NationStates Jolt Archive

What do you think is the weirdest ancient culture and why?

Possibly the Incas, who never used wheels, or writing, or money, but had taxation and bureaucracy.

The Spartans were pretty weird too.

I think the Mayans were quite odd. They played that game where you hit the ball through the hoop with your head and hips, and the team that lost got sacraficed. Hell they killed themselves off by poisoning their water supplies with dead bodies.

Israelis Pork is yummy.

Man, those Romans were queer. They stripped people down to they're loin-clothes and threw them out to be eatean by tigers and lions. The ones that survived were then systematically killed to recreate a battle against Carthage, or some other former enemy, by other people with armor and spears and horses. And the crowds loved it!

Possibly the Incas, who never used wheels,
Well, wheels aren't much use in mountains. It had the interesting consequence that their city gates aren't any wider than a regular door.

I think the Indus Valley Civilisation - thousands of sites have been excavated, but no evidence that they ever fought a war has been found (they died out only when their major rivers changed course). They also have a bizarre script that no-one understands, despite the fact that we have thousands of samples of it (including what seems to be the world's oldest billboard).

The Mayas. Abandoning their cities for who knows what reason.

Egyptians...

I just can't stop wondering who first came up with this brilliant idea of "Hey, if you stick a wire up a corpse's nose and swirl it around, and then turn the head, the brain will flow out" followed by the "Hey, if you put a corpse in an immense amount of salt for a while, it'll keep forever" and the "Hey, let's build a giant solid pyramid with one tiny chamber at the very center and let's put a corpse in there"

I think the Carthaginians get the title for their weird practice of sacrificing their children.

I think the Carthaginians get the title for their weird practice of sacrificing their children.

Which hasn't been proven yet and may in fact be little else than Roman propaganda....
http://www.channel4.com/history/microsites/C/carthage/carthage_life.html#child_sacrifice

Which hasn't been proven yet and may in fact be little else than Roman propaganda....
Its clear, Romans are the strangest people on the face of the planet. Child sacrifices, and killing innocent people for entertainment? Down with Rome, down with Rome!

Its clear, Romans are the strangest people on the face of the planet. Child sacrifices, and killing innocent people for entertainment? Down with Rome, down with Rome!
The Greeks started it.

Which hasn't been proven yet and may in fact be little else than Roman propaganda....
http://www.channel4.com/history/microsites/C/carthage/carthage_life.html#child_sacrifice'ccordin' to the ZDF, they did...

'ccordin' to the ZDF, they did...

According to the ZDF, the world is ruled by Mainzelmaennchen :D

"Gudn Aaaaaaaambd!"

Which hasn't been proven yet and may in fact be little else than Roman propaganda....
http://www.channel4.com/history/microsites/C/carthage/carthage_life.html#child_sacrifice

Yep. One has to remember that there is very little left of Carthaginian history texts, as they were mostly burned with the city, and therefore almost everything we know about them comes from Romans. And archeology, of course, but that doesn't give information abuot whther they sacrificed kids...

Which I certainly doubt. In many aspects, if not perhaps every, Cartaginians were more civilized than their Roman rivals, but weren't capable of sustained warfare through decades.

They form my favourite ancient culture.



The weirdest...? Hmmm....

I think my vote goes to the Spartans. Nothing like that had eevr been created before and has never been created after.

According to the ZDF, the world is ruled by Mainzelmaennchen :D

....But Cabra... the world is ruled by Mainzelmännchen!

....But Cabra... the world is ruled by Mainzelmännchen!Didn't you read the fairy tale where they quit? We've been having to do honest work to earn our living ever since...

I would say it's that culture that thinks their entire lives are dictated by a dude who hid in a bush then set it on fire. If only I could remember what they were called...

I would say it's that culture that thinks their entire lives are dictated by a dude who hid in a bush then set it on fire. If only I could remember what they were called...Actually, there's a type of bush that secretes an oily substance on its leaves that will burn if it gets hot enough, without harming the bush...

Actually, there's a type of bush that secretes an oily substance on its leaves that will burn if it gets hot enough, without harming the bush...

What about the man hiding in the bush?

And that's a very interesting fact

....But Cabra... the world is ruled by Mainzelmännchen!

I knew it! I always knew it!

It's a conspiracy... they took over the world right after WW II and now they've set about ruining Carthage's reputation....
I have to get my tinfoil hat...

What about the man hiding in the bush?

And that's a very interesting fact

...even though it has nothing to do with this thread.

What about the man hiding in the bush?

