Print Page | Close Window

AmericasWheel

Printed From: History Community ~ All Empires
Category: Regional History or Period History
Forum Name: History of the Americas
Forum Discription: The Americas: History from pre-Colombian times to the present
URL: http://www.allempires.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=20794
Printed Date: 27-Apr-2024 at 14:43
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 9.56a - http://www.webwizforums.com


Topic: AmericasWheel
Posted By: bilal_ali_2000
Subject: AmericasWheel
Date Posted: 17-Jul-2007 at 02:31

From most historical sources i have learnt that the Americas didn't know the wheel before columbus. Although recently i have heard some one saying that that notion is wrong. So i am asking the learned here that whether was the wheel known to the Americas (before columbus) or not.




Replies:
Posted By: Paul
Date Posted: 17-Jul-2007 at 05:06
They knew how to make wheels and axles but they only used tem in children's toys. Why they never scaled the technology up is unknown.

-------------
Light blue touch paper and stand well back

http://www.maquahuitl.co.uk - http://www.maquahuitl.co.uk

http://www.toltecitztli.co.uk - http://www.toltecitztli.co.uk


Posted By: Constantine XI
Date Posted: 17-Jul-2007 at 05:17
The reason they did not make use of the wheel like in the Old World was they lacked any sort of draft animal in the Americas tame enough to be attached to it.

-------------


Posted By: Yaomitl
Date Posted: 17-Jul-2007 at 05:18
Ugh. I'm afraid I'm not going to be very good with the links on this, but the wheel or at least its principle was known in pre-Colombian Mexico. There's a famous wheeled toy (a figure of either a deer or a dog) from Classic era Veracruz - the photo turns up in a lot of books so have a look Mary Ellen Miller's The Art of Mesoamerica (Thames & Hudson) should be easy to find - photo is on page 99 of my 1996 edition). Furthermore, I've read the suggestion that the Mexica (and certainly the Olmecs) used wooden logs as rollers to shift those big old stones around. the generally accepted theory as I understand it is that the wheel never really caught on (in Mexico at least) for a number of reasons, these being (1) no large domesticated beast of burden which could pull a wheeled vehicle (2) generally uneven terrain of most of the country made transportation by carrying frame a lot more practical. I've got about a million books on this culture and I must have needed to dip into about half of them over the last week, so I'm sorry but right now I can't even recall where I read that. Best I can do is quote from Eric Wolf's Sons of the Shaking Earth (University of Chicago Press, page 184):
 
Together with horses, oxen, donkeys came the wheel, long known in the Old World but unknown - or rather not utilized - in the New. The Spaniards brought with them their traditional oxcart, put together with wooden pegs and mounted upon spokeless wheels. That the Indians were acquainted with the basic principle of the wheel is clear from finds of fascinating prehistoric toys, mounted upon rollers, from coastal Veracruz. The principle had never been applied, however, to the construction of wheelbarrows or carts to ease men's burdens, or to the mass production of pottery, or to the transmission of wind and water power. Even today there are many Indian villages where the wheel remains an alien artifact and where men rely on their traditional bodily skills to balance heavy burdens upon their backs with the aid of the tumpline, a leather strap laid across the bowed head.
 
So yes and no in other words. Hope that helps.


-------------
"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


Posted By: Paul
Date Posted: 17-Jul-2007 at 05:28
Originally posted by Constantine XI

The reason they did not make use of the wheel like in the Old World was they lacked any sort of draft animal in the Americas tame enough to be attached to it.
 
Trollies and wheel barrows are still a very useful tool.


-------------
Light blue touch paper and stand well back

http://www.maquahuitl.co.uk - http://www.maquahuitl.co.uk

http://www.toltecitztli.co.uk - http://www.toltecitztli.co.uk


Posted By: Constantine XI
Date Posted: 17-Jul-2007 at 05:36
Originally posted by Paul

Originally posted by Constantine XI

The reason they did not make use of the wheel like in the Old World was they lacked any sort of draft animal in the Americas tame enough to be attached to it.
 
Trollies and wheel barrows are still a very useful tool.


That's true, but even in the Old World application of these things was limited. The wheelbarrow, to my knowledge, was not invented until the medieval period by the Chinese - its use spreading to only certain areas of the Old World continents. That makes this very basic device a pretty late arrival, not long preceding the discovery of the New World. The inhabitants of Oceania and Australia, to my knowledge, never made use of either trolleys or wheelbarrows, let alone more advanced devices like the carriage or chariot.

Looking at a civilisation like the Aztecs, their trade and agriculture could be performed via boat along the canals of Lake Texcoco, so not much need for wheeled carrying devices. The Incas likewise did much of their travelling and transportation via boat along the Pacific coast, or up and down steep mountaints - perhaps a further disincentive to develop the devices.


-------------


Posted By: Paul
Date Posted: 17-Jul-2007 at 06:48
I still suspect they must have had some wheel based system to move giant slabs in their buildings and statues, even if it's log rollers.

-------------
Light blue touch paper and stand well back

http://www.maquahuitl.co.uk - http://www.maquahuitl.co.uk

http://www.toltecitztli.co.uk - http://www.toltecitztli.co.uk


Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: 17-Jul-2007 at 16:04
Log rollers were indeed known in the Americas. But that's not the same as the wheel. Actually, one of the reasons of the relative backwardness of the Americans is precisely the lack of applications of the wheel to pottery and machinery, rather than just transportation. Why they didn't have the wheel but in toys?
 
Think in the steam machine invented by the Alexandrian Greeks ... as a toy. To develop the practical device took almost 2.000 years more!
 
Now, the Wheel was used by almost all the civilizations of the old world because they were in close contact, from Iberia to China. But just crossing the Sahara south you find that people there also ignored the use of the wheel.
 
Curious, indeed.
 
Pinguin
 
 
 


Posted By: Constantine XI
Date Posted: 17-Jul-2007 at 16:28
Again I think we need to acknowledge that the Old World offered a range of draft animals who would make using the wheel a much more practical choice. Oxen, horses, cattle, donkeys and mules ... by contrast the closest the Americas had to offer were the bison and llama and raindeer, hardly good animals for pulling carts, chariots or carriages.

-------------


Posted By: Yaomitl
Date Posted: 18-Jul-2007 at 07:19
Good point about the boats back there. Good point about wheelbarrows, but I guess the thing is that carrying frames already did a pretty good job (especially over long distances involving climbing) and they just weren't accustomed to thinking there might be an easier way, least of all one related to a round thing that few people knew or cared about. On the subject of "relative backwardness", I'd disagree that it applies in the case of pottery. Looking close up at the ceramics in INAH and other Mexican museums and they're often so perfect that you'd swear they'd been thrown on a potter's wheel even though obviously they haven't. I guess the lack of wheel inspired Mexican (well, not even just Mexican) ceramic workers to step up their pot game, as it were.

