Author |
Share Topic Topic Search Topic Options
|
Guests
Guest
|
Quote Reply
Topic: AmericasWheel Posted: 21-Jul-2007 at 01:02 |
Originally posted by elenos
In the absence of any other theory to explain the lack of wheels perhaps they had some religious belief that prevented them from using wheel shaped objects? At one time not so long ago people used to accuse others of being square. Perhaps in their original language the natives accused one another of being round and that was a term of insult. That the wheel would never develop beyond being a child's toy or fool's whistle fits right in with the elenos theory! |
Sorry fellow, but that comment is quite absurd.
Natives knew the wheels and not only in toys. Otherwise they wouldn't conceive the Mesoamerican cyclical calendar. What they lacked was machinery. That's the point. I believe it is a problem of engineering and history of technology beyond your focus of interest.
Besides, Native American religions and believes are know with a degree of precision you could hardly imagine.
I bet you are just throlling, so I warned the moderator.
Pinguin
|
|
elenos
Chieftain
Joined: 13-Jun-2007
Location: Australia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1457
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 21-Jul-2007 at 03:29 |
Well fellow fellow, that is absurb absurd! Everybody on this thread agrees except for you. Dare I ask why not turn the lot of us in to the moderators?
|
elenos
|
|
edgewaters
Sultan
Snake in the Grass-Banned
Joined: 13-Mar-2006
Location: Canada
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2394
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 21-Jul-2007 at 05:11 |
There's a real mystery with those toys, which makes me wonder if maybe we're wrong about the wheel in the Americas.
The wheel and axle is thought to have evolved in one of two ways. Either it began with the potter's wheel and was later adapted to carts, or it began with sledge runners and logs, like so:
So if they didn't have the potter's wheel, and they didn't develop a wheel for heavy transport, how did they develop the wheel and axle for toys?
Maybe there were a few wheeled transports at one time, that evolved in the fashion depicted above. If they were wooden, the remains may not have survived.
Edited by edgewaters - 21-Jul-2007 at 05:16
|
|
Yaomitl
Knight
Joined: 05-Jul-2007
Location: United Kingdom
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 85
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 21-Jul-2007 at 06:28 |
Originally posted by pinguin
Originally posted by elenos
In the absence of any other theory to explain the lack of wheels perhaps they had some religious belief that prevented them from using wheel shaped objects? At one time not so long ago people used to accuse others of being square. Perhaps in their original language the natives accused one another of being round and that was a term of insult. That the wheel would never develop beyond being a child's toy or fool's whistle fits right in with the elenos theory! |
Sorry fellow, but that comment is quite absurd.
Natives knew the wheels and not only in toys. Otherwise they wouldn't conceive the Mesoamerican cyclical calendar. What they lacked was machinery. That's the point. I believe it is a problem of engineering and history of technology beyond your focus of interest.
Besides, Native American religions and believes are know with a degree of precision you could hardly imagine.
I bet you are just throlling, so I warned the moderator.
Pinguin
|
Woah, easy fellah! I don't think he's trolling. In sort of defense of his suggestion, when I started reading up on this subject I came across one or two authors with a pet theory (which I think may have been knocking around in the 1950s) that the Mexica (at least, although whether anyone wants to apply it to the rest of the Americas is probably just as dubious as the theory) had an innate fear of innovation, this being derived from a fear of change itself stemming from fear of the present sun coming to an end before each xiuhmolpilli ceremony (xiuh-something ceremony anyway) conducted every 52 years. I'll admit there's a logic to that, but have to agree that there's a whole lot more evidence to support them having no problem with innovation... and besides fear of change (which I think might be where Elenos was coming from) and fear of innovation are slightly different things. There's been a lot of odd theories knocking around over the years (especially in the 1960s, all the stuff about human sacrifice only ever happened in art and was a metaphor for "redemption of the soul" or whatever) and there's been far worse ones than the fear of innovation thing.
Anyway, interesting idea about the wheel originating from the potter's wheel. I can kind of see that. Maybe if that's generally true then we have a possible explanation. They got so good at ceramics that they were never driven to develop the potter's wheel, and other applications (such as in toys) just became kind of a dead end in some respects.
|
"For as long as the world shall endure, the honour and the glory of Mexico-Tenochtitlan must never be forgotten."
