Anciet Weapons of the Caucasian Race

Status
Not open for further replies.
This thread is so beyond fail, offensive, and outrageous that I should have started it.

Seriously... whites and backs descended from different apes? I guess they didn't stop teaching Eugenics in every state back in the 50's...
 
They're NOT different! They had a common anscester in the beginning! We are ALL hybrids of the two. Have you not been listening?

Home Erectus and Neanderthal are REAL, I didn't make them up. The reconstuctions I posted were completed from actual skulls and using the most current DNA. Where do you see racist in any of this??
Home Erectus' migration patterns start in Sub Sahara Africa and work North. Neanderthal's migration patterns start in Europe and work out.

They interbred. When I used the analogy of wolves and coyotes, I thought you knew what I meant. They're only considered different species because... I don't know why. They obviously had a direct common anscester. They can interbreed. Technically different species can't.

Listen to me again, and TRY not to just start nay-saying because Homo Erectus "Looks more like a monkey," or whatever. We ARE all apes anyway. Homo Erectus was a wily survivor, so was Neanderthal.

I think the modern races developed when the two "met" and interbreeded. We are ALL hybrids between the two. You may not agree, but stop calling the idea racist. There hasn't been a pure example of either one for 50,000 years.

I'm not a racist and neither is this theory! It actually explains the racial difference in humans quite well. AND it takes into account the actual presence of these two humans. Did you look at the Neanderthal? Did you see his art? Did you see the hands on the cave wall?

Are you still willing to say that Neanderthal wasn't a direct anscestor to us, but rather a parallel branch. He lived in Europe and Cro Magnon came out of Europe, but the two have little, if anything in common (other than they look almost exactly alike).

All modern humans are hybrids of Neanderthal and Homo Erectus. That's what I'm saying.
 
Where do you see racist in any of this??
Click to expand...

What I do see is someone debating anthropology instead of swords. The posts regarding swords in this thread are few. Much fewer than an effort to be "right" about evolution instead of offering much substance to anyone interested in ancient swords.

The solution, of course is to not feed or even acknowledge off topic rants about "I'm right and you're not"

I am often wrong but this time I might just be right.

Cheers

GC
 
Agree, George. The way the question was framed leaves no room to comment on weapons without also commenting on paleoanthropology. If the OP is interested in discussing the blades of a particular time and place he needs to find a way to frame a question about those things and not about the big can of worms that is distracting from a discussion of swords. I'm done with this particular frame.
 
And this, my friends, is why one does not go to a knife website to learn about genetics.
 
Yes, yes, point taken. I just didn't want anyone accusing me of race-baiting.

Here's the SUPER exciting news! I posted this once, but nobody seemed to notice:

http://www.agt.si.edu/site_overviews/georgia/saphar-kharaba_artifact_catalogue.html

It's an almost perfect bronze sword/dagger from the 15th Century BC. Not only that, but it was unearthed in the Caucasus region of Soviet Georgia. This is the homeland of the Caucasian people and this design predates the ancient Celts by 1000 years!!

This is the oldest "Sword" I've ever seen that's definitely of "European" make. Well, that may not be true. Trade between the Caucasus and Mesopotamia was pretty well established, so... Just as the Franks were the bladesmiths for all the Germanic peoples, Mesopotamia was the ancient center for bronze casting.

This design can be seen anywhere the Caucasian people migrated, and on into the Iron Age. The triangular blade, The "hourglass" handle and the sharp hilt and pommel. What an incredible artifact. I would love if anyone can find an older blade, that's definitely European.

1500 BC, WOW!!!
 
It might be too big but here:

ge_kp120_5_bronze_dagger1_s.jpg
 
The aliens who bred us by combining their DNA with that of cats gave us the weapons at the same time they taught us about agriculture, building pyramids, and the secret of baking Twinkies.

:D

Hey, it's past midnight and I'm sleepy, ok? You should hear the conspiracy radio shows on at this time of night.

Enough silliness on my part. Carry on.
 
