Why no chickens?

[LegioCorvus]

I agree with your book recommendation, but disagree with you assertion that paraphrasing it (as I have done with other sections above) would be a disservice, whether out of a fear of unintentionally perpetuating inaccurate information or somehow "stealing credit" for another's ideas. If I took anything from that book it is that you can't stop the spread of beneficial ideas.

If you are anything like me, reading that book re-invigorated your interest in playing Civilization. Although it highlights some of the more absurd departures from realism present in the game, it succinctly summarizes the fascinating nature of the progress of human development, and in particular the eventual dominance of a few cultures (Europeans) over many others, which is in turn the focus and appeal of the game.

I just don't recommend paraphrasing it partially out of not wanting to perpetuate inaccurate information. I fail to see how it could be stealing credit when the work in question is being credited. The book, easily my favorite non-fiction, does such a thorough and excellent job addressing all the questions someone might have (at least, reasonable questions) that I feel it would actually take more effort to paraphrase it and address each point individually, when the work itself present the entire argument. To be fair, that point of view could be born out of laziness on my part.

I actually wasn't playing Civ4 the first time I read it, as I think I was finally trying KOTOR at the time, but it did re-ignite my passion for evolutionary anthropology.

 

[whitelaughter]

Even herders use pots and other implements that end up being dug out of ancient trash heaps, and not one item of Israelite manufacture has been found in Egypt from that time period. Not one. If hundreds of thousands of Jews were in Egypt for 400 years, they somehow did so without leaving a single trace of their presence.

Sadly, a lot of what was believed about Egypt for years came from mythical accounts from people who were never there. Thus the ongoing belief that the Egyptians relied on slave labor for their great projects when the archaeological evidence indicates that they were not.

Not sure what this has to do with domesticationg animals, but no matter:

1)"use" =/= "manufacture". Herders don't make things, they trade.
2) Hundreds of thousands? Nope. Simple mistranslation: "eleph" has two meanings: it can mean a thousand; it can also mean elite warrior. So a line saying 20 elite warriors plus 1,120 men will be written as "20 thousand, 1,120": and then gets compressed in 21,120 by poor translations. So try a few thousand. (EDIT: Apparently, eleph can also mean 'family'. Joy, that's even more complicating).
3)myth? Myth doesn't mean lie. Most myths have a solid basis in truth; a good example is the Golden Fleece - fleeces were used to pan for gold on northern coast of what is now Turkey, with soil and water being strained through the fleece: gold flecks are caught on the fleece. Dismissing myths is a good way of looking very stupid, as more evidence is constantly being dug up.
4) Your assertion that they were never there is just that - an unsupported assertion. If you wish to be taken seriously, provide proof: and while you're at it, show where they *were*.
Without evidence to the contrary, the texts are our best guides to what was going on.

 

[naterator]

4) Your assertion that they were never there is just that - an unsupported assertion. If you wish to be taken seriously, provide proof: and while you're at it, show where they *were*.
Without evidence to the contrary, the texts are our best guides to what was going on.

Actually, you have it backwards. Your assertion that they were ever there is just that, an unsupported assertion. The burden of proof is on those who make the claims, not the skeptic. It must be proved that they WERE there, not that they WEREN'T. There is no scientific evidence that supports the book of exodus, despite the best efforts of some to shoehorn assorted archaeological tidbits to fit the stories. Books and folklore say alot of crazy things and cannot be taken as scientific or historic fact. Especially books that make claims as outrageous as the bible. I know that there are kernels of history nestled in there, but until hard evidence backs up any individual part of it, it must be filed under fiction.

I say the hebrews were in australia at the time, since you cannot prove beyond a shadow of a doubt they weren't; then i must be right.

 

[Badtz Maru]

Not sure what this has to do with domesticationg animals, but no matter:

1)"use" =/= "manufacture". Herders don't make things, they trade.
2) Hundreds of thousands? Nope. Simple mistranslation: "eleph" has two meanings: it can mean a thousand; it can also mean elite warrior. So a line saying 20 elite warriors plus 1,120 men will be written as "20 thousand, 1,120": and then gets compressed in 21,120 by poor translations. So try a few thousand. (EDIT: Apparently, eleph can also mean 'family'. Joy, that's even more complicating).
3)myth? Myth doesn't mean lie. Most myths have a solid basis in truth; a good example is the Golden Fleece - fleeces were used to pan for gold on northern coast of what is now Turkey, with soil and water being strained through the fleece: gold flecks are caught on the fleece. Dismissing myths is a good way of looking very stupid, as more evidence is constantly being dug up.
4) Your assertion that they were never there is just that - an unsupported assertion. If you wish to be taken seriously, provide proof: and while you're at it, show where they *were*.
Without evidence to the contrary, the texts are our best guides to what was going on.

So you're saying that nomads never manufacture and decorate their own pottery, or make their own implements, they trade for EVERYTHING? This is pretty ridiculous considering the source material you are pulling your history from also describes cities and temples. Not all the Israelites were nomadic herders, and you can bet that if they were living in Goshen that some of them would be living in permanent settlements.