-------------
"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


Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: 18-Jul-2007 at 18:04

My main concern with the wheel is not the lack in transportation (supplied by canoe transport or lama caravans), or the application in pottery. In the last case we know Amerindians produced masterpieces of pottery, and that they even used it as a media for portraits. A noble Inca, for instance, would have a pottery of himself, like Greeks had scuptures and the people of the Renacense had paintings.

No, my main concern was the lack of development in machinery, particularly in clockworks. Clockwork, specially using the toothed wheel, was a main driven force behind the technological development of the West, the Muslim world and China.

Although in the Americas there were lots of inventions, from metalurgy to hanging bridges and paper, and from the sail to presurized air toys (like the ones of Heron of Alexandria), the Americas never had clockworks. Therefore it was behing Eurasia in mechanical engineering.
 
Pinguin
 
 
 
 


Posted By: Yaomitl
Date Posted: 19-Jul-2007 at 08:32
There are early colonial accounts of Motecuhzoma's "zoo" containing "clockwork birds and animals" (mentioned in Prescott, who I think got it from Clavijero, who I think in turn got that from a conquistadore - possibly Cortes's letters to the big cheese back in Spain) although it seems probable that the claim came from a conquistadore wishing to big up the extent of their "discovery" to a boss on the other side of the ocean who was unlikely to check up on such a claim. Er... not disagreeing with you at all then, just your post reminded me of that obscure bit of trivia. As someone noted on either this forum or archaeologica, "progress" isn't always a uniform or linear process wherein all cultures develop the same innovations in the same order. People who develop trousers in the middle of a desert will probably come up with a pretty impressive trouser press before they arrive at the design for a decent boat, if you see what I mean. The lack of wheel use is still a puzzle though, despite all that's been said on the topic.
What an interesting thread this is turning out to be!
"Pressurised air toys" you say? What were they and where? I've not come across that apart from some idea of Andean hot-air balloons which (I'm no expert here mind) last I heard had been discredited.


-------------
"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


Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: 19-Jul-2007 at 10:46
Originally posted by Yaomitl

There are early colonial accounts of Motecuhzoma's "zoo" containing "clockwork birds and animals" (mentioned in Prescott, who I think got it from Clavijero, who I think in turn got that from a conquistadore - possibly Cortes's letters to the big cheese back in Spain) although it seems probable that the claim came from a conquistadore wishing to big up the extent of their "discovery" to a boss on the other side of the ocean who was unlikely to check up on such a claim. Er... not disagreeing with you at all then, just your post reminded me of that obscure bit of trivia. As someone noted on either this forum or archaeologica, "progress" isn't always a uniform or linear process wherein all cultures develop the same innovations in the same order. People who develop trousers in the middle of a desert will probably come up with a pretty impressive trouser press before they arrive at the design for a decent boat, if you see what I mean. The lack of wheel use is still a puzzle though, despite all that's been said on the topic.
What an interesting thread this is turning out to be!
"Pressurised air toys" you say? What were they and where? I've not come across that apart from some idea of Andean hot-air balloons which (I'm no expert here mind) last I heard had been discredited.
 
Well, Moctezuma Zoo could have been made of birds that song with air pressure. Counterweights, levels and mercury can be used to produce mecanical devides that marvel people. There isn't need of gears or clockwork to create fabulous toys.
 
In the Andes the Moche culture has this whistling pots that worked by air pressure. You turn the pot and they "whistle" like a bird.
 
http://anthro.amnh.org/anthropology/exhibits/Bodyart/fi/00000014.htm - http://anthro.amnh.org/anthropology/exhibits/Bodyart/fi/00000014.htm
 
javascript:Go_Back%28%29;">Back%20to%20Info%20Page
 
Pinguin
 


Posted By: edgewaters
Date Posted: 19-Jul-2007 at 12:11
Originally posted by pinguin

No, my main concern was the lack of development in machinery, particularly in clockworks. Clockwork, specially using the toothed wheel, was a main driven force behind the technological development of the West, the Muslim world and China.


True, but there was not a lack of machinery - the Inca had a highly developed textiles industry which rivalled anything in Europe at the time of discovery, and it was using complex looms and a system of mass production.

The Inca (and their Andean predecessors) had an intense understanding of basic hydraulic principles and textile manufacturing. What's interesting is that it's the combination of these two things, plus the wheel, that essentially gave birth to the industrial revolution - in the form of the spinning jenny and the waterframe, ultimately combined in the spinning mule. The lack of the applied use of the wheel may have potentially cost the Inca more dearly than anyone realizes.


Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: 19-Jul-2007 at 12:25
Originally posted by edgewaters

...
True, but there was not a lack of machinery - the Inca had a highly developed textiles industry which rivalled anything in Europe at the time of discovery, and it was using complex looms and a system of mass production.

The Inca (and their Andean predecessors) had an intense understanding of basic hydraulic principles and textile manufacturing. What's interesting is that it's the combination of these two things, plus the wheel, that essentially gave birth to the industrial revolution - in the form of the spinning jenny and the waterframe, ultimately combined in the spinning mule. The lack of the applied use of the wheel may have potentially cost the Inca more dearly than anyone realizes.
 
EXACTLY!
 
In the Inca and Aztec empires there was mass manufacturing. The use of molds, for instance, allowed Incas to mass produce axes that were used as coins. Many goods were produced in mass, including pottery and textiles.
However, the lack of clockwork, particularly of the toothed wheel, left any kind of authomatization out of reach for them.
 
When Spaniards invaded the Inca empire, the Inca recognized the value of the technical novelties the Spaniards had. There is an account of an historical even during the conquist that I could cite if any is interested, on which Atahualpa ordered to kill all Spaniards, except the blacksmith!!!
 
The Spanish invasion indeed produced a technological revolution of proportions in the Americas, that made many to forget Natives also had tech.
 
Pinguin
 
 


Posted By: edgewaters
Date Posted: 20-Jul-2007 at 01:44
Originally posted by pinguin

There is an account of an historical even during the conquist that I could cite if any is interested, on which Atahualpa ordered to kill all Spaniards, except the blacksmith!!!


Yes - I've heard of that before ... I believe he was going to try to get them to teach Incan smiths how to make cannons.

More than the Aztec or Maya, the Inca seem to have been an extraordinarily pragmatic and organized peoples.


Posted By: Yaomitl
Date Posted: 20-Jul-2007 at 09:22
Originally posted by pinguin

 
Well, Moctezuma Zoo could have been made of birds that song with air pressure. Counterweights, levels and mercury can be used to produce mecanical devides that marvel people. There isn't need of gears or clockwork to create fabulous toys.
 
