LmL

In a Grove of Ash (Azor Ahai Goes into the Weirwoodnet)

187 posts in this topic

2 hours ago, Unchained said:

I did, it was really good.  Partnership and dominator cultures are definitely a theme the author is working with.  You pointed out the civilizations that fill these roles where a partnership becomes a dominator.  Recently I have seen people point out that individuals do this too.  Garth was pro nature and growing things.  His potential son Brandon of the bloody blade fought the partnership culture native westrosi races.  Then his son Brandon the Builder worked with the giants and the CotF.  Durran Godsgrief and Brandon the Shipwright had children who notably have very different policies than they do on the CotF and ships respectively.  I think the Greyjoys are still showing this alternating sequence.  Quellon Greyjoy was, I think, more Garth-like.  He was tried to integrate the islands into the green lands.  Balon took them in the opposite direction and is more Grey King like. 

I'm glad you liked it. 

Good catch with cyclical nature of the mythical bloodlines. It can be interpreted as generational thing instead of individual, as in RL myths multiple people were condensed into mythical figure. So maybe there was period of partnership and period of domination. 

Cultural shift to partnership will take more than that as partnership is more than one ruler being nice. But it may signify the influence of Strauss Howe Generational Theory as well, It is a topic worthy of research.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Equilibrium said:

I'm glad you liked it. 

Good catch with cyclical nature of the mythical bloodlines. It can be interpreted as generational thing instead of individual, as in RL myths multiple people were condensed into mythical figure. So maybe there was period of partnership and period of domination. 

Cultural shift to partnership will take more than that as partnership is more than one ruler being nice. But it may signify the influence of Strauss Howe Generational Theory as well, It is a topic worthy of research.

Did you like the part in Garth of the Gallows where I highlighted this generational see-saw effect? I definitely thought of you there. 

The big question I have about the children at this point is how they intersect with the naughty greenseers. Did they aid them? Oppose them? Were they betrayed by the naughty seers after sharing their knowledge? It's a pretty big question. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, LmL said:

Did you like the part in Garth of the Gallows where I highlighted this generational see-saw effect? I definitely thought of you there. 

The big question I have about the children at this point is how they intersect with the naughty greenseers. Did they aid them? Oppose them? Were they betrayed by the naughty seers after sharing their knowledge? It's a pretty big question. 

Yes it was great. You know the more I think about cyclical nature of generational patterns of behavior, more am I inclined to modify my theory, because in all the evidence that upcoming cultural shift will not signify "we/they" all learned something but as an phase in the cyclical history of Westeros meaning sooner or later someone will fuck it up again. This is Martin we are talking about, who in his work frequently subverts the trope of golden age, he isn't likely to finish on that note, or maybe his hippy side will win after all (cycle will continue off screen then)

I thought about it (in that highly specific context) ever since I read your essay. On one hand stealing fire from gods thing and on other there is much to find out about exact nature of CotF and BR relationship. Maybe CotF are the evil ones in that arrangement. If they helped in creation of Others and if I am correct in thinking Others were human, it seems unlikely CotF aided both fire and ice seers. Who are bad ones again, all the myths have ice and darkness as threat, but ice preserves while fire consumes, which is especially true with trees with deep roots. What is your take on that, just spitballin' maybe something comes to us.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

I started to read the referenced sources for the Apkallu, in Myths from Mesopotamia, Oxford World's Classics, by Stephanie Dalley, first published in 1989, but revised in 2000 after prior missing fragments of Gilgamesh and other myths have surfaced. First thing I did was look for Apkallu in the glossary itself, but that specific word wasn't listed in there. So, I began to read "Erra and Ishum" (the Erra Epic).

Not sure why wikipedia calls it an epic, as it is not written as an epic. It is actually nothing but dialogue between gods: what they should do, what they will do, what they shouldn't do, what they have done. It's as if you have Troy, take out all the action, and only read the dialogue of the gods. It centers around a rivalry, dispute and challenge between Marduk and Erra. Marduk is a late generation god who over time grew to be the main god of the pantheon, and is the patron god of Babylon.  Erra is a god of war, plague and hunting. He became assimilated with Nergal, god of the underworld. In Erra and Ishum he certainly is a general god of death and destruction through any means. Officially Ishum is his servant, a minor firegod and Erra's herrald, but also advizor - advice Erra tends to ignore, unless praised and placated by Ishum. 