And that's a very interesting factI was just pointing out that no one needed to set fire to any bush...;)

Didn't you read the fairy tale where they quit? We've been having to do honest work to earn our living ever since...

Weren't those their distant relatives, the Heinzelmaennchen? I've never seen any Mainzelmaennchen at work, anyway

I knew it! I always knew it!

It's a conspiracy... they took over the world right after WW II and now they've set about ruining Carthage's reputation....
I have to get my tinfoil hat...
...wasn't the tinfoil hat in some other movie? ;)
But hey, I'm not going to stop you, I bet it'd look great on you :D

Weren't those their distant relatives, the Heinzelmaennchen? I've never seen any Mainzelmaennchen at work, anywayI was rather shocked that you can occasionally see the private parts of the new ones... :p

I was rather shocked that you can occasionally see the private parts of the new ones... :p
:eek: what??

edit: ...we're slowly drifting towards 'weirdest modern culture' ;)

Poo.

the Minoic Civilisation was pretty weird too, also a lot of strange pyramid buildings and they had a very popular weird entertaining sport, young guys had to make saltos over an incoming bull ....

Well, maybe not ancient, but definately weird: Polynesian cult worshipping giant stone heads with funny looking hats, the deforrestation of an entire island, a writing system that to this day has never been deciphered... Easter Island (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Easter_Island) has it all! :eek:

And another that comes to mind - maybe not the weirdest, but certainly the most depressing - The Dorset Culture (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dorset_Culture); or more specifically the Sadlermiut people.

So Europeans find what could be the last living remnants of the original inhabitants of Greenland... and they end up accidently killing them off before anything could be learnt from them. Waita go imperialism! :rolleyes:

I'd have to nominate the Aztecs. They practiced human sacrifice on a scale only surpassed by Nazi Germany. They were a lot messier about it than the Nazis, too - cutting out hearts on top of giant pyramids, letting the blood flow down until the entire pyramid was blood-red (and probably covered with flies), and tossing the bodies down to the crowds below is just weird.

Second weirdest has to be the above-mentioned Nazi Germany. They followed the commands of a funny-looking little man with a weird mustache as if he was a god. Weird enough in itself, but many of his commands were so obviously insane that it's a wonder anyone ever paid him any attention to begin with.

:rolleyes:

Second weirdest has to be the above-mentioned Nazi Germany. They followed the commands of a funny-looking little man with a weird mustache as if he was a god. Weird enough in itself, but many of his commands were so obviously insane that it's a wonder anyone ever paid him any attention to begin with.

:rolleyes:

Now, who does that remind me of? Did anybody mention burning bushes earlier on? :rolleyes:

How about the Amazons? Recent archaeology shows they existed in west-central Asia. Warrior women on fast horses. Men as slaves.

Now, who does that remind me of? Did anybody mention burning bushes earlier on? :rolleyes:

Now come on! Moses did not have a funny-looking mustache! :p

None of these cultures think they're weird. What's "weird," anyway? Pretty subjective measure. Weird compared to what?

The Romans relied on slave labor to the point that there were millions more slaves than Romans and it threatened the existence of their society. And the Mesoamericans over-farmed and over-warred themselves into decline. But is that any different from modern culture poisoning itself with petrochemical pollution?

Sparta was kind of a cultish culture of extreme forced behaviors. Were they much different from Nazi Germany? Aside from the gay stuff? Or maybe including the gay stuff? I don't know much about the Nazi warrior lifestyle, but I have to say, they looked a little fey in those pretty uniforms.

I've got it!! Victorian England!! Now, okay, they were weird. They were freaks. They made virtues out of vices -- hypocrisy, sexual deviation (the golden age of child porn), racism, sexism, etc. Refusing to use the word "leg" because it was too sexual, but secretly walking around with piercings and tattoos in all their most intimate of areas underneath those ridiculous clothes. They'd let real life go to hell -- pollution, disease, etc. -- while they played at their weird Wonderland make-believe lifestyle that few of them could afford anyway. Lots of cultures put more value in symbols than reality, but the Victorians took it to the max.

Now come on! Moses did not have a funny-looking mustache! :p
How do you know?

How about the Amazons? Recent archaeology shows they existed in west-central Asia. Warrior women on fast horses. Men as slaves.

I think I read something about them cutting off one of their boobs to make archery easier.

Which hasn't been proven yet and may in fact be little else than Roman propaganda....
Yeah, as we all know it's the winners who write history.

The weirdest...? Hmmm....

I think my vote goes to the Spartans. Nothing like that had eevr been created before and has never been created after.
I agree. Every single man was a soldier, and they weren't really that many. No crops of their own, so they conquered lands around and made the people slaves to feed the army. How many were they? Something like 250,000 slaves and 20,000 spartans or something, right?

