Is this true /his/?

File: mesoamerican toy.jpg (3KB, 133x90px) Image search: [Google]

3KB, 133x90px

>>1594206

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

>Mesoamerica, along with Mesopotamia and China, is among the few known places in the world where writing has developed independently. Mesoamerican scripts deciphered to date are a combination of logographic and syllabic values. They are often called hieroglyphs due to the iconic shapes of many of the glyphs, a pattern superficially similar to Egyptian hieroglyphs. Five or six scripts have been documented in Mesoamerica, but the limits of archaeological dating methods make it difficult to establish which was earliest and hence the forebearer from which the others developed. The best documented and deciphered Mesoamerican writing system, and the most widely known, is the classic Maya script. An extensive Mesoamerican literature has been conserved partly in indigenous scripts and partly in the postconquest transcriptions in the Latin script.

also pic related

>>1594206
Wheeled toys have been found throughout Central and South America. Conditions then did not warrant scaling wheels up for everyday use.

Incans came close to writing.

>>1594209

To be fair, those are technically not South American civilizations.

I wonder what Illiad of the Mesoamericans was like...

>>1594209
>>1594211
What about the aztecs?

>>1594214
Bloody and chocolatey

>>1594216
They had writing, but weren't in South America.

>>1594216
OP asked about South America. No signs of Aztec influence have been found there.

>>1594214
ever heard of Popol Vuh?

>>1594211
>Wheeled toys have been found throughout Central and South America. Conditions then did not warrant scaling wheels up for everyday use.

Wheeled toys are not the same thing as an actual functioning wheel for transportation. You need a mechanically viable axel to push a cart on wheels. It's a 2 in 1 deal and just because you understand the concept of roll does not mean you have the primitive mechanical engineering know how to put it all together on a significantly load reducing tool system.

Having a toy glider does not mean you can build a functional flying machine whenever you feel like it with the trees right outside your house.

As I understand it, wheeled toys where also found in proto-indo-european burial sites before there was ever a wheel.

File: pre-co-earthmover.jpg (43KB, 500x222px) Image search: [Google]

43KB, 500x222px

>>1594246
The Incas had writing and were in South America.

Kinda-sorta to both halves of that statement.

The Mayans supposedly picked up their metallurgy (such as it was) from South America. They had writing for nearly a thousand years before they built their cities, so, if they were trading with South America all that time... Presumably...

Dunno about the wheel, but given all the trade that was going on, probably, maybe, too lazy to look it up. There's pic related, but it's kind of an /x/-tier artifact.

>>1594284
Well, they certainly had the concept at least...

...Most of their trade involved traveling through swamps and over mountains, and wheels, well, aren't very good at that.

>>1594365
They kinda suck with jungles too, and the roads in said don't tend to last long unless you invest a hell of a lot of effort, with the tech involved.

Does make one wonder why the indians further north didn't start making them though. Plenty of grassland, desert, and prairie up there, even at the time.

>>1594379
Nothing to pull it?

>>1594488
Buffalo.
Do you think the ox was always domesticated?

>>1594506
Buffalo are temperamental as fuck...

...Plus you're spending most of your time, following them across the plains, season to season, and running them off cliffs anyways, so using one to haul carcasses around would likely only add to the difficulties.

Still, there's always slavery.

>>1594506
That would be nice but there were no buffalo south of Mexico before 1895

>>1594356
>The Incas had writing
No they didn't

>>1594524
Same could be said about aurochs.

>>1594577
No, it couldn't. Look, we have Bison Farming now and they still don't act like cattle.

>>1594580
Why not? Aurochs aren't cattle so your comparison is bad.

>>1594580
>they still don't act like cattle.
They're not cattle (neither were aurochs)

>>1594603
I suspect we never would have tamed them, if they roamed in herds large enough to cover entire states, and provided unlimited food as a result.

>>1594649
Europe has bison

File: the-herd.jpg (73KB, 630x395px) Image search: [Google]

73KB, 630x395px

>>1594657
Not the way Murika had buffalo. If you built your village in the wrong place, it, and everyone in it, could easily be trampled into the dirt by a migrating herd.

File: well_fuck.jpg (114KB, 767x600px) Image search: [Google]

114KB, 767x600px

>>1594696
Good thing we took care of that.