In the Andes the Moche culture has this whistling pots that worked by air pressure. You turn the pot and they "whistle" like a bird.
Wow. Interesting point, and certainly the Mexicans had some knowledge of acoustic tricks - the "Quetzal call" echo effect of pyramid steps in Teotihuacan and Chichen Itza, probably other places too. Wonder if there were any equivalents of that whistling double pot thing. I'm sure I've seen something similar but the acoustic possibilities never occured to me.
 
Er... sorry. Wheels, as all y'all were saying.


-------------
"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


Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: 20-Jul-2007 at 10:32
Originally posted by edgewaters

...
More than the Aztec or Maya, the Inca seem to have been an extraordinarily pragmatic and organized peoples.
 
Yes. Incas has been called the "Romans" of the Americas, because theirs strenght was in engineering. The Inca road with hunging bridges framed on stones, and posts every journey are a testimony of that. Other are theirs hydraulic works, their techniques to preserve food, theirs textiles, theirs military organization of society, etc. Inca were not much dreamers like Mayas, but practical people that had confidence in technologies and social organization.
 
Pinguin


Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: 20-Jul-2007 at 10:36
Originally posted by Yaomitl

..Wow. Interesting point, and certainly the Mexicans had some knowledge of acoustic tricks - the "Quetzal call" echo effect of pyramid steps in Teotihuacan and Chichen Itza, probably other places too. Wonder if there were any equivalents of that whistling double pot thing. I'm sure I've seen something similar but the acoustic possibilities never occured to me.
 
Er... sorry. Wheels, as all y'all were saying.
 
I wouldn't be surprised they have many interesting toys. There are some jewels preserved in museums that show Mesoamericans have toys compossed by several parts joined by pegs. They also knew quite a bit about accoustic, and knew how to mass produce metalworks.
 
Perhaps it is a matter of research a little bit to find something interesting.
 
Pinguin


Posted By: elenos
Date Posted: 21-Jul-2007 at 00:47
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!

-------------
elenos


Posted By: Guests
Date 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
 
 
 
 


Posted By: elenos
Date 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


Posted By: edgewaters
Date 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.


Posted By: Yaomitl
Date 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


Posted By: elenos
Date 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


Posted By: Guests
Date 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.
 
 


Posted By: edgewaters
Date 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?


Posted By: red clay
Date 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.


Posted By: red clay
Date 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.


Posted By: Yaomitl
Date 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


Posted By: edgewaters
Date 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 ...


Posted By: elenos
Date 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


Posted By: Guests
Date 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.
 


Posted By: elenos
Date 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


Posted By: edgewaters
Date 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?


Posted By: elenos
Date 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


Posted By: edgewaters
Date 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.


Posted By: elenos
Date 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


Posted By: Yaomitl
Date 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


Posted By: elenos
Date 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!

 



-------------
elenos


Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: 22-Jul-2007 at 09:32
There is an strange collection of wheels in the Americas done by the mormon church in here:
 
http://www.shields-research.org/Scriptures/BoM/Wheel.htm - http://www.shields-research.org/Scriptures/BoM/Wheel.htm
 
Some interesting a real picture of that site follows:
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Just don't believe everything. However, the second picture makes me think
 
Pinguin
 
 


Posted By: elenos
Date Posted: 22-Jul-2007 at 19:38
I shudder to look, Pinquin. Most archaeological stone objects, once removed from the original site become useless and are virtually worthless for telling what they were used for in the past. The robbing of sites to carry off what could have been valuable has become a very serious problem


-------------
elenos


Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: 22-Jul-2007 at 21:36
Well, the second picture is a toothed wheel, isn't?
 
Yes, I know it is very unlikely that it belonged to an ancient clockwork, but just the image make dreak of advanced devices
 
Pinguin
 


-------------


Posted By: elenos
Date Posted: 22-Jul-2007 at 22:12
Without being found on properly recorded site where the surrounding evidence shows the item was truly of American making, it becomes impossible to determine who made it, when and what for. Once removed from its culteral setting it becomes just another bit of mysterious junk that could have been anything stored in a Mormon church or wherever else.


-------------
elenos


Posted By: red clay
Date Posted: 22-Jul-2007 at 23:03
Originally posted by elenos

I shudder to look, Pinquin. Most archaeological stone objects, once removed from the original site become useless and are virtually worthless for telling what they were used for in the past. The robbing of sites to carry off what could have been valuable has become a very serious problem
 
 
So what makes you think these weren't properly excavated.  Where did anyone say they were looted.
 
Eleos, I think you've misread pinguin.  The photographs were collected by the Mormon church, not the items themselves.
 
The second photo I have seen before.  There's almost no doubt in my mind that those items were used as sprockets or gears of some type.


-------------
"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.


Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: 22-Jul-2007 at 23:08

As far as I found out, the "tooth wheels" of the figure 2, above, it was common in the Peruvian civilizations. They where, indeed, mace heads used in battle. They existed in several cultures, included Moche. However, it is still amazing how closely look to a piece of machinery. Just a strange coincidence and nothing more

Pinguin

 



-------------


Posted By: red clay
Date Posted: 22-Jul-2007 at 23:24
Originally posted by elenos

Without being found on properly recorded site where the surrounding evidence shows the item was truly of American making, it becomes impossible to determine who made it, when and what for. Once removed from its culteral setting it becomes just another bit of mysterious junk that could have been anything stored in a Mormon church or wherever else.
 
 
They were afik, from proper excavations.  And why would you question if it was made in the Americas if it wasn't.   Odds are you wouldn't question something Egyptian if it hadn't been "properly recorded" Museums and private collections are loaded with looted objects.  Or is this a case of, It's too advanced, it couldn't have been made in the Americas"?Stern%20Smile


-------------
"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.


Posted By: red clay
Date Posted: 22-Jul-2007 at 23:36
Originally posted by pinguin

As far as I found out, the "tooth wheels" of the figure 2, above, it was common in the Peruvian civilizations. They where, indeed, mace heads used in battle. They existed in several cultures, included Moche. However, it is still amazing how closely look to a piece of machinery. Just a strange coincidence and nothing more

Pinguin

 

 
 
Ping, I'm not sure.  If you read my post I said "almost".  I've seen the same information.  The object on the right could possibly be for that.  There isn't much care given to the form or placement of the "teeth".  The object on the left is just opposite.  The teeth are well made and well placed.  If you had dimensions you could probably calculate ratios.
Also, knowing how humans are, what would stop a warrior type from seeing something like this being made and see it differently from it's original use?


-------------
"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.


Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: 22-Jul-2007 at 23:36
Other methalic "toothed wheels" identified as maces
 
From Vicus Culture Peru (200 BC-600AD)
 
 
 
Prehispanic Maces of Southern Peru and North of Chile
 
 
Maces Cuspique and Inca
 
 
 
 
 


-------------


Posted By: red clay
Date Posted: 22-Jul-2007 at 23:46
Compare the object on the left of the second photo with these new photos. Look at the relative precision with which the teeth are made compared with the new objects.  It's what sets it apart from all the others.