- Chimalpahin Quautlehuanitzin
<a href="http://www.theotherconquest.com
|
|
elenos
Chieftain
Joined: 13-Jun-2007
Location: Australia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1457
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 21-Jul-2007 at 09:42 |
You are telling me something new there Yaomitl, I knew of a religious reason, but fear of innovation is another. Well put. In that case I would add fear of climate change, for they did have an unstable weather pattern that still is prone to change about every 52 years. They seemed to be bursting with innovation at times with a frenzy of temple building, laying irrigations systems and all, then just ran out of steam in mysterious cycles.
|
elenos
|
|
Guests
Guest
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 21-Jul-2007 at 09:57 |
Well, they were "traditional societies" if that's what you mean. Chineses, ancient Egyptians, Babilonians and most of the others were also traditional societies, based in the rituals and the preservation of the culture. However, in all those innovations existed.
The Mesoamerican area holds thousand of inventions (or patents if you preffer) in things as amazing as the lacquer, rubber, bubble gum, paper manufacturing, the number zero, casting, dams, etc-, all of which show they were "engineering minded". In fact, an historical figure, Nezahualcoyotl, the poet king of Texcoco (15th century, one century before contact) is considered the patron saint of the Mexicans engineers.
Now, why they didn't apply the wheel to machinery? I have no idea, but perhaps there is something important there to understand how inventions develop and why others don't.
|
|
edgewaters
Sultan
Snake in the Grass-Banned
Joined: 13-Mar-2006
Location: Canada
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2394
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 21-Jul-2007 at 10:17 |
I think it might really help if we can define whether we're sure or not that they didn't have the wheel.
On what basis is the claim they didn't have the wheel made? How do we know the Sumerians had the wheel? Doesn't wood rarely survive long in hot or humid climates like Mesoamerica?
|
|
red clay
Administrator
Tomato Master Emeritus
Joined: 14-Jan-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 10226
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 21-Jul-2007 at 10:42 |
So if they didn't have the potter's wheel, and they didn't develop a wheel for heavy transport, how did they develop the wheel and axle for toys?
The question about the potters wheel has been going on forever. I've posted this before. The potters "wheel" can come in many forms none of them having an actual wheel form. The important point of the potters wheel is the use of the shaft and pivot, or bearing. Technologies that existed and were applied in other ways as well.
|
"Arguing with someone who hates you or your ideas, is like playing chess with a pigeon. No matter what move you make, your opponent will walk all over the board and scramble the pieces".
Unknown.
|
|
red clay
Administrator
Tomato Master Emeritus
Joined: 14-Jan-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 10226
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 21-Jul-2007 at 10:47 |
Originally posted by pinguin
Originally posted by elenos
In the absence of any other theory to explain the lack of wheels perhaps they had some religious belief that prevented them from using wheel shaped objects? At one time not so long ago people used to accuse others of being square. Perhaps in their original language the natives accused one another of being round and that was a term of insult. That the wheel would never develop beyond being a child's toy or fool's whistle fits right in with the elenos theory! |
Sorry fellow, but that comment is quite absurd.
Natives knew the wheels and not only in toys. Otherwise they wouldn't conceive the Mesoamerican cyclical calendar. What they lacked was machinery. That's the point. I believe it is a problem of engineering and history of technology beyond your focus of interest.
Besides, Native American religions and believes are know with a degree of precision you could hardly imagine.
I bet you are just throlling, so I warned the moderator.
Pinguin
|
And the Moderator thinks it is a valid, if unlikely, possibility.
|
"Arguing with someone who hates you or your ideas, is like playing chess with a pigeon. No matter what move you make, your opponent will walk all over the board and scramble the pieces".
Unknown.
|
|
Yaomitl
Knight
Joined: 05-Jul-2007
Location: United Kingdom
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 85
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 21-Jul-2007 at 19:27 |
Originally posted by edgewaters
I think it might really help if we can define whether we're sure or not that they didn't have the wheel.