I've got it!! Victorian England!! ... but secretly walking around with piercings and tattoos in all their most intimate of areas underneath those ridiculous clothes.

You do know that the so-called 'Prince Albert' piercing was given its name as a marketting ploy in the 1970s and that there is no historical evidence for any actual connection to the royal family, don't you?

How about the Amazons? Recent archaeology shows they existed in west-central Asia. Warrior women on fast horses. Men as slaves.They didn't enslaved their men, they were pretty equal. I think the proper name of the people was Scythians.
Well, they might have male slaves, but so did the romans and greek and egyptians, female slaves too. Slavery was pretty hip in those days. Still is in some places of the world.

I think I read something about them cutting off one of their boobs to make archery easier.The greeks made that up. They were misogynistic that way..

The greeks made that up. They were misogynistic that way..

Makes sense. I shall alter my internal factbook.

How about the Amazons? Recent archaeology shows they existed in west-central Asia. Warrior women on fast horses. Men as slaves.

I thought the amazon myth was based on the Roxanos and samarthans. (sorry don't know what they are called in english). Based around Ukrain and to the east. Women were fought and dressed like the men

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amazons :

In Greek mythology, the Amazons were either an ancient legendary nation of female warriors or a contemporary land of women at the outer edges of the world. The legends appear to have a nugget of factual basis in warrior women among the Scythians, but classical Greeks never ceased to be astounded at such role-reversals. In early modern usage, the word was often used to refer to strong and independent women, in contrast to conventional stereotypes of women as weak and passive (see "damsel in distress"), but now "amazon" in such contexts has self-ironic overtones. (Compare "Valkyrie".)

The Romans relied on slave labor to the point that there were millions more slaves than Romans and it threatened the existence of their society. And the Mesoamericans over-farmed and over-warred themselves into decline. But is that any different from modern culture poisoning itself with petrochemical pollution?

Agreed. Owning slaves and enjoying to see other fight and die just for entertainment is not that rare. That alone doesn't make Romans speacial. Neither is the destruction because of war exhaustion (The over-farming theory doesn't really convince me, I think the continuous warfare was more important factor... But that's just me.) enough to make Mayan or Aztec culture weird.

The human sacrifices were also conducted in several cultures elsewhere.


Sparta was kind of a cultish culture of extreme forced behaviors. Were they much different from Nazi Germany? Aside from the gay stuff? Or maybe including the gay stuff? I don't know much about the Nazi warrior lifestyle, but I have to say, they looked a little fey in those pretty uniforms.

The reason I "voted" Spartans was the following:

The Spartan city state wasn't really close to any other culture that has ever existed. The whole society was closer to one single army unit than any other wannabe-toughguy culture has ever achieved. The Third Reich was, beeing of course strongly militaristic, far from the perfection of the Sparta and Lakonia.

The city was a military camp. From very early childhood, every spartan male was trained to be a perfect soldier. The government just owned the whole population, and made it to a perfect body of soldiers, unstoppable and unbeatable. Nazi Germany was just a dictatorship that spent rather lot of resources to come up with a well-working conscript army.

Spartan training and society transformed to the 20th century would have produced something totall, totally different than what the Third Reich was, even if it tried to be much like the Sparta, that must be admitted.

They gay issue is rahter irrelevant, and I persume that it describes the thoughts and interrests of Muravyets more than anything else (;) ), and would therefore not be taken too seriously as a claim or historical argument.

Sarmatians had female warriors within their ranks. That is pretty exceptional in the history of humankind, atleast in so large scale.

Stories telling about those warrior women came to the Greece due their trading posts and strongholds in the Crimea and around the Black Sea. This excited greatly the Hellenic world in which women didn't have really significant role, even compared to other cultures of the era.

Another possibility is that the "Amazons" were actually Hittites, who several cultures considered to look like women because it was common for their men to wear ponytails: at Kadesh, for example, Rameses II taunted his fleeing soldiers with the words "How can you run from these women warriors?"

Penthesilea, the "Amazon" queen who fought at Troy, may well have been a Hittite as well, since the Hittite Empire held most of Anatolia at the time, placing them pretty much adjacent to Troy, which they would likely have wanted to protect so as to maintain control of trade routes.

