8 ms·
I find it amazing that early humans tended to make art of animals not humans. Like the cave paintings in France. It seems that early humans put the animals fron
by RandomWorker 5y ago
I find it amazing that early humans tended to make art of animals not humans. Like the cave paintings in France. It seems that early humans put the animals front and Center at some point.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- ChrisMarshallNY 5y agoThey had more impact on human lives. Hunter-gatherer groups tend to be small and disparate. They don’t really have much impact on each other. But they deal with animals, on a daily. It’s not just primitive societies, either. Modern tribal groups tend to concentrate on animals and crops. When your very survival depends on knowing as much as possible about prey and draft animals, weather, etc., these topics occupy your attention. When they depicted other humans, it was often about conflict. We may think of these as “quaint” beliefs, but these folks took this stuff seriously. Their survival depended on it.
- toyg 5y ago> They had more impact on human lives. Yeah, we should remember also that permanent or periodic nomadism was the norm on large swaths of the planet. Animals were obviously key to move significant numbers of people (women, children...), as well as to produce food on the go. If the camel-god says no, you're stuck in the middle of the desert, so you better keep him happy.
- ChrisMarshallNY 5y agoAlso, camels are very smart, and bad-tempered: https://wiki.lspace.org/You_Bastard https://wiki.lspace.org/You_Bastard
- ChrisMarshallNY 5y agoSigh ... Lighten up. Life's too short! If you haven’t read Sir Terry, you don’t know what you’re missing.
- booleandilemma 5y agoUsing your magical paint to steal my soul and trap it in rock? No thank you! That’s a quick way to get yourself bludgeoned. Stick to animals please.
- papandada 5y agoAnd maybe a few fertile/pregnant women.
- swader999 5y agoMy cat is always nice to me. I understand these ancients.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- Spooky23 5y agoHumans tend to have problems with other humans and will destroy images or propaganda. Nobody really hates camels enough.
- anonAndOn 5y ago"Camel Rock" is a pretty good marketing asset. If it wasn't some sort of religious icon, maybe it was an early tourist trap (or both)?
- woko 5y agoHere are a few examples of human figures from 30,000 years ago [1], and 35,000 to 40,000 years ago [2, 3]. For comparison, the eroded camel sculptures are from 8,000 years ago at best. Moreover, beware of possible biases which could explain what we see today: there is a difference between what we observe and what was. Remember for instance the destruction of the Buddhas of Bamiyan [4], which happened less than 1,500 years after they were built. It is extremely unlikely that a work of art survives for 40,000 years, and some may be more likely to be destroyed than others, depending on location, weather, traditions, history, etc. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Venus_of_Galgenberg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Venus_of_Galgenberg [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Venus_of_Hohle_Fels https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Venus_of_Hohle_Fels [3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adorant_from_the_Gei%C3%9Fenkl%C3%B6sterle_cave https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adorant_from_the_Gei%C3%9Fenkl... [4] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buddhas_of_Bamiyan https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buddhas_of_Bamiyan