On what basis is the claim they didn't have the wheel made? How do we know the Sumerians had the wheel? Doesn't wood rarely survive long in hot or humid climates like Mesoamerica? |
I think wood would be okay in the highland basin of Mexico, not so much further east though. Anyway...
Well, I've seen the famous wheeled toy so I know that it exists. Having said that I'd be interested to know if it was the only one. This point we've been discussing makes it into all the text books and always with the same photograph, so maybe said toy really was a one off. As for a wheel that may have left no evidence of its passing - I would have thought that one or two might survive had they existed (there's a woven shawl dating from around 1000AD in one of the Mexican museums which against astonishing odds survived to the present day, astonishing because of the age and it being found in one of the warm, wet, tropical areas - point is, wood would stand a better chance surely) yet none are depicted in any of the codices I've seen, nor mentioned in early colonial accounts. This has set me thinking somewhat, and I realise that the reports of use of log rollers, the ones I've come across are based on the premise that they must have used log rollers because how else would they have done it. So in other words it's only proof by a process of elimination, and nothing more substantial than that. Personally, I'm damn sure they used log rollers because it makes more sense than any other explanation, but as to whether they did or not... anyone know of any evidence here? Half constructed building with log rollers seen lying around in 1521?
What does anyone think of the wheeled toy thing? anyone seen a photo of one other than the famous Veracruz deer?
|
"For as long as the world shall endure, the honour and the glory of Mexico-Tenochtitlan must never be forgotten."
- Chimalpahin Quautlehuanitzin
<a href="http://www.theotherconquest.com
|
|
edgewaters
Sultan
Snake in the Grass-Banned
Joined: 13-Mar-2006
Location: Canada
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2394
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 21-Jul-2007 at 19:45 |
Originally posted by Yaomitl
As for a wheel that may have left no evidence of its passing - I would have thought that one or two might survive had they existed |
I agree, you would think one or two would have been found or at least referred to in primary sources by now.
This has set me thinking somewhat, and I realise that the reports of use of log rollers, the ones I've come across are based on the premise that they must have used log rollers because how else would they have done it. So in other words it's only proof by a process of elimination, and nothing more substantial than that. ... anyone know of any evidence here? Half constructed building with log rollers seen lying around in 1521? |
Actually there are still some sites around that were under construction at the time they were abandoned. No log rollers that I'm aware of though (I presume logs left lying around in the open would have been used for firewood by locals). The best example of such a site is the Cerro de los Idolos at Malinalco, which was the headquarters of the Eagle knights. A temple-fortress was abandoned in the middle of construction there.
The point about log rollers brings up an interesting question. If we are sure they used log rollers, despite the fact we've never recovered one and have no primary source describing use of log rollers, how is it that we are also sure they didn't use wheels? If log rollers went unmentioned and the wooden remains disintegrated, wouldn't the same apply to wheels?
Another thing. The primary sources which I have read, such as Diaz, never neglect to relate what things the Indians were astonished by. Great detail is lavished on native reactions to such things as sailing ships, cannon, horses, metal armour, and even the physical appearance of the Europeans. Diaz relates how impressed Montezuma was when he was taken out for a ride on one of Cortes' speedy sailing vessels in Lake Tenochtitlan for instance, and what a novel conveyance he thought it to be. Now how come nobody anywhere mentions the natives being astonished at the sight of the wheel used for carts, cannons and so forth? Even if they knew of the wheel but didn't use it for such things, it wouldn't have failed to impress them when they saw it used in that capacity.
What does anyone think of the wheeled toy thing? anyone seen a photo of one other than the famous Veracruz deer? |
No, I have only seen the one picture but I find it difficult to imagine it's a one-off.
The thing is that the wheel, in the Old World, didn't just suddenly appear in complete form; it evolved gradually. But here, in a place where this process of technological evolution is never supposed to have occurred, is a fully developed wheel featuring the axle and bearing. I am a little skeptical of the notion that someone just invented it out of the blue, as that's just not the way it happened in the Old World. It was a very gradual process and involved alot of practical usages of proto-wheel forms.
An endlessly frustrating mystery, totally maddening ...