There is established criteria for the types of pottery and implements that were made by the people of what became Israel, that's how their movements were tracked. We have plenty of evidence of their existing in Israel (much later), none in Egypt.

You are the one asserting that a clearly mythical tale that contradicts all current Egyptology is truth, you should be the one providing proof that they were there. But there is no proof. In fact, there is no extra-Biblical evidence of the Hebrews existing prior to the 9th century BC except for one piece of pottery from about 1000 BC (discovered just last year) with some writing on it that appears to be in the Hebrew language in a proto-Canaanite script.

 

[Powerslave]

Are we discussing chickens, the Bible, or Egypt? I ask because I'm a bit conflicted here. As much as I love heated debate on touchy subjects (what the thin-skinned often call "trolling"), I hesitate to join in on conversation that's going to eventually head back to that most detestable of birds, the inedible chicken.

 

[Ramesses]

I contemplate to join in on conversation that's going to eventually head back to that most delectable of birds, the incredible chicken.

I noticed you had a few typos in that sentence. Don't worry, I fixed them.

 

[Silu]

Are we discussing chickens, the Bible, or Egypt?

There's a sentence I never thought I'd see.

Shameless useless post since the thread went semi-OT anyway about 5 pages ago

 

[TheLazyHase]

Shameless useless post since the thread went semi-OT anyway about 5 pages ago

I would like to show the hidden part of Silu's post to everbody?

That being said, we should talk about the most important between chicken, Egypt, and the bible. I would say that the bacon is most important of the three, but it's a translation of a pretty untranslatable joke.

 

[naterator]

this thread is off topic?!? No, it's like an episode of seinfeld, it just looks way off topic, but it'll all come together in the end. When the hebrews are fleeing egypt and are given manna, known today as boneless chicken, from heaven; hence no bones left behind for archaeologists. It's all there in the bible...

 

[Ramesses]

Naterator just hit the jackpot.

 

[Badtz Maru]

She's a cage for every unclean spirit and every filthy chicken.

 

[bestbrian]

this thread is off topic?!? No, it's like an episode of seinfeld, it just looks way off topic, but it'll all come together in the end. When the hebrews are fleeing egypt and are given manna, known today as boneless chicken, from heaven; hence no bones left behind for archaeologists. It's all there in the bible...

And then, yeah, verily, Moses descended from the Mount and brought upon the Israelites God's gift of the Buffalo Sauce, and it was good.

 

[Ramesses]

And then, yeah, verily, Moses descended from the Mount and brought upon the Israelites God's gift of the Buffalo Sauce, and it was good.

Even though the city of Buffalo was at least 6000 miles and 3000 years away...

 

[bestbrian]

Even though the city of Buffalo was at least 6000 miles and 3000 years away...

Oh, yee of little of faith. Where do you think they got the name "Buffalo" from if not the Bible?

 

[whitelaughter]

In order:
naterator - if you wish to be skeptical, you should start by being skeptical about skepticism. It might interest you to know that skepticism took off with Socrates, who was only taken seriously because the Delphic Oracle said he should be. So the reason to be skeptical is because a girl flying high on volcanic fumes said so. Not so impressive is, it?
Skepticism is only useful if you apply it to *everything*, not just one side of an argument. You need to it at both sides of an argument (and ideally, be suspicious of the idea that there are only two sides).


Badtz Maru - No, I am not saying that they made *nothing*. However:
- they will make far less, as that is not their primary social funtion;
- it will largely be from the materials available to them, most of which degrade (eg hide);
- it will be heavily influenced by the society they live in, due to the richness of the Egyptian culture.
Even if none of this was the case, my base statement stands: archealogical records are always fragmentary, and arguing from absence is absurd.
Anyway - a clearly mythical tale? Even if the case, relevant how? The Illiad has gods running around in it, but didn't stop us from finding Troy - and there's some fine work on chariot tactics there as well. The Sword in the Stone an the Holy Grail are myths, but there seems to have been a historical King Arthur. There is normally at least some truth to the old legends.

Bestbrian - given there are no chickens in the Bible, unlikely that we'll get back on topic that way. Via Egyptology? According to that most unreliable of sources, wiki, chickens are mentioned in the annals of Tutmose III. Can't recall anything from a more reliable source.

 

[naterator]

whitelaughter, if you're going to make arguments from wikipedia, at least read past the first section. Clearly, i was using the term in the context of scientific skepticism, not philosophic. The claim is that the hebrews were in egypt, the counter argument is that it must be proven. I am now supposed to be skeptical of asking for proof?

There is ample archaeological evidence of nomadic people who produced far less than the hebrews would have, much of it being found in places far less travelled by archaeologists than egypt. There is no reason that something wouldn't be found. I understand the hit or miss nature of archaeology, but to dismiss a total lack of evidence as insignificant and suggest that asking for proof is somehow a bad position to take... Well, you learn that argument when you research organized religion, not scientific method...

