Posted: Thu Apr 01, 2010 11:05 pm Post subject: Reading due 4/2
Please read pp.65-78 and 89-93 from Ch. 4 of your Jake Page books.
Write a thoughtful response (100-200 words MINIMUM) on the forum . Please try to respond to something a classmate has written and include a question to facilitate discussion.
Here are some thinking points to get you started:
How did mound building societies differ from the other societies we have read about so far? What does it mean to be civilized? Based on your definition were the Native Americans we have read about "civilized"?
One of the main differences that was highlighted in this section seemed to be the emphasis on burial ceremonies that these societies had. As we haven't heard very much about those in the other tribes we've read about, it seems safe to assume that these cultures put more of an emphasis on them.
The fact that the mounds were even constructed is a physical example of how much more stationary these tribes were than others; if they were going to be moving around, they wouldn't have taken the time to build these massive structures. Having a reliable source of food from agriculture (facilitated by the usage of the rivers they built near) allowed them to have a more permanent home. This made it possible for the tribes to grow, and for societies (even city-like) to develop, with more prominent leaders and governmental positions.
I didn't address Martha's last two questions, but I'm really interested in what others have to say and want to make sure they're answered (sorry if it seems lame to not come up with my own, but I genuinely want to see what y'all have to say about these issues). So: what does it mean to be civilized? And... Based on your definition were the Native Americans we have read about "civilized"?
It seemed to me that the Native Americans in this reading shared a lot of similarities with other societies in history. They had groups of nobles who ruled, and there was a kind of monarchy based on a distinct bloodline. While this is what made them similar to other societies, i found the role of these noble groups to be very interesting, specifically their duty to keep the balance between their world and the spirit world. Their political systems, like so many others in history, were completely integrated with their spiritual life. When you think about it, their political systems were not unlike those of "civilized people" at all, especially with the importance of spirituality in politics.
What do you guys think the standards in our society are today to become "civilized people?"
The mound builders touched on a lot of specific societal things like burial, art and agriculture that Page didn't mention before. He also suggested towards a greater hierarchy or order of importance in people when it was said that one specific burial included 20,000 decorative shells, whereas others were actual mounds of dirt. Things that signal towards a developed society are present in this chapter compared to the others, like a balance between gathering and hunting rather than over-hunting which was mentioned before.
To be civilized in my opinion is to be relatively close, or to be the closest to a fully developed society. Developed meaning efficient and productive, as well as a number of different things. What a perfect society is however is different for most people, which makes it hard to compare two different types of people in terms of development and growth. If there isn't a defined scale from not civilized to civilized, then there also isn't a legitimate comparison, which turns 'civilized' into a term that I guess means relatively up to date.
This also brings me back to the noble savage discussion we had in class. What DOES it mean to be civilized?
I definitely agree with Steph that the main difference between the mound building people and other ancient natives we've read about is their advanced burial techniques. Until the development of agriculture I would guess that burials would most likely have been quick and in random places depending on where their food source was at the time.
This chapter seems to address the stereotype that we talked about in class, that all Native Americans are spiritual and in tune with nature. The common people in the mound building societies were not all spiritual, only the spiritual readers/ priests were able to do or know many of the things we assumed every native knows. The fact that the priests actually began to live on the mounds was beyond creepy, but also spoke to the fact that they were supposably completely in tune with the dead.
I never really thought that the ancient natives were uncivilized (based on my definition of civilized which is basically having good communication and punishment for bad behavior.) But if I had to decide whether these people were more civilized than the natives before them I would say definitely yes. They begin to show a respect for the dead, develop traditional ceremonies, and also had a great respect for their leaders.
Speaking of their leaders here's a questions for ya'll!
- Are the ancient native leaders similar to other ancient leaders/ nobles/ priests? Why or why not?
.... I couldn't help but start to think about the church controlling politics etc... when Page began to talk about the priests being a huge part of the natives lives.