-------------
"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.


Posted By: red clay
Date Posted: 22-Jul-2007 at 23:52
Pinguin, to switch gears a little[ pun intended]  Do you remember discussing the potter's wheel in another thread?  There is a direct reference to Henry Mercer in the article you posted here.
 
 

Henry C. Mercer, while conducting the Corwith Expedition for the University of Pennsylvania in 1895, observed a true though simple potter's wheel in operation among the native potters of Merida, Mexico.  Although this could have been a tool resulting from the Spanish influences, its peculiar mechanism and mode of operation distinguish it from any similar clay-molding wheel thus far known, in ancient or modern times, from any part of the Old World.  The natives even call the device by a Mayan name, Kabal.  Mercer is convinced from his studies, which have been confirmed by others, that this device is indigenous to ancient Yucatan. http://www.shields-research.org/Scriptures/BoM/Wheel.htm#4 - 4



-------------
"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.


Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: 22-Jul-2007 at 23:53
Yes. It is getting interesting. I saw a page plenty of calculation on physic about the dynamics of the Peruvian mace. It was a methalic weapon that rotated during the attack, and the momentum of inertia produced an effect similar to a sword.
 
Here another Vicus piece:
 
 
 
And this one is Moche
 
 


-------------


Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: 22-Jul-2007 at 23:55

KABAL!!! Great Red Clay. We have a name and a refference now. Good way to start a research.

By the way, ending with the topic of maces, those peaces show Peruvians were quite good metalurgists as well. A point to consider.

Pinguin

 



-------------


Posted By: elenos
Date Posted: 23-Jul-2007 at 02:10
I read what pinquin said "There is an strange collection of wheels in the Americas done by the mormon church in here" and took the phrasing  to mean the objects existed inside the church. Sorry if I'm wrong. Then I have opinions about this, so far as I'm concerned (and many governments) any unauthorized removal of objects from a site is looting.


-------------
elenos


Posted By: Yaomitl
Date Posted: 23-Jul-2007 at 07:22
Trying not to get too sidetracked here so very quickly:
Originally posted by elenos

Thanks for that information, Yaomitl, that may suggest that only the richest places could afford such labor intensive work, would that be correct?

Er... apparently not. I think it was just a case of some people using one method of architectural construction and others using a different one. Now I think on it, what's left of the Templo Mayer in Tenochtitlan ... er Mexico City (can't get used to these new fangled names) seems mostly small stone brickwork, exceptiing the larger objects such as sculptures and stone altars.
Originally posted by elenos

 

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.

 

Er... rules of play seem to have varied from one region to another (as you said) and it's astonishing how many ball courts there were - hundreds of them from Guatemala right up to SW USA (good book for this is The Mesoamerican Ballgame edited by Scarborough & Willcox - University of Arizona Press) and I think the general consensus of opinion is that the ball game was a ritual enactment of the sun travelling through the sky and/or the underworld (especially the Mayan variant). Not come across any specifically rubber Deities though, which isn't to say there weren't any of course. Rubber treated as a slippery medium is an interesting idea, one with possibilities I'd say but I don't know enough to comment really. I've not come across anything to suggest it was used in this way, but a I said, that doesn't mean it wasn't.
 
Right sorry. The wheel. Not much to add here except that those photos Pinguin posted were pretty damn exciting. Nice work!


-------------
"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


Posted By: elenos
Date Posted: 23-Jul-2007 at 09:05
I'm tossing around the rubber theory, could be a degree in it for someone if they want to take it up, hey it's free as a gift from me! They did play with the balls, but as stated the rules are unknown. Could it be they were exercising with the balls to become experts in handling them? Could the reward be that they became overseers of building sites where the rubber balls were used to move around heavy weights?

I have seen much the same principals used in modern technology. I wish people would drop this silliness of viewing them as el locos who sacrificed virgins on Saturday night and holidays and filled in the rest of their week  by forcing teams of slaves to build their elaborate buildings.

Of course the balls had other purposes. They could mean all sorts of things if you bring in religion. They probably still are laughing their ass off about the stupid way in which the invaders are so strung up on things that have nothing to do with loving the earth as our partner. What the balls were really used for and the way they were used wouldn't survive for rubber is biodegradable yet always replaceable if needed. It could be used for a whole range of purposes but became too expensive a long time ago.   

-------------
elenos


Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: 23-Jul-2007 at 10:02
Originally posted by elenos

I'm tossing around the rubber theory, could be a degree in it for someone if they want to take it up, hey it's free as a gift from me! They did play with the balls, but as stated the rules are unknown. Could it be they were exercising with the balls to become experts in handling them? Could the reward be that they became overseers of building sites where the rubber balls were used to move around heavy weights?

I have seen much the same principals used in modern technology. I wish people would drop this silliness of viewing them as el locos who sacrificed virgins on Saturday night and holidays and filled in the rest of their week  by forcing teams of slaves to build their elaborate buildings.

Of course the balls had other purposes. They could mean all sorts of things if you bring in religion. They probably still are laughing their ass off about the stupid way in which the invaders are so strung up on things that have nothing to do with loving the earth as our partner. What the balls were really used for and the way they were used wouldn't survive for rubber is biodegradable yet always replaceable if needed. It could be used for a whole range of purposes but became too expensive a long time ago.   
 
Well, as far as I know the game was not forgotten. It is still played in Mexico and Guatemala for some fans. You have to have thick skin, though, because the rubber ball leaves the marks of the impact on it. There is another thread in this same section that describes the ball courts.
 
Well, natives used rubber not only for balls but also to have waterproof cloths, and perhaps other applications I am not aware of.
 
And yes, the game has other purposes: gambling. Somewhere in a source I can't recall now I read that gambling was as important for the game as any sacred ceremony.
 
Pinguin
 
 


-------------


Posted By: elenos
Date Posted: 23-Jul-2007 at 18:56
The Roman games started every morning with blessing to the gods and were asked that every death be pleasing to them. The, the Romans bet huge sums on the outcome of the contests in imaginative ways, how long they would last before they  die, how many wounds they would receive and so on. Sacred games of death are well known and the Old World and the New, that is if you can get hold of the details. I have got some books because I'm fascinated by ancient rituals, but most people don't want to know because it freaks them out. Once you get past the stage of having nightmares it's quite an interesting topic and much the same the world over, but you still can run across those that make your stomach churn.

Now that you have told me of the betting and how they still play the game (not like they have the Roman games anymore!) the similarities are more amazing. I did see one article of known instances of the original natives using rubber webbing to hold large items and a kind of rubber rope. You don't mean "Jai alai" as a ball game do you? (sure I spelt that wrong) What size balls are used in the present games?


