Nirvana Tuesday Jan 22 09:42 PM
January 23, 2013 Lost City of Cahokia
SPUCK Wednesday Jan 23 06:59 AM
sigh - kiss the bridge goodbye.
Trilby Wednesday Jan 23 08:12 AM
eta: that story about the Roman brothel coin was pretty interesting. It must be so surreal to make a find like that. I read about the Saxon (?) hoarde of gold weaponry made by some dude in the west-middle part of England. How incredible to come upon something like that. Was really cool -- but it was perplexing as all the weapons had been bent up and broken on purpose. They thought maybe it was an offering of some sort to some god or other.
DanaC Wednesday Jan 23 08:20 AM
Wow. That's exciting stuff. That suggests a very different culture to what's been posited before for that time and place, right?
Trilby Wednesday Jan 23 08:23 AM
right. very different. This is really new stuff-i'm so glad they found it.
DanaC Wednesday Jan 23 08:33 AM
Love stuff like this. When a piece of the past suddenly presents itself like this it is really astonishing. Can overturn years of academic study overnight, or confirm things long thought unconfirmable.
footfootfoot Wednesday Jan 23 10:36 AM
To lose one city of Cahokia may be regarded as misfortune...
Sundae Wednesday Jan 23 11:19 AM
I love it when people find areas of mosiac, in tact and in situ.
And just work around something that has been there since Roman times.
Bill Bryson described one such place in Gloucestershire.
xoxoxoBruce Wednesday Jan 23 12:54 PM
They've know it was there for a long time, part of a chain of "urban" centers stretching as far as Florida. Being off limits to amateurs, and not much chance of finding treasure, it's left to the government to explore. What the proposed bridge brought was the money and mandate to dig into the details of the layout and construction.
Gravdigr Wednesday Jan 23 01:07 PM
And we read about it in the fucking Mail?
CaliforniaMama Wednesday Jan 23 02:08 PM
In one small town, where the land was cheap, they had the bright idea to build an open-air mall with stores below and condos above. When doing a project like this in this area, a Native American (or an expert?) must be on hand in case anything appears in the digging.
In this case, the mall was to be built on land that had been inhabited by the Ohlone. There was a big to-do about the whole thing. Some said it was sacred land and others claimed it was the village dump due to the number of fractured shell pieces.
The mall was built, the area was named Shellmound because that is what it had been and a monument was in place to honor and inform visitors about the Ohlone that had once lived there.
The mall did not do well. It has struggled to survive all these years. Every so often there is a protest against the mall being on Native land.
When do we move on? We can't preserve every bit of land that had been inhabited by other people or we'd never have any place to live.
Look at the digs they are doing in (Israel? I can't remember now.) where they are digging undeveloped land in the middle of a city. The old city continues on under the developed areas.
It is a tricky balance.
They need the bridge and they need to uncover and discover the city that was found. Hopefully, they can find a way to do both before they completely destroy each other and the project.
glatt Wednesday Jan 23 02:21 PM
In the US, there is very little left that has any historical significance. We're just too young. I think we should do everything within reason to preserve truly significant stuff like the site of an ancient city half a millennium old.
CaliforniaMama Wednesday Jan 23 02:30 PM
Trilby Wednesday Jan 23 02:33 PM
We're losing all our civil war battlefields, etc. Nothing is sacred here except the almighty dollar.
Trilby Wednesday Jan 23 02:33 PM
Sundae Wednesday Jan 23 04:35 PM
Foot once told me that we'd run out of oil to make plastic bottles far sooner than we'd run out of space to bury them. That spoke to me about the huge expanse of America.
You can save some space to preserve history if you can spare some to bury stuff that could be recycled.
Of course I suggest you learn from us. Preserve some, but also knock down beautiful places and build execrations next to them. I suppose it provides architects a cheeky smile to see the juxtaposition. Unless they are all inducted into a secret "who can bulid the ugliest building" contest. And trust me, I live in a town blighted by the '60s. And pretty much every decade from since then. Oh wait. I mean DON'T learn from us.
Our history is ten-a-penny, so we're casual about it. But in odd woods and fields or preserved in publicly accessible basements of office blocks (our cities cities have layer upon of layer of history) and in strange corners of the country, we still have the past. It anchors you.
ZenGum Wednesday Jan 23 06:11 PM
Archeological finds are not such a problem here, although burial sites have to be respected.
xoxoxoBruce Wednesday Jan 23 06:22 PM
Easy, just kill the people it's sacred to... or allow them to build casinos.
Spexxvet Wednesday Jan 23 06:42 PM
Diaphone Jim Wednesday Jan 23 08:02 PM
There are many more astonishing Native American things to find. And further in the past than we expect.
footfootfoot Wednesday Jan 23 10:55 PM
I went back to Cahokia
Griff Thursday Jan 24 07:07 AM
xoxoxoBruce Thursday Jan 24 08:11 AM
The number of natives in the western hemisphere circa 1492 seems to be about 40 million. Working back the 25,000 years or so there seems to have been natives, it's easy to come up with maybe 100 million have lived (and left trash behind) in the Americas.
Trilby Thursday Jan 24 08:25 AM
ZenGum Thursday Jan 24 07:07 PM
The 25,000 years I'll go along with, although it's not really certain. There's quite a puzzle about the early migration to the Americas.
But 40,000,000 in 1492? That a HECK of a lot. And it would project backwards over just a few generations to well over the 100 million all time tally you wrote. Did you mean 4 million?
Griff Thursday Jan 24 07:40 PM
Wiki has a good article with estimates and discussion of the difficulty of fixing a solid number.
xoxoxoBruce Friday Jan 25 07:20 AM
You can see by the chart there have been a number of scholars weigh in on this and it seems to have come back to 40 million in the latest thinking. Remember this isn't the US, this is the Americas, two continents.
Assuming the 25,000 years holds up, and looking at the recent excavations in central and south america, show the Inca 9-16 million, Maya 2 million, Aztec 25 million, populations that had several boom/bust cycles. Those are just the major groups. There's a whole lot of generations in 25K years, and would add up to a shitload of people, methinks over 100 million.
You can't sacrifice 84,000 people in four days, to dedicate the temple, unless you have a surplus.
SPUCK Saturday Jan 26 07:26 AM
Yeah I was just gong to say, there'd have been a bucket load more of them if they hadn't sacrificed so many.