>>1594696
>Not the way Murika had buffalo
How the fuck do you know?

>>1594729
People wrote about it and took pictures of the late stages, thus we have this thing called, you know, history.

>>1594738
No retard, European bison.

>>1594748
Same. No one wrote about herds the size of states trampling would-be cities, and there's not piles of bones numbering in the millions at every other cliff edge.

There was just a lot more wide open grazable flat, traversable land in North America than there ever was in Europe, and the fuggers bred out of control.

>>1594764
>than there ever was in Europe
Ukraine

>>1594764
>Same. No one wrote about
Aurochs domestication predates writing so it's possible herds that size existed at the time.

> b-but we would find bones!

Most bones decay over time, fossilization is generally the exception not the norm for dead bodies.

>>1594772
Frozen as fuck until few thousand years ago, and there's a lot more mountains involved.

>>1594783
>fuck until few thousand years ago
Same with a lot of North America. Back then they would not have the "too plentiful to bother domesticating" excuse. Granted, many would just be settling in but it still makes your hypothesis baseless and overall shit type so let's stop Going around in circles and agree you need to try again.

>>1594782
I doubt they woulda managed to curb their numbers without more modern hunting methods - the Injuns never managed to run out of em until the white man showed up to show em how it's done.

Europe was a lot colder going back that far, and even around the mediterranean and the middle east, there was never the same virtually unlimited flat fertile plains to work with.

...and when you pile bones that deep, fossilization isn't an issue. The bones on top are still there, and then you just see how deep the debris goes. Bison death of that magnitude just isn't seen anywhere else in the rest of the world.

>>1594805
No, North America, within the scope of the continental US at least, was quite a bit warmer than Europe of the same period.

>>1594821
>than Europe
Well that's nice but the wisent probably spread all the way out to central asia, soooooooo, why bother domesticating anything? They had everything right?

>>1594837
That's part of the problem with an unlimited food supply that's on the move. You never settle down to grow your numbers, and just constantly follow the herd for sustenance. They grew crops, sure, but most of those tribes left them alone for full seasons while they ran off after the buffalo, and harvested/replanted after they returned.

If, on the other hand, you settle down and grow rice patties, you might have a chance of starting an actual civilization.

Granted, it's not the only factor - just one of a great many. Takes a lot of different rare coincidences to come together and cause civilization to form - it's not inevitable. It's just, once it does, it tends to spread everywhere. It's, in all likelihood, a lot like life itself, in that respect.

>>1594524
>Buffalo are temperamental as fuck
In what way are buffalo more temperamental than either of the two subspecies of aurochs that were domesticated?

I mean, surely you know right? You wouldn't just go on the internet and talk out your ass of course. Who does that?

>>1594883
Oh, so they were too retarded to plant some corn, i see.

>>1594894
RtTBUMFP

Bigger, meaner, and most importantly, vastly more numerous, making it so the only possible use for them, from the perspective of those living off them, would be to haul other dead buffalo, which would probably make them even more twitchy.

>>1594903
Exactly the opposite of what I just said. You could guard acres of corn with that scarecrow.

>>1594926
>Bigger, meaner, and most importantly, vastly more numerous
Oh? What zoological study are you using to justify this assertion? It seems like a fascinating read.

File: land_mammals.png (33KB, 619x495px) Image search: [Google]

33KB, 619x495px

>>1594936
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aurochs
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_bison

>Lott, Dale F. (2002). American Bison: A Natural History. Berkeley: University of California Press. ISBN 0-520-23338-7.
>It's estimated, that by collective weight, the American Bison once outweighed all other land mammals by a factor of twenty.
There's just no evidence there were ever anywhere near that many aurochs running about, there was never an environment to support that many, and pre-history probably would have been a lot different, if there were. Unlimited buffalo were just too fucking convenient to pass up.

>>1594962
Wtf does that have to do with what he asked?

>>1594968
Nothing at all to do with OP, as there were no Buffalo in South America. Just fuckloads of jungle and mountains.

But I assumed "zoological study" on an extinct species was sarcasm, and he just wanted to know what I was referencing in my other tabs.

>>1594962
I'll ask plainly then. I wish you to prove your assertion that buffalo are more temperamental than aurochs were, specifically the two subspecies that are related to most modern cattle.