-------------
elenos


Posted By: edgewaters
Date Posted: 23-Jul-2007 at 19:27
Pinguin's pictures have hurt my brain.

They are even more frustrating and maddening than the toy alone.


Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: 23-Jul-2007 at 19:41
Originally posted by edgewaters

Pinguin's pictures have hurt my brain.

They are even more frustrating and maddening than the toy alone.
 
Why so? Well, I have seen in local museums wonders of the Peruvian metalurgic. Besides, we are a mining country so we have colections of those items as well. Natives produced bells of the size of the used in old schools, also bells for llamas, axes, weapons, coins, pins and lot of things in metal. In pottery they were even more skillful because, as I mention one time, they made portraits in pottery like westerners had paintings.
 
Even more, they had wind furnaces that worked continuosly and authomatically channelling the mountain winds to melt metals.
 
So, those objects don't surprise me at all.
 
Pinguin
 


-------------


Posted By: edgewaters
Date Posted: 23-Jul-2007 at 19:47
Originally posted by pinguin

Originally posted by edgewaters

Pinguin's pictures have hurt my brain. They are even more frustrating and maddening than the toy alone.

 

Why so? Well, I have seen in local museums wonders of the Peruvian metalurgic. Besides, we are a mining country so we have colections of those items as well. Natives produced bells of the size of the used in old schools, also bells for llamas, axes, weapons, coins, pins and lot of things in metal. In pottery they were even more skillful because, as I mention one time, they made portraits in pottery like westerners had paintings.

 

Even more, they had wind furnaces that worked continuosly and authomatically channelling the mountain winds to melt metals.

 

So, those objects don't surprise me at all.

 

Pinguin

 


Well the toy is particularly maddening because nobody just invents a wheel with axle and bearing out of thin air. It is the product of centuries, perhaps millenia, of using proto-wheel forms for carrying loads, even if it came from the potter's wheel and not the log roller/sled combination. So it is a big mystery, and mysteries drive me crazy.

But then you go and show us flywheels and millstones and sprockets ...

The toy drove me insane enough!



Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: 23-Jul-2007 at 19:51
Originally posted by elenos

..
Now that you have told me of the betting and how they still play the game (not like they have the Roman games anymore!) the similarities are more amazing. I did see one article of known instances of the original natives using rubber webbing to hold large items and a kind of rubber rope. You don't mean "Jai alai" as a ball game do you? (sure I spelt that wrong) What size balls are used in the present games?
 
 
Here is the way the game is played
 
http://www.allempires.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=19188 - http://www.allempires.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=19188
 
And this site is a MUST SEE IT.
 
http://www.ballgame.org/ - http://www.ballgame.org/
 
The game today is called ULAMA and is still played:
 
 
 
 
Photo:%20Guillermo%20Aldana
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Other link, where to look at:
 
http://www.mazatlan.com.mx/cultural/ulama.htm - http://www.mazatlan.com.mx/cultural/ulama.htm
 
 
 


-------------


Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: 23-Jul-2007 at 20:00
Originally posted by edgewaters

...
Well the toy is particularly maddening because nobody just invents a wheel with axle and bearing out of thin air. It is the product of centuries, perhaps millenia, of using proto-wheel forms for carrying loads, even if it came from the potter's wheel and not the log roller/sled combination. So it is a big mystery, and mysteries drive me crazy.

But then you go and show us flywheels and millstones and sprockets ...

The toy drove me insane enough!
 
LOLLOLLOL
 
Yes, the Americas are still a mysterious land, full of surprises. That's what I like about its study.
 
Pinguin
 


-------------


Posted By: elenos
Date Posted: 24-Jul-2007 at 00:28

When looking at the picture of the wheeled toy, I wonder if what seems like wheels are a distraction. If the natives of a pre-wheel culture wanted to suggest movement by a toy animal they would put rollers underneath, which the picture clearly shows. We can go further and say are the ends really wheels as we know them or part of a solid state dumbbell shaped device? The wheels may roll at all, but could suggest the attachment of rubber pads to make the pulling or pushing of larger objects easier. 

The many uses of rubber suggest how far their technology went. Hard rubber, soft rubber, spongy rubber and so on, hey we had to rediscover all that and we are still learning!

 Photo two has been explained as weapons, but how would you train to use such weapons without killing you own men in the process? Again no problem to those with a rubber technology, use rubber weapons for training and use rubber mats to learn to leap and so brain your opponent when handling the real thing.

 Photo three has a man that looks like he jumping from trampoline device with pigtails flying in the air from his head, He jumps so high the figures beneath him look small. Only the use of rubber could make this possible

 Photo seven could be a ball hoop, but could be a “birthstone” the same objects were found in Neothilic Europe and signify rebirth or being born again from the earth mother.  



-------------
elenos


Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: 24-Jul-2007 at 11:55
elenos,
 
I can't get you. Sorry, but I don't understand what has to do the knowledge of the rubber with the application of the wheel. Yes, I know modern cars use rubber wheels and that Mayans knew vulcanization before the Europeans. But I can't graps what is the relation you are looking for.
 
By the way, the weapons are Peruvians and rubber is Mesoamerican.


-------------


Posted By: elenos
Date Posted: 24-Jul-2007 at 19:52
I said earlier about brainstorming, us guys getting together to work out what could be used in place of the wheel, but nobody took up the challenge. I went ahead and pointed out how the early use of rubber could have possibly halted any invention of the wheel.

Rubber is amazing for when treated in different ways it has different properties. You said the Mayans knew vulcanization, that would lead some to conclude they knew a lot more that we don't about. Rubber can be made extremely slippery when treated in various ways. Sliding rather than rolling can be used be for shifting heavy weights.

"By the way, the weapons are Peruvians and rubber is Mesoamerican."

Quite so, but we are brain storming, meaning any idea is better than none. I am inviting others to share their ideas, on how rubber could have been used and without regard for where. If people don't agree on my rubber theory for moving weights, then be my guest and share some other possible ideas, bearing in mind the way the people lived of course.


-------------
elenos


Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: 24-Jul-2007 at 22:59
Interesting theory. However, there is not evidence of it at all.
What's known is that Mayans carried loads at foot.
 


-------------


Posted By: red clay
Date Posted: 25-Jul-2007 at 00:21
Originally posted by elenos

I said earlier about brainstorming, us guys getting together to work out what could be used in place of the wheel, but nobody took up the challenge. I went ahead and pointed out how the early use of rubber could have possibly halted any invention of the wheel.

Rubber is amazing for when treated in different ways it has different properties. You said the Mayans knew vulcanization, that would lead some to conclude they knew a lot more that we don't about. Rubber can be made extremely slippery when treated in various ways. Sliding rather than rolling can be used be for shifting heavy weights.