Well, the ancient Greeks tick me off, because they had the steam-engine, but thought it was useless because slave labour was oh-so-much cheaper. GAH! :eek:

Anyway... I think one of the weirder ones had to be the Moche people of Peru. Nothing quite like having a banquet where the table is surrounded by the skinned bodies of one's enemies, on pikes. I can't think of anything that would whet my appetite better! :D

You do know that the so-called 'Prince Albert' piercing was given its name as a marketting ploy in the 1970s and that there is no historical evidence for any actual connection to the royal family, don't you?
http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0FSL/is_2_79/ai_113802508

Link to a randomly selected article on piercings culled from AORN Journal, a monthly magazine for the preoperative nursing profession. Skip down to the history section. (I picked this one because it seems like a neutral, level-headed source that has no motive to spread misinformation).

Whatever this may say about my private life, I am not up on the historical timeline of piercings promotion. Obviously, the claim that any given individual celebrity-of-the-time got any particular body work done can only be anecdotal, but it is generally accepted that there was a fashion among the Victorians for intimate piercings, despite their public repressiveness. Their attitudes towards porn and prostitution are also well documented. In all, they were a decidedly hypocritical culture.

I think the Mayans were quite odd. They played that game where you hit the ball through the hoop with your head and hips, and the team that lost got sacraficed. Hell they killed themselves off by poisoning their water supplies with dead bodies.

Actually, nobody's really sure what the outcome of the Maya ball game was.

<snip>The city was a military camp. From very early childhood, every spartan male was trained to be a perfect soldier. The government just owned the whole population, and made it to a perfect body of soldiers, unstoppable and unbeatable. Nazi Germany was just a dictatorship that spent rather lot of resources to come up with a well-working conscript army.

Spartan training and society transformed to the 20th century would have produced something totall, totally different than what the Third Reich was, even if it tried to be much like the Sparta, that must be admitted.

They gay issue is rahter irrelevant, and I persume that it describes the thoughts and interrests of Muravyets more than anything else (;) ), and would therefore not be taken too seriously as a claim or historical argument.
I only compared Sparta to Nazi Germany because both societies were so unlike their surrounding cultures and so focused on just one set of activities and so aggressively conformist that they both seem more like cults (in the modern, admittedly perjorative sense) than real cultures. Of course, the Spartans were nothing like the Nazis in practice.

As to "gay stuff," it is known that ancient Greek culture had a ideal of homosexuality as a kind of "perfect" conjoining of like energies and that homosexual relations were common. The Greeks were not unusual in this. For all their oddness, the Spartans were Greeks and also accepted homosexuality openly. In fact, some recent historical articles and documentaries on ancient wars and military matters have talked about the reputation of the most elite of the Spartan troops as being composed entirely of committed homosexual couples who had sworn to both live and die together. They were the most feared of all the Spartan forces because it was thought that everything they loved was right there on the battlefield with them, so they had no motive to run from a fight -- nothing to run home to.

Obviously, the Nazis did not share this attitude, so my remark about "gay stuff" was meant as a compliment to the Spartans and an insult to the Nazis. (Even thought the Nazis are essentially dead, I still like to give them a kick now and then.)

Actually, nobody's really sure what the outcome of the Maya ball game was.
I always though it was the winning team that got the 'honour' of being sacrificed. Huh. :)

Obviously, the Nazis did not share this attitude, so my remark about "gay stuff" was meant as a compliment to the Spartans and an insult to the Nazis. (Even thought the Nazis are essentially dead, I still like to give them a kick now and then.)
Kind of ironic, the Nazi stance on homosexuality, considering Hitler himself was a total knob-gobbler. :D

Kind of ironic, the Nazi stance on homosexuality, considering Hitler himself was a total knob-gobbler. :D
Do you have proof of that, or are you just basing it on that swishy walk of his? ;) :D

Well, the ancient Greeks tick me off, because they had the steam-engine, but thought it was useless because slave labour was oh-so-much cheaper. GAH! :eek:They had a steam-power toy, it wasn't anything near a practical device for doing work. It was simply far to inefficient to use; if you made a locomotive based on it, it wouldn't have enough power to pull along it's own fuel.

Well, maybe not ancient, but definately weird: Polynesian cult worshipping giant stone heads with funny looking hats, the deforrestation of an entire island, a writing system that to this day has never been deciphered... Easter Island (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Easter_Island) has it all! :eek:

Definitely!

And today: North Korea. Completely mad. Need I explain?

They had a steam-power toy, it wasn't anything near a practical device for doing work. It was simply far to inefficient to use; if you made a locomotive based on it, it wouldn't have enough power to pull along it's own fuel.
Ah, but is that because the design was faulty or because the government declined to fund further research? The story I heard supports the latter. Obviously, it's possible to develop a functional steam engine; what makes you think the ancient engineer couldn't have accomplished it? They accomplished lots of other impressive things.