Your argument is essentially that "an absence of evidence is not an evidence of absense"; which is in itself true, but without evidence, it remains simply a story.

Your example of the Iliad is a great one. by your logic, they found troy so that proves the existance of cyclops. Part of the story was true, so then until somehow disproven, all of it must be true. Why would they lie, right?

 

[naterator]

Naterator just hit the jackpot.

Thanks, hey maybe you could settle a bet for me. Back when you were pharaoh, do you remember a bunch of slaves raining frogs until you let them go? The leader was supposed to be your step brother. Ring a bell?

 

[Ramesses]

Thanks, hey maybe you could settle a bet for me. Back when you were pharaoh, do you remember a bunch of slaves raining frogs until you let them go? The leader was supposed to be your step brother. Ring a bell?

Funny story. I do remember having a crazy step-brother once. Moe, he was called. I was babysitting him one day and he just killed a soldier and ran off babbling into the desert for no apparent reason. Fortunately my parents were cool about the whole thing. But he came back eventually. He told me to release the joos, and I asked what was he talking about, because I never heard of joos before (it sounds tasty, though). He told me that the joos were slaves taken from a land called Canada or something and that I should let them go. Of course, I had no idea what he was talking about, since Canada wasn't a country I ever heard of. Also, I wasn't running slavery at the time... okay, I may have had a couple prostitutes locked up in my room, but I'm pretty sure he wasn't talking about them. Um, anyway, he then changed the subject to how he could produce snakes from wood. You... don't want to hear about that. Well I sent him off, and I figured he'd just stumble on back to whatever cave he was living in. And then for no apparent reason, he started slaughtering the cattle and pouring their blood into the river, put frogs in people's houses, all while chanting Free The Joos! Free The Joos!... It didn't help that there was also a famine at the time. Well, after he started killing people's kids, I had enough. I send an army after him, and, I'm not sh*tting you, he ACTUALLY swam the entire Red Sea to escape.

It wasn't until later that I heard about some prophet guy who bought some rules carved on stone tablets from Moe for a shiny stone he found in the sand. He then held a session with a small tribe called "Moe Says", and that was the start of a little religion called Joodyism.

 

[LegioCorvus]

Funny story. I do remember having a crazy step-brother once. Moe, he was called. I was babysitting him one day and he just killed a soldier and ran off babbling into the desert for no apparent reason. Fortunately my parents were cool about the whole thing. But he came back eventually. He told me to release the joos, and I asked what was he talking about, because I never heard of joos before (it sounds tasty, though). He told me that the joos were slaves taken from a land called Canada or something and that I should let them go. Of course, I had no idea what he was talking about, since Canada wasn't a country I ever heard of. Also, I wasn't running slavery at the time... okay, I may have had a couple prostitutes locked up in my room, but I'm pretty sure he wasn't talking about them. Um, anyway, he then changed the subject to how he could produce snakes from wood. You... don't want to hear about that. Well I sent him off, and I figured he'd just stumble on back to whatever cave he was living in. And then for no apparent reason, he started slaughtering the cattle and pouring their blood into the river, put frogs in people's houses, all while chanting Free The Joos! Free The Joos!... It didn't help that there was also a famine at the time. Well, after he started killing people's kids, I had enough. I send an army after him, and, I'm not sh*tting you, he ACTUALLY swam the entire Red Sea to escape.

It wasn't until later until I heard about some prophet guy who bought some rules carved on stone tablets from him for a shiny stone he found in the sand. He then held a session with a small tribe called "Moe Says", and that was the start of a little religion called Joodyism.

+1 You have made us laugh in the past.

 

[Sanguinarius]

You ever wonder why certain resources are missing from the game, or why certain ones are there? Like, for example, chickens. Chickens are one of the major types of livestock. Their consumption has outpaced beef all over the world, and their eggs are essential for a great deal of foods. Their lack of inclusion baffles me. Balance issues?

This one is kind of unusual, but what about coffee?

There are many claims that renaissance thought was fostered by coffee shop discussions, then the newest sign of social power and not the Starbucks thing we have going today. At any rate, as Starbucks itself can attest, coffee is a majorly consumed product in the world today, and is a natural stimulant.

The only drawbacks I see are that it would probably have an unusual bonus attached (+1 in cities with resource). That, and it is a drug. Otherwise, I'd argue about tobacco. Good profit crop, would benefit from plantations. Downside, +1 . Not sure of the bonus. I don't know what stance the Civ guys have on narcotics, as they've had a long and profound effect on our societies, but they're up there with Hitler for adding controversy to the game.



Ones I don't understand:

Incense Really? What am I missing about this one? I've known people to use incense occasionally, but definitely not to the level I've seen people use sugar or dyes.

Bananas Why bananas? I know they're a decent source of found, but are they really that profound? Isn't 'banana republic' a pejorative term for a country that is dependent on limited agriculture (i.e. bananas)? Does it just represent all fruit? I'm not getting this one, either.

You think too much. Play the game and be happy!