"By the way, the weapons are Peruvians and rubber is Mesoamerican."

Quite so, but we are brain storming, meaning any idea is better than none. I am inviting others to share their ideas, on how rubber could have been used and without regard for where. If people don't agree on my rubber theory for moving weights, then be my guest and share some other possible ideas, bearing in mind the way the people lived of course.
 
 
 
Certain Herbal substances can, when introduced into the system, produce this effect.  It is most certain to happen when 4-5 likeminded share the aformentioned Herbal substance.
 
 
 
 
                                                         Big%20smile


-------------
"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.


Posted By: elenos
Date Posted: 25-Jul-2007 at 00:28
If the mountain won't come to Mohamed then Mohamed must go to the mountain! Right at the beginning of the thread edgewaters pasted some nicely colored diagrams on the way rollers could have been used. Carrying loads on foot is for cavemen which the Mayans were not.

Could Mayans could move blocks a hundred times their own weight by dragging or pushing the blocks along? How did they lift these huge stones up the side of a temple without using a block and tackle? Carrying by loads foot is hardly an original idea, nor proven as the right one. Is there any technology that you have known, seen or heard of more advanced than just the use of manual labor?


-------------
elenos


Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: 25-Jul-2007 at 00:32
Rollers? Wink

-------------


Posted By: elenos
Date Posted: 25-Jul-2007 at 00:50
That may help to keep the ideas rolling along, what kind of rollers would you suggest?

-------------
elenos


Posted By: edgewaters
Date Posted: 25-Jul-2007 at 01:17
Originally posted by elenos

When
looking at the picture of the wheeled toy, I wonder if what seems like wheels are
a distraction. If the natives of a pre-wheel culture wanted to suggest movement
by a toy animal they would put rollers underneath, which the picture clearly shows.


Well, if those bits rotate, then they're wheels not rollers. They have wheels, an axle, and bearings.

We can go further and say are the ends really wheels as we know them or part of
a solid state dumbbell shaped device?


I'm fairly certain the wheel bits do rotate. Why would they put dumbbells on the bottom of an animal anyway?

The wheels may roll at all, but could
suggest the attachment of rubber pads to make the pulling or pushing of larger
objects easier.


Unless you're implying that they had rubber tires on wheels, then no, rubber would actually make it quite difficult to move objects. That's why cars stop so well when the brakes are applied and the tires stop spinning - rubber (whether hard or soft) generates an incredible amount of friction with surfaces it rubs against largely because of its elasticity, which causes high adhesion due to deformation. If cars had wooden tires, braking would be very difficult because wood has very low elasticity and therefore does not adhere well.

No matter how slippery the rubber may be, the fact that it is elastic and deforms to match the surfaces it is in contact with causes adhesion when sliding. Even on ice, rubber tires exhibit this effect if the surface is at all rough and not perfectly smooth.

Moreover sliding rubber generates a particularly large amount of drag when the object it supports is heavy, again, due to deformation:





Posted By: elenos
Date Posted: 25-Jul-2007 at 02:23

Edgewaters said; "Well, if those bits rotate, then they're wheels not rollers. They have wheels, an axle, and bearings."  

Edgewaters also said; There's a real mystery with those toys, which makes me wonder if maybe we're wrong about the wheel in the Americas.

Ditto; True, but there was not a lack of machinery - the Inca had a highly developed textiles industry which rivalled anything in Europe at the time of discovery, and it was using complex looms and a system of mass production.

Ditto; The Inca (and their Andean predecessors) had an intense understanding of basic hydraulic principles and textile manufacturing. What's interesting is that it's the combination of these two things, plus the wheel, that essentially gave birth to the industrial revolution - in the form of the spinning jenny and the waterframe, ultimately combined in the spinning mule. The lack of the applied use of the wheel may have potentially cost the Inca more dearly than anyone realizes.

Ditto” 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 ...

Ditto: Sleds would do.

 Ditto; 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?

There are many types of debaters, those who come in with an open mind, those with a closed mind, those who argue, and those playing games.  I’m in the first category and stuff the rest. I’m not interested in saying the same things over and over again. If you really are interested an open exchange of ideas then I am too. I like you last questions but I have answered most of them already. If you find something you can agree with  then let's discuss that shall we?  



-------------
elenos


Posted By: edgewaters
Date Posted: 25-Jul-2007 at 02:33
I'm not following you, sorry.

I'm merely pointing out that for rubber to be a good material to use for moving heavy loads, it has to be in a rolling form, ie a tire (or perhaps rubber-treated rollers - now there's an idea - it would almost be like having caterpillar treads). Sliding rubber is a very poor way of trying to move a heavy load, you'd be better off with stone, metal, or wood. Rolling rubber has advantages for sure - it's bouncy and it deforms so it is not impeded by small obstacles (rocks, rough surfaces, etc). The same adhesion and deformation effect that causes so much friction for sliding rubber, has a different effect with rolling rubber - it gives traction.

I'm not sure why this point would cause you to imply that I have a closed mind or that I'm playing games, or what your quotations are supposed to reveal. Please elaborate.


Posted By: elenos
Date Posted: 25-Jul-2007 at 03:04
I will elaborate when you put forward your ideas of how they could have possibly moved those blocks around to the extent that we know they did. I get it, I hear you, you don't agree with my theory, but I have said it is theory. Are you going to tell us what you think about other possible means or not?  

-------------
elenos


Posted By: edgewaters
Date Posted: 25-Jul-2007 at 05:15
Originally posted by elenos

I will elaborate when you put forward your ideas of how they could have possibly moved those blocks around to the extent that we know they did.


Well, its not really germane. The topic is wheels not other things. So my main attention is focussed on things like the wheeled toys here. Your focus may have shifted from the subject of the thread, but mine hasn't and I'm not really interested in shifting focus (not that there's anything wrong with shifting focus in the course of a thread sometimes, just that I remain interested in wheels).

As for movement of large objects without wheels, there are many many ways which we are all familiar with - rollers, sleds, levers, A-frames and so on. None of these were beyond their capacities, all are capable of the job, so that's not really what I'm interested in, except as they relate to the question of the wheel.

What I'm interested in, in the context of this thread, is the wheel in the Americas.


Posted By: elenos
Date Posted: 25-Jul-2007 at 05:40
Originally posted by edgewaters

What I'm interested in, in the context of this thread, is the wheel in the Americas.


I'm interested in the context of this thread as well, but there were no wheels. Admit it! Be there or be square! Think of an alternative based on the bulk of the evidence. Frankly, waving around a toy as your best shot just doesn't cut it. We would need more of them and real examples to form an opinion. At the moment your wheel theory is only just a theory among others. And you are saying that is all you are interested in end of discussion and and no other correspondence will be entered into?