But still, refusal to develop a promising new technology doesn't make the Greeks weird because practically every government in every culture in history has done that.

Ah, but is that because the design was faulty or because the government declined to fund further research?Possibly both. Most technological marvels of the time were just toys for the patrons.
But I don't think the time was right for the idea. Certainly technology in other areas like metallurgy were lacking.

Obviously, it's possible to develop a functional steam engine; what makes you think the ancient engineer couldn't have accomplished it? They accomplished lots of other impressive things.Their model was a sort of rotating barrel with a few nozzles at an angle where the steam spurted out. It's a long way from pistons and flywheels used in a modern steam engine.
Aside from that they couldn't work steel into large steam engines that work under high pressure. I'd say at the least they'd need cast iron, but they couldn't get fire that hot yet.
On the other hand it's really not my area of expertise; we'd need an historical engineer or something. Familiar with the level of technology available and required.

romans, one of the strongest armies ever, get humpred by a bunch of ginger men in skirts

romans, one of the strongest armies ever, get humpred by a bunch of ginger men in skirts
Fem guys are clearly the toughest -- see my notes re Spartans above. ;)

Possibly both. Most technological marvels of the time were just toys for the patrons.
But I don't think the time was right for the idea. Certainly technology in other areas like metallurgy were lacking.

Their model was a sort of rotating barrel with a few nozzles at an angle where the steam spurted out. It's a long way from pistons and flywheels used in a modern steam engine.
Aside from that they couldn't work steel into large steam engines that work under high pressure. I'd say at the least they'd need cast iron, but they couldn't get fire that hot yet.
On the other hand it's really not my area of expertise; we'd need an historical engineer or something. Familiar with the level of technology available and required.
I'm sure we're not the only ones who could go on forever and ever about things we know almost nothing about. :D

I'm not sure about wierdest, but the most fascinating culture to me was that of Scythia. For one thing, they had no system of writing, so little or nothing not found in their burial chambers is known about them. That being said, if you read Herodotus, it seems that these guys absolutely terrified the Greeks with their skill in horsemanship.

I think the Mayans were quite odd. They played that game where you hit the ball through the hoop with your head and hips, and the team that lost got sacraficed. Hell they killed themselves off by poisoning their water supplies with dead bodies.
Killed themselves off? Wow...all the Mayans living in Mexico and Guatemala must be suprised that they are the undead!

Killed themselves off? Wow...all the Mayans living in Mexico and Guatemala must be suprised that they are the undead!

But there was one civilisation that just disappeared though, wasn't there? I thought they were called Mayans, but if you know better, please enlighten! :)

But there was one civilisation that just disappeared though, wasn't there? I thought they were called Mayans, but if you know better, please enlighten! :)The civilization in a sense died, but not the people.
They just abandoned the cities for some unknown reason. (Although there are hypotheses)

But there was one civilisation that just disappeared though, wasn't there? I thought they were called Mayans, but if you know better, please enlighten! :)
The Mayans are made up of a number of different groups...and are still going quite strong. Perhaps you are thinking of the Aztecs? Actually it is the Toltecs that are thought of having disappeared...but more likely they were 'bred' out as other ethnic groups moved into their territories. The Aztec Empire was actually a loose amalgamation of all the ethnic groups already living in the area, and none of them really just 'disappeared'...they interbred with the Spanish conquerors. Certain cities were abandoned, and no one is really sure why. In any case, if you'd like to see a good visual timeline as to the ethnicities that held influence in Mexico (and into Guatemala as well), check this link (http://www.ballgame.org/sub_section.asp?section=1&sub_section=1) out.

The Francs. How can a nation powerful enough to challange imperial rome have degenerated into what we see today. Christianity must be.

What do you think is the weirdest ancient culture and why?

Possibly the Incas, who never used wheels, or writing, or money, but had taxation and bureaucracy.

The Spartans were pretty weird too.

Christians, for not eating shellfish!

Christians, for not eating shellfish!
Nor are they allowed to lie down with men or handle pig skins.
So suck it, you Gay Football playing Shrimp eaters!

I would argue that there is no one weirdest ancient culture. They all have their weird idiosyncracies which seemed perfectly natural to them, but seem weird to us. I am sure they would think us strange. I mean we sit for hours at a time in front of a glowing box. How weird is that?

The ideal type of love in Greek society was not between a man and a woman, but between a man and another man. More specifically, ideal love was between an older man and a young boy. The men of Greek society, that is right, Socrates and Plato, were pedophiles. Didn't seem weird to them.