So, Erra is sleeping but stirred by noise (seems to be from noisy settled people), and though angered he's sleepy and not sure whether to rise or stay in bed with his lover Mami. He decides to "snooze" (my shorthand insertion) and lie a while longer with Mami. His "seven" (the Sebitti) though wake him and challenge him to go to war, because staying in bed will make him weak, and them weak, and old. They want him to go to war so that kings, gods, people, countries and demons alike will praise and worship him and recognize him as the greatest, and quiver in fear of his all-power of destruction. These seven are his attendants, weapons given to him by Anu (their father after they were born by earth impregnated by the king of the gods Anu), to wreak havoc amongst people whenever they anger him. So, he decides to rise and make war. Ishum challenges him, asks him why he wants to do such evil, but he silences his assistant, claiming that Marduk has neglected his duties, does as he pleases, and Erra wants to anger him and overwhelm his people (Babylonians).

Erra seeks Marduk out and insult and taunts him, by making the observation that his crown and robes are dusty and have lost their shine. Marduk then relates the Flood. Marduk claims here to be the one who caused the Flood of destruction, who nearly annihilated people, and how much has been lost because of it. Basically he sounds weary and tired and reluctant to do the same thing again. It is in this speech that in this story the Apkallu are mentioned, except Dalley used an epiteth "Craftsmen" (see later). Erra decides to prevent Marduk from re-entering his dwelling and to rule in Marduk's place instead, while Marduk puts off his crown and takes of his girdle, thereby undoing the order of hte heavens and earth (again). Basically a battle of wills between both follows, where if Erra persists, Marduk will bring destruction too to foild Erra's plans. Towards the end the people are destroying themselves - mothers versus daughters, sons versus fathers, governors turning against their own citizens. And yet still Erra is committed to destruction. Ishtar tries to reason with Erra but fails. Ishum tries to reason with Erra, but fails often. Ishum tries to make Erra see how he has all the power, has proven that without him there would be no death and no war, and yet he complains about being despised, for killing both the old and young, both the just and unjust, both the kings and the rogues, while insisting that they should love him, because Marduk passed the power over to him. Several gods, like Marduk and others, tell him which cities he laid to waste. This actually starts to please Erra enough that he orders Ishum and his seven (the Sebetti, not the sages) to lay more waste, but allow the Akkad[ians] to remain strong and shepherd the survivors. Erra goes back home and lies down, though not yet going to sleep, but making the point that without him, the people wouldn't be offering stuff and sing praises to the other gods for their salvation. The other gods are in awe and Ishum offers a deal - we'll worhsip you, because you are the most powerful, and you go sleep. And Erra is pleased and radiates and all agree, so while there was a lot of loss, Ishum saved the remnant by placating Erra.

The self-proclaimed source of this tale is a Babylonian priest of the Dabibi family (8th century BC) who ends the tale by saying he learned of this in a dream given to him by a god (likely Erra). And the copy is stamped with a king's seal as verificaton of truth. The curious thing is that the priest wouldn't have been an Erra devotee, because he's Babylonian and associated with high temple office (aka Marduk's), and Erra's seat of worship is in Kutha. 

I'll quote the whole Marduk speech here. My insertions I put between square brackets, as Dalley's insertions are between normal ones.

Quote

"Warrior Erra, concerning that deed whichyou have said you will do; A long time ago, when I was angry and rose up from my dwelling and arranged for the Flood, I rose up from my dwelling, and the control of heaven and earth was undone. The very heavens I made tremble, the positions of the stars of heaven changed, and I did not return them to their places. Even Erkalla [underworld] quaked; the furrow's yield diminished, and ofrever after (?) it was hard to extract (a yield). Even the control of heaven and earth was undone, the springs diminished, the flood-water receded.

I went back, and looked and looked, and it was very grievous. The (remaining) offspring of living things was tiny, and I did not return them to their (former) state, to the extent that I was like a farmer who can hold (all) his seed-corn in his hand. I made a house and settled into it.

As for the finery which had been pushed aside by the Flood, its surface dulled: I dirrected Gerra [god of fire] to make my features radiant, and to cleanse my robes. When he had made the finery bright, and finished the work, I put on my crown of lordship and went back to my place. My features were splendid,and my gaze was awesome! (As for) the people who were left from the Flood and  saw the result of my action, should I raise my weapons and destroy the remnant? I made those (original) Craftsmen go down to the Apsu [primeval sea, subaquatic], and I said they were not to come back up. I changed the location of the mesu-tree (and of) the elmesu-stone, and did not reveal it to anyone.