-------------
elenos


Posted By: edgewaters
Date Posted: 25-Jul-2007 at 05:56
Originally posted by elenos

I'm interested in the context of this thread as well, but there were no wheels. Admit it! Be there or be square! Think of an alternative based on the bulk of the evidence.


Isn't the wheel one such alternative? I mean, on what grounds do you say "wheel no, rollers (or whatever) yes"? It's not like there's any evidence for anything other than carrying things by foot, llama and travois. All we have is a question, no answers.

The fact of true wheels being present in miniature opens up a line of inquiry. No other alternative presents anything to open up a line of inquiry.

We would need more of them and real examples to form an opinion.


Same goes for any other particular alternative.

And you are saying that is all you are interested in end of discussion and and no other correspondence will be entered into?


I might be drawn into discussion on other possibilities but it's not something I myself am going to start.


Posted By: elenos
Date Posted: 25-Jul-2007 at 06:18
Hmm. you way of answering questions is indeed unique. The wheel as an alternative to the wheel? I would never have thought of that!

-------------
elenos


Posted By: red clay
Date Posted: 25-Jul-2007 at 06:27
Originally posted by elenos

Originally posted by edgewaters

What I'm interested in, in the context of this thread, is the wheel in the Americas.


I'm interested in the context of this thread as well, but there were no wheels. Admit it! Be there or be square! Think of an alternative based on the bulk of the evidence. Frankly, waving around a toy as your best shot just doesn't cut it. We would need more of them and real examples to form an opinion. At the moment your wheel theory is only just a theory among others. And you are saying that is all you are interested in end of discussion and and no other correspondence will be entered into?
 
 
Elenos, your a classic.  If you can say that after three days,  you haven't been paying attention.


-------------
"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.


Posted By: elenos
Date Posted: 25-Jul-2007 at 06:55
Originally posted by red clay

Originally posted by elenos

[QUOTE=edgewaters] What I'm interested in, in the context of this thread, is the wheel in the Americas.
Elenos, your a classic.  If you can say that after three days,  you haven't been paying attention.


You could explain what you mean, without any personal attack of course, and I will  accept what  have to say. By the way have you read of what I have said and if so what is your opinion on the subject. What I have been talking about is perhaps there are other unknown alternatives to the wheel? Three days? well that is what discussion on a forum is all about, having opinions and being able to clearly state them!


-------------
elenos


Posted By: edgewaters
Date Posted: 25-Jul-2007 at 07:15
Originally posted by elenos

What I have been talking about is perhaps there are other unknown alternatives to the wheel?


There's nothing unknown about alternatives to the wheel for moving heavy objects. We understand all the principles and methods well enough. Scaffolding, ramps, rope and frame, levers, sleds, water transport, and rollers. Some archaeologist re-enacts the methods for television audiences every week, and of course, with or without the wheel, some of those methods are still crucial. The Egyptians certainly had the wheel but it was of limited use in building the pyramids.

So, the question isn't really how did they move heavy things around - it's did they have the wheel, because the wheel is about more than just moving heavy things around. It has so many other uses.



Posted By: elenos
Date Posted: 25-Jul-2007 at 07:50
I accept that, thankyou for your explanation, if somebody had said the same thing before we wouldn't be having this discussion now! However, as I keep on pointing out, I look for real alternatives. That's the way  I am and will remain so, sorry about that. So far as we know America didn't have the wheel. Perhaps you suspect as I do that too much information has been lost by neglect and by rampant looting. Good thinking!

Many scholars ride their own hobby horse despite whatever change takes place in the evidence. Tell them something different what they haven't read in a book and they freak out and cannot handle it. They only have one way of approaching a problem, the way they learned as a child and will spend the rest of their life trying to prove it!

-------------
elenos


Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: 25-Jul-2007 at 15:18

Perhaps, but the problem with the Americas is not much the lack of knowledge but the large number of idiotic fantasies that cover the reality. The list is endless: "the white rulers of Tiahuanaco", "the astronauts landing in Nasca", "The black phylosophers teaching the Olmecs", "The Lamanites of the Mormons", "The fountain of youth", "The cities of the Caesars", "The chupacabras"..... name it.

Every single idiot in this world has a theory about the Americas :)

However, if one wants to get a good idea of what really happened there are good books on history, arts and engineering of ancient americas. It is amazing what they tell us and it is a lot better than fantasies, because it is real.

Pinguin

 

 



-------------


Posted By: edgewaters
Date Posted: 25-Jul-2007 at 18:34
I hope I'm not pulling a Von Daniken by suggesting that there may have been more wheels than just the toys.

I don't think its really that incredible - they obviously did have the wheel and understand the principles, its just a question of how did it develop and what else might they have used it for, and why did they not use it in the ways we'd expect.


Posted By: elenos
Date Posted: 25-Jul-2007 at 20:11
I agree with you pinquin. The lost city of gold and all that. I used to believe that stuff because the libraries are full of it, but to see the place is not to believe the myths anymore! A book can make many things seem better than they are in real life and exaggerate to the point you would rather believe the book than the facts.

South America always has been "the Lost World" The most common question "what went on there so the natives, without our technology built their civilization in parallel ways to Europe?" Immediately you are hooked. Go on tell me!  I love a good mystery so tell me! And the authors of this literature tell you alright, they get crowds flocking to Town Halls where you  pay your money at the door to hear all about the revelations and the more amazing the stories the better.


-------------
elenos


Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: 25-Jul-2007 at 20:28
Originally posted by edgewaters

I hope I'm not pulling a Von Daniken by suggesting that there may have been more wheels than just the toys.

I don't think its really that incredible - they obviously did have the wheel and understand the principles, its just a question of how did it develop and what else might they have used it for, and why did they not use it in the ways we'd expect.
 
Well, I agree with you that some cases of applications of wheel could have existed and we are not aware of. I like very much your post about the Mesoamerican pottery wheel, because that is a string to follow, very interesting indeed. In the case of the Andes and Chile, we know natives didn't use pottery wheel and still some pottery is done the traditional way without the wheel.
 
What I miss is the development of machinery!! They knew the wheel because it is obvious the knew the circles and they developed toys as well. Why nobody figure it out the toothed wheel is the big mistery, I believe.
 
 
 
 


-------------


Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: 25-Jul-2007 at 20:34
Originally posted by elenos

I agree with you pinquin. The lost city of gold and all that. I used to believe that stuff because the libraries are full of it, but to see the place is not to believe the myths anymore! A book can make many things seem better than they are in real life and exaggerate to the point you would rather believe the book than the facts.

South America always has been "the Lost World" The most common question "what went on there so the natives, without our technology built their civilization in parallel ways to Europe?" Immediately you are hooked. Go on tell me!  I love a good mystery so tell me! And the authors of this literature tell you alright, they get crowds flocking to Town Halls where you  pay your money at the door to hear all about the revelations and the more amazing the stories the better.
 