In ancient Near Eastern culture the statues that they made to their gods were thought to be actual physical embodiments of the god it was made to look like, so whenever they went to battle they lugged their god with them. Makes you wonder what they did if the statue broke. Didn't seem weird to them either.

<sniptactico!>
Didn't seem weird to them.
<Double Snip times two!>
Didn't seem weird to them either.
Yes, but there is a reason for that, they were insane.

What do you think is the weirdest ancient culture and why?

Possibly the Incas, who never used wheels, or writing, or money, but had taxation and bureaucracy.

The Spartans were pretty weird too.

before the khazars became jews, they worshipped.....penis.

that's kinda weird.

looking back at it, the greeks were downright bizarre.

Sarmatians had female warriors within their ranks. That is pretty exceptional in the history of humankind, atleast in so large scale.

that's a bunch of bullshit designed to discredit gimbutas and reinstall renfrew/genesis.

the amazons are/were a myth.

http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0FSL/is_2_79/ai_113802508

Link to a randomly selected article on piercings culled from AORN Journal, a monthly magazine for the preoperative nursing profession.

Do a Google search for 'Doug Malloy'. Click on the first result that comes up and search for the phrase 'Prince Albert' (find the third occurence) - the royal connection appears to have been made out of whole cloth.

Warning: contains graphic images of genitalia, and thus I have been somewhat circumspect about the link.

I don't know if this has already been said, but I would definitely say the Greeks. They had these statues called herms, which means boundary markers, which started out as big piles of rocks that basically said, "This is my land, STAY OFF." They eventually evolved into thick poles with men's faces on them. (usually hermes - get it?) The WEIRDEST part, though, is that the statues had MASSIVE ERECT PENISES ON THEM. Obviously, when I see a phallus, it means "stay the fuck off my land." :confused:

... Then again, maybe men of today would understand this??

Egyptians...

I just can't stop wondering who first came up with this brilliant idea of "Hey, if you stick a wire up a corpse's nose and swirl it around, and then turn the head, the brain will flow out" followed by the "Hey, if you put a corpse in an immense amount of salt for a while, it'll keep forever" and the "Hey, let's build a giant solid pyramid with one tiny chamber at the very center and let's put a corpse in there"

no monarch has ever been buried in a pyramid

It has to be the Persians - if a girl died without being married, her dead body was married off before she was buried.

Thats not just weird but oh so very wrong.

It has to be the Persians - if a girl died without being married, her dead body was married off before she was buried.

Thats not just weird but oh so very wrong.
I wonder if the Persians had a tradition like the Rite of First Night . . .
Not that I was thinking of combining the two thoughts at all, I'd never!

Do a Google search for 'Doug Malloy'. Click on the first result that comes up and search for the phrase 'Prince Albert' (find the third occurence) - the royal connection appears to have been made out of whole cloth.

Warning: contains graphic images of genitalia, and thus I have been somewhat circumspect about the link.
Do a Google search for "Victorian piercing" or click here:

http://www.faqs.org/faqs/bodyart/piercing-faq/historical/

Also, you might want to remember that there is more than one place on the body that can be pierced. I've already said that the "Prince Albert" story was anecdotal, but there is obvious historical record of Victorian era piercing, especially of the nipples. I've also been saying that the *Victorians* were into it, not that Victoria and her husband were. Man, what's getting on your tits (to use an appropriate expression) -- the idea that royals-of-the-past might have been kinky, or that the Victorians were anything other than the stuck-up asses they acted like, or are you just obsessed with Prince Albert's naughty bits? Of all the things to dispute...

Yes, but there is a reason for that, they were insane.

Same could be said of us. Come on, staring at glowing boxes for hours on end is not indicative of sanity. It is merely the sanctioned action of the current culture. Also, our culture is insanely fad laden. Post-Modernist society is the most fad laden culture to have yet arisen, and I would say that most ancient cultures would find out preoccupation with the styles of the time to be quite to cooky practice, not to mention decadent.

Man, what's getting on your tits (to use an appropriate expression) -- the idea that royals-of-the-past might have been kinky, or that the Victorians were anything other than the stuck-up asses they acted like, or are you just obsessed with Prince Albert's naughty bits? Of all the things to dispute...

Nah: I'm not arguing with the fact that some of the Victorians had full and 'varied' sex lives with all the weirdness that entails, just pointing out that the Prince Albert story is generally accepted as apocryphal by all those that look into it in any detail, and yet remains one of the touchstones regarding Victorian sexuality when viewed from the C21st. As for the link you provided, it is unclear whether it is just perpetuating the same old urban legend or actually discussing other actual true cases which it doesn't see fit to mention.