Now, concerning that deed which you have said you will do, Warrior Erra, where is the mesu-wood, the flesh of the gods, the proper insignia of the King of the World, the pure timber, tall youth, who is made into a lord, whose roots reach down into the vast ocean, through a hundred miles of water, to the base of Arallu [name of a desert, likely where gold was begotten, but also became synonymous with the underworld] whose topknot above rests on the heaven of Anu?

[... continues to ask where is this or that he made disappear or destroyed with his Flood...]

Where are the Seven Sages of the Apsu, the holy carp, who are perfect in lofty wisdom like Ea their lord, who can make my body holy?"

I can't translate what mesu-wood or elmesu-stone are exactly, as it is only speculated on. But it appears to be some rich precious wood and some precious stone. Basically Marduk made a certain wood and stone go extinct.

I don't know why (yet) why the wikipedia says the Seven Sages continued to be advizors amongst people. In Erra and Ishum it is clearly stated by Marduk that he ordered them to return to his father's seat of rule at Apsu, underwater, at the end of the Flood, and his question where they are now further hints their absence of the heavens and earth. The seven lofty wise sages were banished by Marduk to the subaquatic and forbidden to resurface. He ends his speech with that question and it is of relevance to to Erra's original taunt of Marduk that his crown and finery are dusty and have lost their shine. It are the Seven Sages whose ritual job it is to cleanse Marduk. Since they are banished under water, they cannot clean him anymore, so now that he is old, he looks dusty.

Marduk is Ea's (aka Enki's) son. Enki or Ea was the god of fresh water,wisdom and incantations, and helper of mankind, because he's theone who sent the Seven Sages to teach arts and skills of civilisation to men. And his abode or dwelling was Apsu, the subaquatic. (from the glossary of the book I'm quoting from).

Because of the notes, I discovered how Dalley had listed the Apkallu in the glossary - as the "seven sages". I'll just quote the glossary explanation here.

Quote

Seven Sages - according to cuneiform traditions, known only from indirect references and from Berossus, Ea sent seven divine sages, apkallu, in the form of puradu-fish (carp?) from the Apsu to teach the arts (Sumerian me) of civilisation to mankind before the Flood. [... the names ...] Each is also known by other names and epiteths, and is paired with an antediluvian [pre-flood] king, hence their collective name 'counsellors', muntalku. In this capacity they were credited with building walled cities. Responsible for technical skills, they were also known as 'craftsmen', ummianu, a word which puns with Adapa's name U-an [one of the seven sages]. They were banished back to the Apsu forever after angering Ea. After the Flood, certain great men of letters and exorcists were accorded sage-status, though only as mortals. Deities other than Ea - Ishtar, Nabu and Marduk - claimed to control the sages. In iconography sages are shown either as fish-men, or with bird attributes appropriate to the Underworld creatures.

So, we have these 7 sages, sent by a god of wisdom to teach mankind and associated as advizors of kings and building of cities, except they did this before the flood, not after the flood, and they were banished to the subaquatic after, forbidden to help mankind any further. And thus the wikipedia article would be wrong about claiming they continued to advize and help mannkind after the flood. This should be cross checked with the claimed source wikipedia uses for this statement, because Erra and Ishum certainly disagree with that, at least with the "divine" sages continuing to help mankind. The Erra and Ishum tale may not be as famous to us as Gilgamesh, but there actually have been more tablets of copies found of Erra and Ishum than of Gilgamesh. By the number of copies found it suggests it was a more popular tale than Gilgamesh.

So, if we are to connect the 7 sages with either the Younger Dryas, GT and related settlements (all non-walled) or Atlantis, these 7 taught building and crafts and arts before during the Younger Dryas, before GT and before alleged Atlantis was lost, but were banished to the subaquatic at the start of the Hollocene (the sea level rises after the Yougner Dryas ends). It would mean the sages drowned along with Atlantis. The Erra and Ishum tale basically says the opposite of what others use it to argue for.