I also have to agree with what Alex and Stephanie said about the biggest difference between the Hopewellian and other societies we have read about is their burial rituals. Not only does just the fact that they had burial mounds set them apart, but the entire process behind the burial of a person or people was such a long process and so important to them. Between the gathering of the body and precious material possessions, burning them, building a mound around them, decorating the mound, having a feast around the mound to celebrate the dead, and everything else involved in the process, I can't even comprehend how they found the time to get it all done. The mounds also seem to show how the Hopewellian society was very centered on spirituality, and that the power in the society was held in spiritual figures. The mounds were literally the center point of building their what could be called villages, and they were considered to be sacred areas. Later on when spiritual leaders began to live on these mounds, that just enforces the idea that they were blessed with power to have contact with the spirit world. They were living in an area considered to be the boundary between sacred and secular, life and death.
To attempt to answer the questions on civilized, I personally find it extremely hard to have my own definition of the word, as I find it to be one of the words where I think there is no real minimum requirement to fit the definition. I can, however, look at the word from a sort of anthropological point of view, and say that to be civilized, a group of people need to sort of have a dependency on certain things. Or rather, they need to have developed to have a dependency on things like agriculture, trade, and sort of occupations. Those are the core aspects of a civilization. The groups we read about tonight fit this definition pretty well, so I would consider them to be civilized. They definitely had a dependency on agriculture, it was the whole reason they were able to have settled "villages" in the first place. They developed irrigation systems and had seasonal crops. Page mentions a little the trading that occurred between them and groups from Mexico and south of them. The part about the three main leaders definitely shows that they had a sense of occupations, they had spiritual leaders, a sort of clan leader/chief, and a war chief. The groups we read about even fit some of the smaller, second tier descriptions of what it means to be civilized. The mounds are a form of architecture that has a sort of monumental feel to it, and Page mentions that the placement of mounds across settlements fits an unknown standard unit of measurement.
Nobody has really mentioned the Hohokams yet, so I am just going to say what I found very interesting about them. To me, it seems like this happens kind of a lot in history. Page talked about all the advancements that their tribe went through, starting from a hundred or so people, and lasting a thousand years, and by that time, just being very superior and advance, but suddenly just having to die out and abandon their settlement. I didn't really understand the possible reasons Page gave for why they left and their society died out, and when I thought I kind of understood, he said that later on there were descendants of the tribe living in the same area, in a less advanced version of the Hohokams.
Now that I have kind of rambled on a lot...I want to ask a kind of bad question, so feel free to ignore it. The talk so far on the Native Americans we have read about being civilized has been sort of centered on the groups in the first section of the reading. Are the Athapaskans mentioned in the second section civilized? If so, are they civilized in the same way as the tribes mentioned in the first section of the reading? What similarities and differences did all these tribes share?
I think this chapter was far more interesting than the last (possibly because I am interested in Architecture). The Cahokia city made up of mounds sounds like a beautiful sight. I have seen models of these abodes in museums and they seem so cozy, efficient and far from what I am used to. Which brings me to the question that is on all of our minds....civilized? what does it mean? why were the native americans perceived as uncivilized?
I maybe over simplifying this but I think I large part was probably the aesthetics of the buildings and the resources the natives used. What the Europeans saw was something different, something they were not used to from their houses to theyre clothing. People judge and make assumptions based on appearances. After all the three branches formed in their societies are much like the ones we have in the United States. _________________ Melipe Fatho
I agree with what Alex said. In my eyes no Native Americans were ever uncivilized. They just became more civilized. In my opinion, being civilized means they find or make a surplus of food and then be able to do more, like make jewelry and think about how to treat the dead. And the tribes Page writes about in this chapter are able to do these things
I was specifically interested in the Hohokam. They were able to sit back and think about the best way to get water to their crops. The dug for 100 days to create a tunnel that ran a few miles up the shore. They also made jewelry out of seashells. One of the most fascinating things about this tribe was that they had macaws. This proves that they had contact with people in the south. They had pottery that was also from Mexico. One of the criteria of a civilized society is interacting with other peoples and being able to learn from it. Another really interesting thing about the Hohokam is that they had dumps. They were a clean society; they understood the difference between clean and dirty and did something about it. I’m not sure exactly why but some of the reasons I gave start to justify why these groups are more civilized than the ones in the previous chapter. This is just based on my opinion and what I have been taught what civilized and this could be completely wrong.
I want to know what the definition of civilized is and what determines uncivilized.