Did the Victorian age see a blossoming of public discourse about sexual activity and new public displays of such activity? Yes. Did it also see a terrified shrinking from any mention of the subject and the restriction of such activities to the darkened bedroom as a duty rather than a pleasure? Yes. The tensions involved in Victorian sexuality and society are fascinating, and no simple explanation seems to cover it - it is tempting to merely label it as one of hypocrisy and exploitation where those with wealth and power take their pleasure from those without whilst condemning them for it, but the very fact of public sexual liasions between members of the mdidle and ruling classes show that such a simplistic analysis is one which fails.

Man, those Romans were queer. They stripped people down to they're loin-clothes and threw them out to be eatean by tigers and lions. The ones that survived were then systematically killed to recreate a battle against Carthage, or some other former enemy, by other people with armor and spears and horses. And the crowds loved it!

I would watch that. In fact if you ever get to Rome and go to the Collesium. You can walk the prep rooms for these people. You can almost feel the gladiators and animals down there.

Same could be said of us. Come on, staring at glowing boxes for hours on end is not indicative of sanity. It is merely the sanctioned action of the current culture. Also, our culture is insanely fad laden. Post-Modernist society is the most fad laden culture to have yet arisen, and I would say that most ancient cultures would find out preoccupation with the styles of the time to be quite to cooky practice, not to mention decadent.

Yup.

Nah: I'm not arguing with the fact that some of the Victorians had full and 'varied' sex lives with all the weirdness that entails, just pointing out that the Prince Albert story is generally accepted as apocryphal by all those that look into it in any detail, and yet remains one of the touchstones regarding Victorian sexuality when viewed from the C21st. As for the link you provided, it is unclear whether it is just perpetuating the same old urban legend or actually discussing other actual true cases which it doesn't see fit to mention.

Did the Victorian age see a blossoming of public discourse about sexual activity and new public displays of such activity? Yes. Did it also see a terrified shrinking from any mention of the subject and the restriction of such activities to the darkened bedroom as a duty rather than a pleasure? Yes. The tensions involved in Victorian sexuality and society are fascinating, and no simple explanation seems to cover it - it is tempting to merely label it as one of hypocrisy and exploitation where those with wealth and power take their pleasure from those without whilst condemning them for it, but the very fact of public sexual liasions between members of the mdidle and ruling classes show that such a simplistic analysis is one which fails.
1. Thank you for using the word "apocryphal." I wanted to use it but couldn't remember how to spell it and was too lazy to look it up.

2. If you scroll down a bit in the link I provided, you will find quotes from period sources (with bibliographical references). I always like primary document sources. I admit the article is a bit tough to navigate as it is apparently an outline for course purposes.

3. My description of the Victorians as "weird" is, of course, just my subjective opinion. I agree with you as to the facts of the period -- though I would tend to include Victorian sexual habits within the context of other social issues/trends of the time -- but I see them in a negative light, as part of a pattern of denial and hypocrisy (spelling again?) which I think of as detrimental to the health of a society. (But, please, don't get me started on how I see Victorianism still dictating much of what I don't like about society today.) You, apparently, have a different opinion, which is just fine by me.

4. This difference of opinion just goes to show the hopelessly subjective nature of "weirdness" which I commented on in my first post, which I am also too lazy to link for you here.

Oh, well. :)

I would have to say the Germanic tribes for their lack of a civilization and yet they were able to topple the Roman Empire by taking advantage of internal weaknesses. They went from tribal rule to the masters of the Western Roman empire in only a few generations.

Also, I think the Chinese should deserve an honorable mention because they thought that Giraffes were a god. Not like cows for India, but that the giraffe was truly a god, they also destroyed their entire fleet of the world's largest and most advanced ships because they feared they might discover a civilization more advanced than their own and would lose the madate of heaver or something like that.

The Amish, still don't quite grasp that concept.

I would have to say the Aztecs. They were one weird culture. They sacrificed humans who were POW's by cutting out their hearts and then throwing the body down the temple. After this the warrior who captured said POW would eat the body and share it with his neighbors at at huge celebration. sometimes they would sacrifice hundreds of people a day.

I would have to say the Aztecs. They were one weird culture. They sacrificed humans who were POW's by cutting out their hearts and then throwing the body down the temple. After this the warrior who captured said POW would eat the body and share it with his neighbors at at huge celebration. sometimes they would sacrifice hundreds of people a day.

Yeah, thank god for the Geneva Convention, eh?

Yeah, thank god for the Geneva Convention, eh?

No Doubt.

