forgive me for the paywall.
It feels like the window of time where this myth could make sense is pretty narrow. It's hard to imagine this story having much appeal before or during, say, the Trail of Tears. Maybe I'm mistaken but it feels like policy in this time must have relied on racism and dehumanization of Native Americans being widespread. But waiting a generation past the Trail of Tears (so the myth imagines a princess in an then-intact-now-vanished society, rather than positioning grandma as a victim of forced displacement whose family is currently struggling in an unfamiliar reservation) basically puts you in the 20th century. Anecdotally, I encountered this myth more than once in the 1990s. So that leaves only a handful of decades, and fairly recent ones, for the idea to become appealing, take the specific form of a Cherokee princess, and become widespread in white families. How much do we know about how this idea crystallized and propagated?
Need assistance finding primary source on the legend for a paper. Most papers I find only cite other papers or do their own field work. Thanks!
Traditionally, they were made of animal or sometimes human skin and bones, but the surviving ones we have today were made of materials like wood and ivory in the late 1800s to be preserved.
Many civilizations have historical leaders who are remembered as the ones who brought their empires into greatness.
For example, Rome had Julius Caesar or Octavian and while France had Napoleon....
This made me curious......In Aztec history, who is generally considered the greatest ruler or leader?
Was there an emperor who led the empire into its golden age, expanded its territory the most, strengthened its government, or brought major achievements in culture, warfare, or influence...?
And also brought the whole Empire to Greatness for its time?
And Do you think that if the certain Aztec ruler was alive when The Spanish Conquistadors arrived.... How would he handle their presence?
Would like to know your insights and perspectives on this.
This gilded copper disk featuring a three-dimensional butterfly at its center was produced by Moche metalsmiths on Peru’s North Coast. The ornament was originally cut from a larger sheet of hammered copper and then gilded (Lechtman, 1982; Schorsch, 1998). The disk features a solid roundel at the center surrounded by concentric bands of step motifs. The outermost ring is adorned with gilded dangles suspended by copper bands attached to the back of the disk. There are additional disks at vertices within the roundel yielding what must have been a dazzling spectacle when displayed in the sun. The gilded butterfly is represented with notable attention to anatomical detail, including its spread spotted wings, each inscribed with the wing veins, an abdomen with the sections apparent, and a head inlaid with shell and turquoise eyes. The insect is attached to the main body of the disk by six thin copper legs. These appendages would have permitted a slight movement of the figure as the disk was moved suggesting the idea of flight. The wires that hold the dangles are oriented so that only when the butterfly is pointing up do the dangles hang properly. The cut-out design may suggest a sense of place, as step designs are often associated with architecture: they may represent mirror images of temple steps or a repeating stepped wave design common in representations of buildings in Moche ceramics.
The function of disks such as the present example is unclear. They may have served as shield frontals, attached to a cane backing, but the delicate nature of the butterfly would have made this work impractical in battle. More likely, this disk served as part of the ceremonial regalia deployed in ritual performance. Alternatively, these disks may have been attached to textile banners or wooden supports of some sort. In either case, the presence of only one or two holes for attachment also seems to indicate that disks like this were not used in activities that involved strenuous motion.
The Moche (also known as the Mochicas) flourished on Peru’s North Coast from AD 200-850, centuries before the rise of the Incas. Over the course of some six centuries, the Moche built thriving regional centers from the Nepeña River Valley in the south to perhaps as far north as the Piura River, near the modern border with Ecuador, developing coastal deserts into rich farmlands and drawing upon the abundant maritime resources of the Pacific Ocean’s Humboldt Current. Although the Moche never formed a single centralized political entity, they shared unifying cultural traits such as religious practices (Donnan, 2010).
This object was said to have been found at the burial site of Loma Negra, which was one of the most northern outposts of Moche culture. Loma Negra works in metal share similar iconography with ceramics and metalwork found at Moche sites father to the south, such as Ucupe (Bourget, 2014). The precise relationship between the Loma Negra and the Moche “heartland” remains a subject of debate, however (Kaulicke, 2006).
Long story short:
Was drinkin' my coffee and scrollin', and ran across a Tiktok about the Pirahã. Course, I lost it cause I got distracted by comments. Basically, many commentors claimed it was debunked sensationalism. Which tracks: my first thought was "How can an entire cultural group NOT count, when other mammals and birds can? This has to be misrepresented. Wait- they 'see their culture as complete and perfect', but trade for canoes"- that is admitting they see other groups as doing things better, and can grasp quantities."
One guy did post a vid, saying later fieldworkers debunked Everett and Wikipedia's summary. (TBF, the wiki mostly just cites the one book.)
A Reddit search finds linguists basically see it as sensationalism, but that the guy just keeps digging in. Which reminds me of Lesson One of Undergrad: Having a Ph.D. doesn't actually equal genius, honor, and truth.
Several commentors claiming to be Brazillian stated that their country's researchers found the Pirahã do have stories, history, counting, and aren't comically culturally supremacist; one said a few of Everett's claims were basically taking a joke serious.
(Seeing my state has "The Mountains of the Bark-Eating Dumbasses", and other ethnographers accounts- I can see that happening)
Thing is, the vid is mostly in Portugese and seems w/o context:
https://youtu.be/lC-8J1lUBVU?si=HYz1XvmCEosnw4ET
It looks like a channel made for an academic conference ages back. The commentor claimed it debunked most of the sensationalist description of the culture.
It was discovered in an offering or altar inside a tomb in Group B of the archaeological zone of Palenque, in Chiapas, Mexico. Chronology: Dates from the Late Classic period (approximately between 550 and 900 AD). Current preservation: It is exhibited in the "Alberto Ruz Lhuillier" Site Museum of Palenque.
Not sure how appropriate this is for this sub but “Fictional Mythology” is one of the flair options so here goes;
I read an illustrated storybook compilation as a child (I believe it might’ve skewed more “Snow Queen” & “Thumbelina” TBH, less Homer’s Odyssey) and my vague memories of one specific tale are bugging TF out of me. I’m 90% sure it was set in America - somewhere with mountains & pine-trees, probably pre-20th century - and was about… well something that was drawn a lot like the attached image here.
It was a big quasi-bipedal leonine thing like from Disney’s “Beauty & the Beast”, only non-sapient and decidedly chimeric. Wings, horns, a scaled fish tale IIRC, etc.. The story itself was either about it menacing a secluded town (and possibly falling to its death out of a tree at the end, lol?), or mayyybe about a townsperson simply making it up as a tall tale & constantly adding new stuff. In either case, it had “fearsome critter” energy, and I got the impression it was a minor cultural touchstone. I could’ve sworn it’s name was even shorthand for big hairy hodgepodge monsters. Something like… “bugaboo” or “gruffalo” or IDFK “nallywag” but obviously/evidently none of those. Ring any bells to anyone here?
It doesn't have to be just the most interesting, but also the most ridiculous, plausible. or anything else.