Edited by edgewaters - 21-Jul-2007 at 21:53
|
|
elenos
Chieftain
Joined: 13-Jun-2007
Location: Australia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1457
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 21-Jul-2007 at 21:21 |
If we to use a process of logic why not talk about what technology they did use for building temples and so on? We know they used bricks that could not be rolled, so they used human labor, baskets, sleds, carrying frames and what?
I have also heard from a guy who went there, of impressive ancient buildings made of packed rubble underneath with brick facings for show? Feel welcome to correct me if I'm wrong, but you hear these stories.
|
elenos
|
|
Guests
Guest
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 21-Jul-2007 at 23:41 |
I have no doubt they used rollers. Otherwise there is no way to translate the huge stones of a fortress like Saysachuaman in Peru.
|
|
elenos
Chieftain
Joined: 13-Jun-2007
Location: Australia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1457
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 22-Jul-2007 at 01:17 |
The question is how else the work can be done. It's a matter of carefully sifting through any known alternatives to the wheel, I have named several and all are quite welcome to mention the unlikely. How about this one I just thought of as a theory. They shaped many of the stones into balls, rolled them there then chiseled them into the desired shape on the site?
|
elenos
|
|
edgewaters
Sultan
Snake in the Grass-Banned
Joined: 13-Mar-2006
Location: Canada
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2394
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 22-Jul-2007 at 01:46 |
Originally posted by pinguin
I have no doubt they used rollers. Otherwise there is no way to translate the huge stones of a fortress like Saysachuaman in Peru.
|
Sleds would do.
The point about the rollers is that we accept rollers were used, without any evidence that they had them, why do we say they didn't have the wheel just because we haven't found one? Have we found a sled or roller?
|
|
elenos
Chieftain
Joined: 13-Jun-2007
Location: Australia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1457
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 22-Jul-2007 at 02:21 |
Sleds are an excellent choice, but now how do we lubricate their movement? I have heard and even seen a rocking motion being used in the ancient world (as in Egypt) for shifting heavy weights. Another hypothetical advantage of sleds is being able to tip them up to stand the stones and they would be a good place to attach a network of ropes. Any engineers to make a drawing of this proposed devise out there?
|
elenos
|
|
edgewaters
Sultan
Snake in the Grass-Banned
Joined: 13-Mar-2006
Location: Canada
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2394
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 22-Jul-2007 at 05:24 |
Originally posted by elenos
Sleds are an excellent choice, but now how do we lubricate their movement? |
Well ... you can use log rollers, but then you're bound to invent the wheel.
|
|
elenos
Chieftain
Joined: 13-Jun-2007
Location: Australia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1457
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 22-Jul-2007 at 06:46 |
No wheels, don't even go there! I have heard accounts of how the Inuit lubricated the runners of their sleds by frequent use of urine and moss, this had a hardening effect on the original soft hide that was frozen and treated to turn out like iron. Then there was a story of Aztecs running sleds over bodies laid out in full length. That could be discounted over a long journey but we have free our mind to look through the haystack of the improbable to find the needle of the possible.
They would have treated the sled runners probably by fire, so they could run more easily over what would have to be a wet or oily surface. It was not always the Egyptians used rollers but often enough used sleds with similar means of lubrication. I even heard of the flooding their building areas so the the blocks would move more easily. But enough from me, everybody to invited give what they can come up with.
|
elenos
|
|
Yaomitl
Knight
Joined: 05-Jul-2007
Location: United Kingdom
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 85
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 22-Jul-2007 at 06:56 |
Originally posted by edgewaters
The best example of such a site is the Cerro de los Idolos at Malinalco, which was the headquarters of the Eagle knights. A temple-fortress was abandoned in the middle of construction there.
|
Didn't know that, though I've seen the place and it explains the parts that just looked like the end result of subsidence and disrepair. Have to say though, that temple complex is as good as carved out of the side of a pretty steep cliff face and I'm not sure how much use even log rollers would have been. Hmmm. Most likely they just cut the stone directly from the cliff face behind. Not sure how big the largest pieces were as I wasn't really looking out for that at the time, but I do remember a fair bit of the "brickwork" comprising blocks that could probably be carried by two people. Malinalco is fantastic by the way, one of my favourite sites.