I haven’t read the first readings yet so I don’t think I can answer Sean’s question…sorry! The thing that I think is really important in this chapter is sort of summed up in the last pages of the last section that we read. Page’s thesis for these sections seems to be that these people in fact were civilized. They have many of the things that are necessary for a successful society and also have the ability to adapt in case their needs should change. They had permanent homes and villages with adequate supplies of water and food sources. They were cultivating much of their food, and were able to develop technology that was used for a long time. They also had forms of government, whether they were based on religion, or agriculture. They developed building techniques as well as methods for using the rivers to their advantage for irrigation. They even had trade networks with other groups in the surrounding areas.
To me, this was evidence that these people were very civilized in the most simple of ways. They had all of the necessary things to have a functioning society, and it was a successful one too. So I think that in the last few paragraphs of what we read tonight, Page states his belief that these people were not the “noble savages” that many thought them to be, and that they were, in fact, people who had developed working societies similar and equally advanced to the ones that exist today. So my question would just be if someone could go into more detail about the similarities and differences between these societies and the ones that were discussed previously in the book. Although, I don’t know if that would be helpful for everyone, or just for me since I unfortunately missed a bit of class.
In general, people’s first and most dire necessary is food. If a group of people spends all their time looking for food there is no time for the development of any kind of society or real social structure. The big difference between the tribes we’ve read about before, and the ones we just read about is that their development of agriculture and high efficiency production of plants allowed them spare time. Once a given this spare time, more pronounced change is likely to happen in a much shorter period of time. This is something Jake shows beautifully when explaining Cahokia. Entire tribes no longer had to dedicate each member’s time and effort on food. When put on a larger scale more collaboration is likely and the possibilities of innovation are endless. That’s not to say that they made huge steps, but that they certainly changed the course of native American history for the better.
From diverting streams, to more religious and well thought our burials, to the use of fire as a farming tool, these people, once allowed the chance, flourished in agricultural technique, religion, as well as a sense of greater community.
From the very first sentence of the chapter, Page makes it apparent that he wants us to believe the Native Americans were a civilized people. I agree with Meg that this was the central thesis of the chapter. Page said they were civilized because even the great Europeans awed and refused to believe that the Natives' ruins were entirely built on their own, with no help from other races, Mexicans, or other "cleverer people with a great knowledge of engineering principles and architecture aesthetics, people who were more organized, even perhaps civilized" as if to say, only those who are clever and architecturally adept deserve the title of being called "civilized." These mound builders seem to earn this "civilized" label due to the fact that they built these elaborate and structurally advanced and organized burial and trash-ceremonial mounds with ease and efficiency.
In my eyes however, some of their games and traditions seemed like the opposite of civilized. I think of civilized not in terms of how architecturally advanced a culture is, but whether their philosophies of living make sense. Yes, it is important to be organized and clever, but strangling women during a hierarchy's funeral and sacrificing the loser of the great ball games seems a bit too primitive and bloodthirsty for my taste. That is anything but civilized in my mind.
I'd love to hear more about the lists people came up with in class about the necessities for an ideal society. Would this utopia need to be civilized? Can religion constitute for a civilized society? Is our society even civilized?
Posted: Fri Apr 02, 2010 10:41 am Post subject: late night postin'
So yeah, I just finished the reading from last night, tonight, and reading all your awesome responses and I just hope mine makes sense at 1:30 AM. >_<
I'm really enjoying this book now and gleaning a lot of information from it, and I agree with most everyone about their ideas of what it means to be civilized. After reading Steve's post I agree, those things aren't very civilized, but I feel like every culture has one or two "uncivilized" things about them, or at least something to not be proud of. Racism and war aren't very civilized either, yet they still exist.
I'm more interested in Snaketown, Cahokia, and the Hohokams. I never knew that any Native American culture was that advanced that they had legitimate canals, dumps, and sports (albeit violent). I can't even comprehend some of the things they developed, and I'm really disappointed how few people know that. I really wish the Hohokams hadn't fallen victim to climate changes and flood and had continued to advance, which is my comment question.
If Europeans had discovered America later in time than 1492, and the Hohokams had continued to develop along with all the other tribes, how differently would have interactions have happened? I've thought about this in the past and it's one of my favorite "what ifs."
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