>>1594379
>>1594488
SUB HUMAN IQ

>>1594524
Aurochs were used by the Romans in the arena, they weren't docile in the slightest.

>>1594962
this image disgusts me
there are too many humans on this planet, and the rest are our fucking livestock. disgusting.

>>1594973
Temperament is nearly entirely conjectural, as there's no live aurochs to observe the behavior of, but we do know that, as bovines go, the American bison is about the worst, and they were certainly quite a bit larger.

Their virtually unlimited numbers, however, are the more important factor. When your entire culture centers around migration patterns, and is extremely successful as a result, you've no reason to settle down long term, and every reason to continue that process. To that end, taming them is useless - even if it somehow occurred to you, and was possible, you'd have no motivation to do so, unlike folks dealing with pockets of aurochs, that they could easily hunt into extinction, and scavenging for food so desperately that even the adults start drinking the milk.

>>1594973
>>1594962
If you can't that's fine. Just please stop talking out of your ass.

File: what_are_bulls.jpg (114KB, 600x419px) Image search: [Google]

114KB, 600x419px

>>1594978

>>1594506
Buffalo can't be domesticated. People have tried.

>>1594994
>>1594993

>>1594993
>American bison is about the worst
You specifically stated that it was worse than something else, I expect you to prove that, recant or silence yourself.

>>1594488
DING DING DING
The first domesticated animals that could bear significant loads arrived with the europoors.

>>1595002
A literal second before mine was posted and it in no way validates your assertion.

>>1595003
Google anything on the temperament of buffalo. Given that temperament was probably the least of the many issues, I don't feel the need to defend that commonly held belief.

There were a fuckload of them, they provided an unlimited food supply, there was no reason to even try to domesticate them.

>>1595001
Everything can be domesticated, it just takes a lot of fucking around....literally.

>>1595010
I'm not asking about the temperament of buffalo. Stop trying to save face. I'm asking about their temperament in relation to aurochs. You claimed the Buffalo to be more temperamental, can you prove it? I am asking for your proof.

>>1594284
They had a wheel but not wheel and axle. Granted that has only been invented in like 1-2 places the spread like crazy

>>1595011
In a way, although the end result would be nothing like what you started with.

>>1594993
Reindeer were domesticated under similar circumstances

>>1595027
No, you asked why the injuns didn't just up and domesticate the buffalo.

I told you why.

And then you decided to go all "Fuck no! You don't know dick about their temperament!" (While ignoring all the rest of the argument.)

To which I responded, while it's impossible to know dick about the temperament of the aurochs, we know that the buffalo are temperamental as fuck, and it's the least important factor, as it wouldn't really matter, even if they were docile, given their numbers and the mass migration behavior.

https://www.quora.com/Can-the-American-Bison-be-domesticated

It's not like the white man came in and started taming them. They were all "fuck that, we'll lose 80% of the herd in route, but we'll boat in proper cows and just genocide these angry fucks."

They are about the most violent and agile bovine we're aware of, and we STILL can't tame them. We basically just veal them.

>>1595038
Tamed and domesticated are two separate beasts, but yeah, maybe.

>>1595011
>Everything can be domesticated, it just takes a lot of fucking around....literally.

Way too much investment cost for many to be feasible back then. Many it's nearly impossible like cheetahs because they need wide access to mate.

>>1595051
>STILL can't tame them
*domesticate them, rather
>>1595055
Fair point.

>>1595055
They're domesticated tho....

>>1595083
Neat.

Dunno why'd you bother with billions of buffalo running about though.

>>1595051
>you asked why the injuns didn't just up and domesticate the buffalo
I asked nothing of the sort. I merely asked for you to prove one specific assertion. Now that it's obvious to you and the other posters that you were talking out of your ass, I'm fine.
>it's impossible to know dick about the temperament of the aurochs

Not really, though it's good to see you sank right back into your little habit. I mean I don't care for it but I'm sure someone must. Otherwise why would you keep doing it right?

>>1594206
No stop taking entertainment as fact.

>>1595056
>they need wide access to mate.
So you just keep fucking them until they dont. Everything is fixed with more fucking anon.

>>1595091
Same reason you'd bother with a similar per capita pop of reindeer: you're not a subhuman piece of shit.

>>1594973
>>1595027
>>1595097
You're a pedantic faggot and seem generally unpleasant.