Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Horses became extinct 10,000 years ago in the Americas but existed before that.
There is no evidence that 10,000 years ago horses were domesticated in the Americas. They weren't the same horses the Spaniards brought from Europe. They were smaller, quite wild and eaten for food just like buffalo, elk and deer.
Describing petroglyphs as written language is a bit of a stretch. No one considers the Lascaux paintings written language, for example. It's unlikely there will ever be an interpretation that's even mostly free of guesswork, just like Cretan Linear A.
Even the Central American nations had only glyphic recordings on the verge of becoming language.
Perhaps some of them were mere doodles by lazy travelers taking rest but current research suggests that they had various communicative functions, hence "newspaper" rocks.
Some appear to be associated with certain tribes and seem to be boundary markers - "No trespassing." Others appear to tell stories of travels, maps and information of where to find game and water. Others have been determined to refer to celestial events and ceremonies.
So while artistic drawings can only be vaguely called communication others of these seem to have the deliberate purpose of leaving messages.
Maybe we need to think in terms of what type of communication would be most practical to nomadic people, primitive though it may be in its execution, before we write the petroglyphs off as simply ancient art.
Until the Mayan glyphs were deciphered they were simply ornate carvings but it is now realized that they were a quite sophisticated method of recording.
Perhaps you and I differ in our definition of communication?
The Aztecs and the Mayas left the remnants of vast empires that existed in what is now Mexico and Central America.
However, there are no pyramids, cities, or signs of any advanced civilization that developed in the United States in pre-Columbian times. Only some pueblos in southwestern states like New Mexico.
Why do you think the Native Americans in the U.S. never developed much beyond the primitive state in spite of living here for many thousands of years?
They did, to an extent. Look up Cahokia, and also read up on the Anasazi.
Perhaps you and I differ in our definition of communication?
No, language.
I do not debate that petroglyphs, cave paintings, (can't think of the term for constructed monuments like Stonehenge and the snake mounds) etc. are meant to be, at least in part, communication. (Sometimes just to the gods, since the Lascaux paintings are so inaccessible and the tribes of South America didn't have helicopters.)
Whether a few "hobo marks" about weather, buffalo herds and hostile/friendly tribes is "language" is debatable. I'd say pre-, proto-language at most.
AFAIK, the only complete written language developed by Native Americans is Cherokee, and that was directly inspired by contact with European languages and writing. Other nations developed written forms as straight transcription of spoken language, in that era and later. Usually to provide a means of translating the Bible to their tongue, although cultural and ethnographic recording made good use of it later.
The original settlers of North America left Asia before the languages of the Indus Valley and China developed, so were on their own and on a different timeline.
Going back to the OP's original question "Why did Native Americans in what is now the U.S. never develop the level of civilization of the Aztecs and the Mayas?"
Well would you consider the Mississippian culture to be on the same level? The main difference is that they didn't use stone in their construction so what is left doesn't look nearly as impressive, but I would still consider it as a civilization since it had urban populations, agriculture, and a form of a centralized political and religious power.
See what happened is the Natives had 5G early on. By that point the only things being done were people pushing buttons all day and calling it accomplishment, like many of us do today. Then the internet went out and the tribes had nothing left to do but go around nomadically and search for spirit quests with the help of some shrooms. Then one day in a burial mound, Al Gore discovered the internet again and was like...wow check out these cat videos!
In actuality, necessity is the mother of invention. The Native tribes seemed to have learned ecology fairly well. With wide open spaces there was simply no need to try and settle down and reinforce borders. Besides, make a dwelling too nice and it might invite envious neighbors to try and take it from you Lives were active, nomadic and short
Indian tribes didn't stay in one place long enough to want to build structures. They took their "houses" with them.
They were hunter/gatherers and followed herds and moved according to the time of year.
They would have starved by staying in one place because of the lack of wildlife and edible vegetation: desserts that were without rain that became barren during the hot weather, or deep snow which made navigating to hunt impossible in the winter.
Indian tribes didn't stay in one place long enough to want to build structures. They took their "houses" with them.
They were hunter/gatherers and followed herds and moved according to the time of year.
They would have starved by staying in one place because of the lack of wildlife and edible vegetation: desserts that were without rain that became barren during the hot weather, or deep snow which made navigating to hunt impossible in the winter.
You're describing only some pre-Columbians. Some did indeed stay in one place, and many built permanent structures. Agriculture was practiced in many places. Europeans first exploring what would become Virginia discovered this. It was widespread in the Mississippi river valley, though those civilizations had mostly been devastated by European diseased before European bipeds made their way there. In other places where wild food was particularly abundant due to high-producing land (exs: the Southeast, western California) or in coastal areas where the sea provided bounty (exs: the Pacific Northwest, the Chesapeake), there was no reason to move.
As for permanent dwellings, there were the great houses and cliff dwellings of the Chaco and other cultures in the Southwest, the longhouses of the Iroquois and other tribes, the earth lodges of the interior, and the buildings of the city of Cahokia (near modern St. Louis), which at peak had a permanent population in the thousands or tens of thousands.
Seasonal migration was usually practiced in less-productive areas, where the land could not sustain a permanent residence - deserts, high mountains, the Arctic, etc.
I do not debate that petroglyphs, cave paintings, (can't think of the term for constructed monuments like Stonehenge and the snake mounds) etc. are meant to be, at least in part, communication. (Sometimes just to the gods, since the Lascaux paintings are so inaccessible and the tribes of South America didn't have helicopters.)
Whether a few "hobo marks" about weather, buffalo herds and hostile/friendly tribes is "language" is debatable. I'd say pre-, proto-language at most.
AFAIK, the only complete written language developed by Native Americans is Cherokee, and that was directly inspired by contact with European languages and writing. Other nations developed written forms as straight transcription of spoken language, in that era and later. Usually to provide a means of translating the Bible to their tongue, although cultural and ethnographic recording made good use of it later.
The original settlers of North America left Asia before the languages of the Indus Valley and China developed, so were on their own and on a different timeline.
OK. I see your perspective more clearly. I think it's a fair scholarly viewpoint but perhaps more selective than it needs to be considering what types of information were the most crucial in their world.
We are still using "hobo marks" to communicate. (Think universal road signs. I'm in mind of the National Parks sign of people feeding animals with a line through it.) Certainly not a discussion of a lofty concept but vital information, nonetheless.
When you don't know what language your readers will be speaking and want to leave a message the best way to do it is in symbols. I don't think that implies inferior communication. At any rate it bespeaks an effort at helping those who follow. Rather generous considering they had to be chipped out of rock.
My opinion and certainly not worth an argument.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