I would watch that. In fact if you ever get to Rome and go to the Collesium. You can walk the prep rooms for these people. You can almost feel the gladiators and animals down there.
I'll be there next year!

Also, the Spartans had a democracy before the Athenians, and they only turned into what we usually consider them after they took over Lakonia.

Anyhow, massive slaughter of innocents is not uncommon in Ancient Cultures, making them all not weird. We are obviously weird for not killing people on a massive scale for entertainment, or to appease our gods. What have we become?

I´m still working on my opinion...but two facts about the greeks:

1) As to homosexuality, it was considered allowed and regular for a male teacher to have intercourse with his (male and underage - to our standards) pupil...weird in my eyes to put it mildly. The parents knew about and accepted it.

2) They thought the brain was a kind of sponge to cool the blood...
hmmm, after considering and reading in some threads this seems now to be not so far from the truth in my eyes :p

Second weirdest has to be the above-mentioned Nazi Germany. They followed the commands of a funny-looking little man with a weird mustache as if he was a god. Weird enough in itself, but many of his commands were so obviously insane that it's a wonder anyone ever paid him any attention to begin with.

:rolleyes:

What i find funny is that hitler idea of the perfect race was somebody with blond hair and blue eyes yet he didnt have either he pretty much admitted to the germans that he wasnt perfect.

Remeber that the germans at the time wanted somebody to blaim for all there troubles so when hitler gave them someone (the jews) AND healed there economy well they just thought he was the perfect leader.

I'll be there next year!

Also, the Spartans had a democracy before the Athenians, and they only turned into what we usually consider them after they took over Lakonia.

Anyhow, massive slaughter of innocents is not uncommon in Ancient Cultures, making them all not weird. We are obviously weird for not killing people on a massive scale for entertainment, or to appease our gods. What have we become?

Yes but would the government of any democracy want to admit that the founders of democracy didnt seem to like the idea?

I mean the romans prefered ditatorship to a republic and there empire seem to run better with a ditatorship.

Whats so wrong with the Greeks enjoying homosexuallity? Today, we repress it, and thus supress peoples urges, limiting their ability to express themselves. And if someone is willing to engage in that acivity, even if its with a professer who is far older than them, they gotta get their family respect somehow. Its kinda like an ancient grading system, but its guy on guy action, not something we particularly approve of today. And why are the Greeks so weird? Because they're even more liberal than us and we can't admit it? We still carry on many of their ideals, and thoughts, and culture today.

Anyhow, when the Greeks wrestled naked in the Olympics, the stick and berries was for grabs, tearing, punching, etc. They didn't have spandex, and it was kind of hot. And those markers with Hermes on them, with an obvious hard on, I believe were mile markers, or whatever measurement they used, not stone piles seperating land. Even though that is perfectly common in Scandinavia and England, stone markers, or walls even. The Ancients were just more comfortable having their private parts dangling about then us Judeo-Christians for the most part. Hermes was the post god, right? The messenger? Makes sense to me.

And Aztecs: 1400's, not ancient. Nor are the Mayans, or Incas. Albiet, theír tech was ancient, but they were just backwards.
And on Nazi-Germany: 1940's, not ancient. Why was it even mentioned? We all know the motives as to why, and blah blah. Shall we drop it?

@Phenixica: They adapted to repressing their newly conquered land, and they couldn't do it with a democracy. I believe that they had a government body of "the people" but it really didn't ammount to much. They elected dictators in times of war, just like the Romans. And when you have a larger empire, and you're the minority, its easier to oppress and rule, and attempt to give everyone equal rights. Later, Athenian democracy was a sham, they went around bribing and invading other cities to join the Athenian League or whatever, and if they refused? BURN, PILLAGE, RAPE! etc.

2. If you scroll down a bit in the link I provided, you will find quotes from period sources (with bibliographical references). I always like primary document sources. I admit the article is a bit tough to navigate as it is apparently an outline for course purposes.

I was refering to the first link that you posted, rather than the FAQ.

3. My description of the Victorians as "weird" is, of course, just my subjective opinion. I agree with you as to the facts of the period -- though I would tend to include Victorian sexual habits within the context of other social issues/trends of the time -- but I see them in a negative light, as part of a pattern of denial and hypocrisy (spelling again?) which I think of as detrimental to the health of a society.

I don't really see the issue as one of hypocrisy - if it had been the self-same individuals engaged in both poles of sexual activity (ie. public sexual rendezvous and then covering up the legs of their pianos), then hypocrisy would make sense, but instead we have a society which has different stances and attitudes running through it. To call it hypocritical is like calling a modern western society hypocritical on the basis that it contains both tree-huggers and gas-guzzlers.