←back to thread

198 points isaacfrond | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.199s | source
Show context
hopelite ◴[] No.45099153[source]
On a related note, since the Paleolithic rarely comes up on HN, something that seems to rarely come up in English language content; Menhir [1] (Long stone) or standing stones, which are spread all across Europe, some very elaborately decorated, others with sight holes cut in them, others extremely large, i.e., 30-40 feet tall before they were knocked over by the invasive meme, Christianity.

They are found from Portugal all the way to Siberia, but very little is known about them following the Christian meme eradicating the indigenous cultures through the many purges and programs from 300CE on.

There are some references that imply at least in some places they were a kind of connection to the afterlife and ancestors that would turn into birds that would perch on top of the standing stone, something that is still part of indigenous beliefs and practices in parts of Asia. It's basically the indigenous culture of the Native Europeans that middle eastern Christianity destroyed and eradicated like it destroyed and eradicated the Native Americans and so many other native people and cultures around the world.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Menhir

replies(5): >>45099447 #>>45099501 #>>45099587 #>>45099609 #>>45100019 #
vasco ◴[] No.45099501[source]
What about the indigenous people the guys with the menhirs killed? Why are menhir guys indigenous, but whoever killed them, not indigenous?
replies(1): >>45100546 #
namenotrequired ◴[] No.45100546[source]
Quote me the passage where he said they weren’t?
replies(2): >>45101787 #>>45105932 #
1. vasco ◴[] No.45105932[source]
The question is whatever time period people discuss, somehow the indigenous people is whoever was there exactly before the time they mean. But people have moved around all through history and killed each other the whole way through so it's always strange. Almost as a rule the "original" indigenous people were killed by the "current" indigenous people sometimes not that long ago before the period under discussion. It think it's better to just use the terms for both groups. Also because it's a bit weird to relegate the conquered group to just "the indigenous", they have a name too.

I understand using the shorthand for encounters of two groups with very disparate technology knowledge like for example during the Discoveries period but when it's so long ago and people had access to "same" stuff it's a bit weird. My comment isn't a slight on the less powerful people it's weirdness with the term.