There is something strange to me about using the term teenager when referring to someone in ancient Egypt. There is nothing wrong with it, but seeing it in an article opposed to in casual conversation? New to me.
I used to get occasional work helping farm kids pick rocks. We don’t seem to have built any fences in Saskatchewan, preferring instead to just pile them up or bury them.
Never underestimate what happens when thousands of individual people do one thing over and over again, rock by rock, step by step, day in and day out, year after year. Whether it’s building fences, depleting resources, or putting waste into the environment, we always manage to more collectively than we can imagine as individuals.
I dunno—seems to me like anyone in Central Asia seeing that image in that era would immediately associate it with Azhdahak, the mythical Zoroastrian demon-king with two snakes protruding from his shoulders: …wikimedia.org/…/Bowl_Depicting_King_Zahhak_with_…
I wondered what the heck a “true” saddle was supposed to be, but it looks like they roughly defined it as a treed (wooden frame) saddle with stirrups attached.
I can’t seem to parse whether the tree came before the stirrup – it’s implied but not stated – but it looks like a single mounting stirrup was invented before paired riding stirrups. I’ve seen a Native American (Cherokee? IIRC dated about Removal Time) saddle that was basically just a tree, presumably used with blankets above and beneath for comfort, without any indication of rings for girth or stirrup attachment, but that doesn’t rule out looping them through the gap between the tree bars (where the spine floats underneath).
It was/is a trend within the last decade or so to use a treeless saddle for more “natural” horsemanship (whatever that means), and I’m sitting here wondering what that means for stirrup attachment. Layered on top of the girth, I hope, for stability. Gonna go fall down the google-hole.
In the interest of horse-girl infodumping, I recall seeing some at the Gilcrease Museum in Tulsa, OK, and luckily they have some pics for their online collection, thank you Gilcrease.
This one actually has stirrups, looks like the girth attachments are more sophicated than my Dunning-Kruger ass imagined, but the stirrup leathers are, in fact, looped over each of the wooden bars: collections.gilcrease.org/object/84985
The Dominicans are certainly reinforcing stereotypes about ignorant religious zealots. Worried about losing the church they built literally on the ruins and corpses of the Zapotecs.
Flintknapping is extremely prone to finger and hand injuries, and nobody understood infection back then. Probably everyone was making and using stone tools constantly. Might explain things.
archaeology
Active
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.