two species may have overlapped. There has been suggestions in the past that HSN in his later days copied HSS tooling, IF that is so how do you tell HSN tooling from HSS tooling?

Agreed Min, but that tells me only half the ochestra is playing, we are therefore attempting to create a working theory from only part of the evidence. Bad science.

Don't know if chucking them in the river shows disrespect or not Marduk. Does cremation? Does eating your relatives? Or your enemies?

marduk · Post by **marduk** » Thu Mar 01, 2007 12:35 pm

cremation shows respect and thats why the Nazis err i mean the hindus did it right i think thats a bit of twisted logic there

eating your relatives shows that you like to keep it in the family
eating your enemies just shows that once again Tescos is closed

Digit · Post by **Digit** » Thu Mar 01, 2007 12:44 pm

Well now I know!

Post by **Minimalist** » Thu Mar 01, 2007 1:00 pm

we are therefore attempting to create a working theory from only part of the evidence.

You're speculating that there is more evidence.

Isn't that how Bush/Blair got us into Iraq?

Digit · Post by **Digit** » Thu Mar 01, 2007 1:08 pm

I am indeed Min, but if HSS buried his dead and HSN didn't there would be only 2 logical reasons.
1 He couldn't bothered.
2 He disposed of his mother-in-law some other way.
It would be difficult to eliminate either alternative, but an absence of graves doesn't qualify for lack of respect for his dead, surely?