No technology? They had it, but it was different of what we would expect.
 
There is an excelent book about the topic published in the U.S., that weight a ton, and that cost me a fortune to import LOL, but that was worth it. I would recomend you to get it and probably is in a public library.  It tells a good fraction of the inventions and developments of Natives of the hemisphere. There are more that 450 fascinating entries. It is called

American Indian Contributions to the World

by Emory Dean Keoke and Kay Marie Porterfield

%5bbook%20cover%5d
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
You can see samples of the technologies in here.
 
http://www.kporterfield.com/aicttw/index.html - http://www.kporterfield.com/aicttw/index.html
 
Try to get a copy in your public library.
 
Pinguin
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 


-------------


Posted By: elenos
Date Posted: 26-Jul-2007 at 01:50
Sounds like a really good read, thanks piquin. 

-------------
elenos


Posted By: Yaomitl
Date Posted: 26-Jul-2007 at 04:37
Originally posted by pinguin

Perhaps, but the problem with the Americas is not much the lack of knowledge but the large number of idiotic fantasies that cover the reality. The list is endless: "the white rulers of Tiahuanaco", "the astronauts landing in Nasca", "The black phylosophers teaching the Olmecs", "The Lamanites of the Mormons", "The fountain of youth", "The cities of the Caesars", "The chupacabras"..... name it.

Every single idiot in this world has a theory about the Americas :)

However, if one wants to get a good idea of what really happened there are good books on history, arts and engineering of ancient americas. It is amazing what they tell us and it is a lot better than fantasies, because it is real.

Pinguin

 

 

Yeah too right on every point there! It drives me nuts and the subtext is pretty damn offensive, it being more or less "these people were too stupid to have built these things so it must have been aliens or whitey." The human brain has had the same capacity for thought over the last few million years at least and there's no difference between the cerebral equipment of Nezahualcoyotl and Albert Einstien. Furthermore, the deeper you get into studying Nahua (amongst others no doubt) thought, the more you realise these cultures had thinkers easily equivalent to those of Rome or Greece, although they applied their reasoning to different things. Personally I suspect that the choice of how they applied their thinking was ultimately defined by culture, which was itself ultimately defined by geography. People who live on an island will come up with a better made boat than desert dwellers and so on. It's not easy to discern the specifics of how this would postpone the development (or at least widespread use) of a wheel, at least not beyond what has already been said, but I really do believe the only two explanations are either (a) stupidity or (b) environment, and there's a great wealth of evidence to rule out the first option.
Interesting looking book there by the way. I too shall keep a look out for it.
 


-------------
"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


Posted By: edgewaters
Date Posted: 26-Jul-2007 at 09:51
It drives me nuts and the subtext is pretty damn offensive, it being more or less "these people were too stupid to have built these things so it must have been aliens or whitey."


Exactly what I've always thought ... whether it's diffusionists or the "ancient astronaut" crowd, they all basically want to try to deny natives credit for their achievements.

Nobody ever postulates that little green men built the Forum of Rome, I wonder why?


Posted By: elenos
Date Posted: 26-Jul-2007 at 10:08
Originally posted by edgewaters

Nobody ever postulates that little green men built the Forum of Rome, I wonder why?


Because after building Stonehenge,the pyramids and sinking Atlantis they decided to go to South America rather than mess about in Europe anymore?


-------------
elenos


Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: 26-Jul-2007 at 20:43
Originally posted by Yaomitl

[QUOTE=pinguin] ...Furthermore, the deeper you get into studying Nahua (amongst others no doubt) thought, the more you realise these cultures had thinkers easily equivalent to those of Rome or Greece, although they applied their reasoning to different things.
.... 
 
Absolutely agree!
 
People is the same. And yes, Nahua is great but my vote goes to Aymara.... a language really outstanding that is the favorite of linguistics and computer scientists.
 
Pinguin
 


-------------


Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: 26-Jul-2007 at 20:45
Originally posted by elenos

Originally posted by edgewaters

Nobody ever postulates that little green men built the Forum of Rome, I wonder why?


Because after building Stonehenge,the pyramids and sinking Atlantis they decided to go to South America rather than mess about in Europe anymore?
 
The reason is simple: RACISM.
 
Some people still believe Native Americans invented nothing. Therefore theirs achievements have to be assign to others.
 
In other words: IGNORANCE and BIGOTRY
 
Pinguin


-------------


Posted By: elenos
Date Posted: 26-Jul-2007 at 22:10
Do you mean the little green men went to South America because of racism? 

-------------
elenos


Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: 27-Jul-2007 at 10:24
Originally posted by elenos

Do you mean the little green men went to South America because of racism? 
 
The little green men were invented as an explanation of Amerindian achievements. That's racism. John Smith, Van Danniken and Van Sertima,  are all racists because they tried to robb the Amerindian heritage from theirs legilitame owners: the Amerindians.
 
Pinguin
 


-------------


Posted By: elenos
Date Posted: 27-Jul-2007 at 19:46
We have to admit that sensationalist  journalist writers gave the wrong impression. They give an idea of what happens when shoot from the lip historians take over, but on the good side their books did boost tourism. 

-------------
elenos


Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: 27-Jul-2007 at 22:15
Originally posted by elenos

We have to admit that sensationalist  journalist writers gave the wrong impression. They give an idea of what happens when shoot from the lip historians take over, but on the good side their books did boost tourism. 
 
Yeap. You can see lot of Dutch going to Tiahuanaco for pictures  after visiting Van Danniken green-martian-Gods museum in Dutchland LOL, and now it is quite possible to see Black Americans embracing Olmec heads Big%20smile.
 
However, when will come the time the world recognize the merits of Native Americans themselves?


-------------


Posted By: elenos
Date Posted: 27-Jul-2007 at 22:32
Originally posted by pinguin

However, when will come the time the world recognize the merits of Native Americans themselves?


Perhaps when the various Governments stabilize their economies, control the drug cartels and stop having revolutions by disarming the population?


-------------
elenos


Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: 27-Jul-2007 at 22:41
Originally posted by elenos

Originally posted by pinguin

However, when will come the time the world recognize the merits of Native Americans themselves?


Perhaps when the various Governments stabilize their economies, control the drug cartels and stop having revolutions by disarming the population?
 
That shows ignorance, fellow. Colombia is not an Indian country. Besides, our economies have been stabilized for more than a decade. Chile is growing 6% once again this year, for instance, and other countries of the region grow faster.
 
Well, but perhaps you gave the answer: WHEN THE GRINGO STOP APPLYING STEREOTYPES LOLLOL
 
So, it will never happen I am afraid.


-------------



Print Page | Close Window

Bulletin Board Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 9.56a - http://www.webwizforums.com
Copyright ©2001-2009 Web Wiz - http://www.webwizguide.com