Also of note, the Mesopotanians seemed to favour the number 7: the 7 sibetti, the 7 sages, but at the very least Erra and Ishum uses the number 7 regularly in phrases even when not talking of either beings, such as 'you killed 7 and spared none', or 'go out against 7' or '7 winds'.

ETA: you can check it in an open source form. Click the link. Click E, go to page 2 and scroll down to the linked name "erra". Then click on the 55x/100% link. A new screen opens with transliteration lines. Scroll to the transliteration lines under Neo-Assyrian/Literary/Huzirina, and click the first link behind the first line (STT 1, 016: o i 5) and you'll have the transliteration of "Erra and Ishum" on the left and a translation in English on the right: http://oracc.museum.upenn.edu/cams/gkab/qpn-x-divine

 

Edited by sweetsunray

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

On 6/5/2017 at 11:16 PM, LmL said:

I would maintain that no precedent for GT has been found. Until we dig up the older circles, we cannot say there was a gradual increase in knowledge of the technique there for certain. What we have is the sudden appearance of GT.

Well, we cannot say "sudden" either as there are suggestive preliminary findings that still need to be investigated. All we can say with surety is that the most elaborate version has been unearthed, which at present is the oldest of those unearthed.

Quote

 What are you referring to when you say "At the start of the Hollocene we have people settle and build mud brick and stone permanent houses and a separate ritualistic centre and the first appearance of megaliths made from the nearby quarry"?

A summary of the symposium videos on the GT epoch: they have evidence of contemporary settlements, where people actually lived sedentary and built houses (without a door but where you enter through the rooftop) and relatively nearby (for people living of hunting and gathering wild cereals) we have GT as a ritual centre where they held rites or rituals of some kind. The megaliths of GT were taken from a nearby limestone quarry. They even have megaliths in the quarry that were cut out, then people attempted to lever them loose from the quarry, but cracked and ended up broken, and were left there,unused.

On 6/5/2017 at 11:16 PM, LmL said:

There are a lot of people besides Graham Hancock who have documented their claims of extensive astronomy being encoded in GT. I suppose you will simply dispute all of them, but that's what I am referring to.

Actually, I do not dispute all of them. My point is that there are many various claims about astronomical elements, sometimes about the same depiction, and arguing what exactly is shown, with various arguments. For example some argue - well the doors face south and the unearthed "temples" are at the southern side of the manmade hill, so we must look to the southern star sky for answers. But clearly, not everything has been unearthed, and not all that has been unearthed is on the south side of the hill, and the door is something you enter. Someone who enters walks from the south direction to the north direction. So is the south sky where we should be looking? Without further investigation and the complete unearthing of the hill, especially the suspected earlier constructions, imo nobody can truly say with certainty what it is.

That is why I included Andrew Collins and the Rig Veda professor talk of the GT symposium with the many other videos. I don't know which one is right or not about pillar 43, and they might all be wrong. But without further debate, withour further digging I find it preliminary at this moment to make any absolute statements about the advancedness or precission or even what exactly of astronomy is depicted, other than Dr. Siddhart showed a picture of a symbol on the think flank of a pillar that matches the astrological symbol of a solar eclipse (conjunction of indented sun and moon sickle) and two small identical figures facing each other above it, which matches the astrological symbol of Gemini.

In other words, I encourage researchers to investigate this archeo-astronomical angle further and to keep debating amongst each other. If however, anything remotely like a consensus is not reached, at the very least I will keep the right to conclude - it is not clear at all what exactly pillar 43 is trying to show its visitors, even if I am very readily willing to believe they have astronomical significance.

Are there signs they may not reach a consensus? Yes, because the various claims of "it's a comet", "it's Orion the Hunter and Garuna" or "It's star x/y/z" all depend on their larger agenda. Collins is pushing for a universal link to Cignus and us coming from or being instructed from there. Hancock is now on the comet bandwagon for Atlantis, and the peer review paper authors seem as well, since they refer to the abstract symbols at the top of pillar 43 as "handbags". Dr. Siddhart wants to prove the Rig Veda is 11500 years old. None of them look at the evidence indepedently, but how the finds can serve their overall belief, and thus may be skewing their interpretation of what we're looking at (such as calling those things that aren't carried by anybody 'handbags') -  in other words "cherry picking" from whatever that looks useful, but leaving out the rest (notjust for themselves, but anyone else trying to verify for themselves). None of them are immune to it, nor are scientists, which is exactly why the process of peer reviewing and debate and further investigation is so important. If you believe something, your brain will avoid cognitive dissonance by not putting any weight on certain elements of the evidence, when it might conflict with the belief. Anyone claiming he is immune to it, is talking rubbish, myself included.