Originally posted by edgewaters
Another thing. The primary sources which I have read, such as Diaz, never neglect to relate what things the Indians were astonished by. Great detail is lavished on native reactions to such things as sailing ships, cannon, horses, metal armour, and even the physical appearance of the Europeans. Diaz relates how impressed Montezuma was when he was taken out for a ride on one of Cortes' speedy sailing vessels in Lake Tenochtitlan for instance, and what a novel conveyance he thought it to be. Now how come nobody anywhere mentions the natives being astonished at the sight of the wheel used for carts, cannons and so forth? Even if they knew of the wheel but didn't use it for such things, it wouldn't have failed to impress them when they saw it used in that capacity. |
Excellent point there. No wheel-astonishment reports in anything I've seen either.
Originally posted by edgewaters
An endlessly frustrating mystery, totally maddening ... |
Amen to that.
Oh... and Elenos, the thing you mentioned about a flat stone facing to what is essentially rubble (thus giving the impression of a much larger block) is found at Teotihuacan and (I think) Kaminaljuyu and probably other places. Though there still remains the mystery of the genuinely huge solid blocks of stone found everywhere else. A programme we had over here a few years back showed a group of people attempting to recreate the manufacture of an Olmec collosal stone head, I think they moved it (somebody correct me if my mind's playing tricks on me) with about 40 or 50 people pulling it on ropes across running boards, with a small team gathering up the boards from behind and taking them to the front. Not sure if I'm remembering this right because I can't see how those boards didn't just splinter under the weight. We need a time machine.
|
"For as long as the world shall endure, the honour and the glory of Mexico-Tenochtitlan must never be forgotten."
- Chimalpahin Quautlehuanitzin
<a href="http://www.theotherconquest.com
|
|
elenos
Chieftain
Joined: 13-Jun-2007
Location: Australia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1457
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 22-Jul-2007 at 08:55 |
Thanks for that information, Yaomitl, that may suggest that
only the richest places could afford such labor intensive work, would that be
correct?
You mentioned stone heads and that set my imagination going.
Somehow The tears of the trees came to mind and so rubber trees. The origins
of rubber began in Mesoamerica by the Olmec and Mayan
people. The discovery of Mesoamerica
by the Spanish first told the world of the use of latex products
associated with tribal power and religion.
The Olmecs left behind artifacts such as large heads carved
from stone. They were originally farmers but built large cities of stone,
religious centers with temples, and places for the priests, artists, and
builders. For (recreation?) they played a ball game where heavy rubber ball was
knocked around with two teams trying to score "goals" (no hand or
foot contact allowed). The loser was sacrificed.
This ritual ball game was played on stone courts as long as
a football field. The sight of huge, bouncing solid rubber balls of the Mayans
used amazed the Spanish. Some were a foot in diameter and weighed more than 15
pounds. The Spanish left no record of how the game was played, they systematically
wiped out all records of the native religion to replace it with their own. Illustrations on Mayan pottery, the ball
fields and reports by independent explorers provide insights. In one version, a
smaller ball was hit with a stick, in another it was thrown through an overhead
hoop. Sacred music accompanied these ritual events.
Now what could they be worshipping at such places, the gods? Worshipping gods is a Near East phenomena. To me it sounds like
the worship of rubber tree and being praised as the source of their power. Why?
Perhaps the use of rubber products played a part in the way they built their
cities without wheels.
Can the trunks of rubber trees bend without breaking and how
slippery are they to use? But why waste the trees, when the sap could be used
on other substances to give them a coating? The sap could be also used to make
rubber mats that when treated properly would be like slippery plastic, some water or perhaps oil and the heaviest stones would slide along. The rubber could be
also used to make heavy duty slings and such.
In all the Olmec civilization was an important
political/religious center, which controlled vast flood plains and river trade
routes. Like in the Egyptian experience flood plains are the place for carting
stones on sleds. The first drainage system in Mesoamerica
was discovered there, channeled blocks of stone set into the earth, covered
with slabs. Anyway just another of my ideas. You other guys are way behind!
Edited by elenos - 22-Jul-2007 at 09:03
|
elenos
|
|