Comment on Ancient Historians v. Modern Historians
TranscendentalEmpire@lemmy.today 10 hours agoYeah, some of the stuff that has been able to be confirmed via geological studies is just insane. It’s crazy to me how they aren’t more widely known for disrupting the idea of prehistory.
I wouldn’t say the idea of prehistory is disrupted per se. But we have to accept that it’s region-dependent. In any given region (recorded) history started when the oldest still available account was preserved.
Some regions are far better at preserving very old accounts than others.
That’s not how we classically define prehistory though. Technically pre-history is defined as the period of time beginning when the first humans started using stone tools and ending when different cultures developed writing systems.
My criticism is that western scholars put too much importance on the written word.
That’s my point: The classical definition makes the assumption that written records are the only records with any kind of reliability, which doesn’t hold everywhere.
ChicoSuave@lemmy.world 9 hours ago
Blame the people who don’t look like them but run the country. Anglo fragility won’t give brown people have a chance.