Exactly because I recognize my brain will avoid cog-dis once it believes something, I tend to search for the various arguments, pro and contra first, beyond the "sources", and it's why I offered the various angles in this thread.

On 6/5/2017 at 11:16 PM, LmL said:

It also seems Andrew Collins participates on Hancock's board, and engages in discussion about GT. Hancock mentioned Collins and many others when discussing astronomy at GT too, so I am not sure where the idea that there is bad blood or accusations of stealing from Collins is coming from, for what it's worth.

Oh, Collins does not go out and accuse Hancock of citing him incorrectly. While he obvioiusly disagrees with arguments and proposals on depicted star candidates on pillar 43 and other artifacts, he is grateful of Hancock's foreword in his own book, and grateful that after years of saying "watch whatever they'll find at GT" since 1995 Hancock finally does. And he states why he's grateful in the video I linked to before  - Hancock sells millions of copies, Collins doesn't.

It's Calvino who in his review of Magicians (I linked to it earlier) states that Hancock lifted arguments and ideas straight out of Collins' book and did not give him enough credit. And since you are rereading Magicians the Calvino review might be interesting. Calvino quotes text several times, and then shortly after says, "Well, that wasn't actually a quote from Magicians, but from this or that Victorian book". You can directly compare those quotes, as he does the review per chapter. Calvino alleges that several sources are left out or how Hancock makes mistakes on source material.

Edited by sweetsunray

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@sweetsunray thanks, I will read Calvino's 'review. I need to get an ebook copy of Magicians; I need listening on Audible is kind of tricky when you want to stop and focus on something, or quote a section. Hancock actually seems to prefer an interpretation of the vulture Stella as an alignment towards the dark rift in the Milky Way, which many regard as the galactic center. In terms of the 25920 year cycle of the precession of the equinoxes, the galactic center would be regarded as the beginning and end of the entire cycle. He seems to like Paul Brule's idea that  the desk at the end of the vultures outstretched arm is actually the Sun comma rising in front of the dark rift between Scorpio and Sagittarius on the Spring Equinox, a kind of celestial time marker. Elsewhere he sees alignments at Gobekli Tepe which point back to that 10500 BC tim period he us such a fan of

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/5/2017 at 11:06 PM, LmL said:

The apkallu 'handbags': http://firstlegend.info/The Apkallu.html

compared to an image in Mesoamerica: https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/originals/f3/9e/54/f39e5445d8ed7fd50d10e6cd33638a7f.jpg

This website has all the possible "handbag' examples all together - I haven't read the site and have no idea how they are interpreting, but it does conveniently have them all together:

https://knittingittogether.com/tag/gobekli-tepe/

Notable is the one from Karatepe, just down the road from GT

I'll skip the Mesopotanian ones, that includes Assyrian, Akkadian, Babylonian as that is all Mesopotanian.

Karatepe is a fortress/palace built by Hittites in 8th century BC. It is a contemporary culture of the Assyrian (Mesopotamia) one, a neighbour, in the same period of the oldest literary reference about the Apkallu, "Erra and Ishum". I searched for images of Karatepe in general (just googled Karatepe) and there are reliefs with sphinxes and bearded men: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/b7/KaratepeNVr13-11.jpg/400px-KaratepeNVr13-11.jpg. There is a clear link of artistry between Mesopatamia and Karatepe. "It's just down the road from GT" seems not a useful fact as GT would have been buried already for 8000 years by then. The Hittites allegedly migrated from Ukraine into Anatolia between 3000-2000 BC. So, if the Hittites have something culturally linked to GT, it would have come from inclusion of Mesopotanian cultural elements, that may or may not have GT cultural relics woven in theirs.

But looking at the Karatepe image: You see a boat, a rower, a guy holding either something in his hands made out of a criss-crossing material, a fish below the boat, and then we have the imager of a figure on land with what appears a spade together with a large bird, also holding something in his hands. To me the guy in the boat is holding a netting, hence the criss-crossing, not a bag, and it makes sense in the scene. No idea what the bird is, but might be a domesticated bird for all I know at present. To be honest that guy with the spade appears to be holding a true bag, sausage like with a handle,so imo the author of the website circled the wrong item - he circled a fishing net, while the guy at the bottom with the spade is at least holding something in solid cloth, filled with whatever, and it has a handle like a handbag.