When the science is against you and your answer is that the science cannot be trusted as it is against you, you enter the realm of myth.

Many have pushed race myths over the years. Little was made better in any sense by their respective versions of PC.

We are all descended from one area and one stock. All manner of pictures from millions of years apart will not change that.

This thread did not go off track. It started off track with your racial theories.
 
It's not really my theory. The idea that Neanderthal interbred with Homo Erectus to create modern humans is actually a well-established theory. I happen to believe it.
Different races exist. I think this is the origen of race. It fascinates me to think that Neanderthal was the anscestor to modern Europeans. They were close to the earth. Their Gods would be ours. That interests me. I've been looking at a lot of cave paintings. I respect my anscestors.

What is the other theory?

"All humans evolved solely from Homo Erectus"

That means the resemblance between Neanderthal and Europeans is a coincidence. Skin pigmentation and facial features evoled solely as the result of heat and sunlight. We all STARTED out black. Us Europeans turned white so we could hide better in the snow? Oh yes, the Neanderthal DNA we have is just silly. It barely means anything at all.

I spent a lot of time tring to find the oldest actual European sword I could find. What do you think of the SWORD??
 
What part of KNIFE DISCUSSIONS is ambiguous here? Seriously, can someone lock this threat PLEASE... it adds nothing at all to the forum
 
Yup, the fecal bomb has officially exploded, but let's post pictures of ancient Caucasian weapons to keep the thread from getting sent to W&C..


640x905_5679_Korgoth_2d_fan_art_warrior_fantasy_barbarian_picture_image_digital_art.jpg

ManowarBand1983IntoGloryRideSession.jpg
 
The KlingenMuseum in Solingen, Germany had a fascinating exhibit of early bronze age edged weapons. I saw the exhibit a couple of years back. Well worth a visit if you are in the neighborhood.

TedP
 
The problem with your hypothesis, Uath, other than I can't find any references for it anywhere, is that Homo erectus (1.8 to 0.3 million years ago) died out before Homo neanderthalensis (250,000 to 30,000 years ago) came on the scene.

If it were a valid hypothesis, I would think I could find a reference to it somewhere. I'm pretty sure you don't qualify as a human evolution expert, uath
 
I am not an anthropologist, but an historian with a university appointment. As I understand it, the concept of race is now discredited, since it was a racist system devised in the imperial age to differentiate humanity in a way to justify imperial expansion. In retrospect, the notion of dividing humanity on the basis of skin color makes as much sense as setting up a classification system derived from hair or eye color.

In my discipline, race is still powerful, given how many historical actors based their conduct on this idea.
 
Uath said:
We know that Neanderthals and Cro Magnon lived at the same time. We also know they interbred. Also, we know that "White" people originated from the same places Neanderthal lived.
Click to expand...

My impression of the current state of knowledge on this is that there's no evidence conclusive of interbreeding between Cro Magnon (Homo Sapiens) and Neanderthal and virtually no trace in the gene pool. There have been a few finds in archaeology of what appear might be intermediate individuals, but no evidence that they actually were or that they propagated to any degree. There is also an assumption that the primary purpose of weaponry was war, but I suspect that we will find that wars were not as frequent as we assume from more modern history and that culture was more likely spread by religion than by war, and that all cultures around the world evolved out of a common "scenic" founding event. There may have been many such events but they all have a basic similarity reiterated in myth. It is a kind of "system" for avoiding war, but highly unethical by our modern lights and also very effective. It involved human sacrifice. I'm a political sociologist with a particular interest in anthropology... and the big question left out by most social scientists and anthropologists is "how did mankind get along well enough to survive and thrive when there is such a propensity for violence?" Turns out it's an easy question to answer. We turned the "war of all against all" into a "war of all against one." After that one was dispatched and peace reigned (temporarily) we attributed divine inspiration to the victim and decided that peace was his intention all along. So the victim is worshiped as a new founder, and new god. This is the central theme of all human culture, which we see repeated in every age.

And only one "race" of mankind discovered this mechanism, so only one survived.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top