Then we have an image of Mitanni on the website with some bird-man figure with a cloak holding what seems to be a grain stalk and a handbag. MItanni was a kingdom that emerged in the South Anatolian, northern Mesopotanian region during a political vacuum. Hittites had conquered Aleppo and fought amongst each other, and the Akkadian (Mesopotamia) were weak politicians. The Mitanni had moved south before 18th century BC and encrouched on Mesopotamia and carved their kingdom. Since even the Greeks included Mesopotanian gods and Flood myth in their own mythology, it's again little surprising that there is a Mitanni and Mesopotanian cross culturing. 

The Jiroft artifacts of the Jiroft culture and Tepe Yahia: the site in south Iran was occupied from the 6th until the 2nd millenium BC and then 10th to 4th century BC. Around 3000 BC Tepe Yahia becomes a craftscentre of chlorite pottery - dark stone vessels intricately carved. The people there were an "inter cultural" people, as the pottery can be found in the Indus valley, and their pottery vessels were found in ancient Mesopotanian temples. They traded with Mesopotamia. At the time it were Elamites (copper age Iranian natives) who ruled there.

Looking at the depictions on the Jiroft pottery

  • can't make out what's on the top left
  • top right: appears a man, with 2 spotted large cats walking on their front paws, hind legs up
  • bottom left: again the picture is too small with annoying lighting to make sure exactly what's on it, except for 2 horned figures
  • bottom right: a bird, wings up and outstretched, flanked by 2 coiled snake figures, at the left a bird flies downward, at the right above the snake's head is either a deer's head or a rabbit's and then a lion like animal in profile standing on its hind legs
  • the large bottom picture: 2 female headed scorpions, and the actual depictions of smaller scorpions above it.

The website author makes a lot of the last one, seeing "fish people" in it. But you can clearly see how the body of the horned women (I think: long waving hair and breasts with nipples) spirals into the conical body of someting insect-like and then the rings of a scorpion's tail, including the stinger at the end. Of course all these images are on pottery that were shaped in what we can associate with a bag and handle (handbag). (Are they actual containers?) But the last image combined with the "Oh see we have fish tailed gods here swimming in water" shows the lack of scrutiny (as it does with the netting of  a man in a boat) - avoidance of cog dis right there. The water is attached to the heads, so it's hair, and the scorpion tails are quite clearly scorpion tails with stingers.

All in all, I don't think we should separate what's depicted on these stone artifacts from its function:nd the imagery on it varies, birds, leopard-like or lion like, snakes, scorpions, but no fish-men. They are obvioiusly made to be carried. But why? As wards? (just freely sepculating here).

Possibly, the "handbags" being carried by the Apkallu may have originated from the Elamites in Iran? If Mesopotanians traded with the Elamites to put those vessels in their temples then it seems to have a status or ward connotation for the high priests of somesorts to me. And since the divine seven sages are worshipped for their various wisdoms, they might have awarded the Apkallu with carrying such pottery vessels as a type of honoring. We then would have an Elamite cultural element of status or honor incorporated into Mesopotanian art.

Phoenician goddess of Yanouh: you can make out the shape of a head with a hat. Logic compells me to see the "handle" being the goddess's hair or veil, and the shape beneath her head to be her dress (you can see buttons or something like it). For the author to make this into a "handbag" is completely forgetting the context.

Ancient Armenia: well it was once part of the Hittite empire, the Mitanni and then became Persia.

The Peruvian vessel: it has a tip to pour. That's not a handbag. It's a vessel to pour liquid. They're made in every form with any animal or human you can think of.

The Toltec Warriors of Tula: I can answer what they're holding in their right hands. It aren't handbags. Those are weapons. In the left hand they hold an atlatl or javelin thrower (not visible on this particular picture). In the right they hold curved, bladed clubs or maces for close range combat. What looks like a "handbag" is actually a known weapon to knock and cut someone's skull in that is quite typical for Toltec war culture. 

And of course in general baskets, containers and bags that you can carry around would be something that would appear in every culture, because it's so damn handy to put stuff in.  .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now