Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Zakuska

Wheels, an Anachronism?

Recommended Posts

It's common knowledge by the critics of the BOM that the Indians and aboriginal inhabitants of the Americas were too dumb to know anything about the wheel. Yet they carved 300 ton stones with such precision and transported them over 25 miles up hill and placed them so precisely that a cigaret paper cant fit between them.

One of three stone wheels found at Tiwanaku, Bolivia.

Stone_Wheel_Tiwanaku.jpg

Another found half way up a mountian.

http://home.earthlink.net/~rnisbet/millwheel.html

Then we have all the Toys with their wheels.

http://www.precolumbianwheels.com/

Knowledge of the wheel was certianly here during BOM times.

So were the roads.

Share this post


Link to post

It's common knowledge by the critics of the BOM that the Indians and aboriginal inhabitants of the Americas were too dumb to know anything about the wheel. Yet they carved 300 ton stones with such precision and transported them over 25 miles up hill and placed them so precisely that a cigaret paper cant fit between them.

One of three stone wheels found at Tiwanaku, Bolivia.

Stone_Wheel_Tiwanaku.jpg

Another found half way up a mountian.

http://home.earthlin.../millwheel.html

Then we have all the Toys with their wheels.

http://www.precolumbianwheels.com/

Knowledge of the wheel was certianly here during BOM times.

So were the roads.

I believe the debate is on whether or not there were wheels used for transportation or easement of labor.

Share this post


Link to post

I believe the debate is on whether or not there were wheels used for transportation or easement of labor.

But we are using non-nephite cultures to prove what they did or didn't do. I don't buy into the Mesoamerica LGT. I honestly believe they are a lost tribe not to be found in current cultures.

Course I also believe in the theory of Atlantis, so I am a nutjob. :P

JMS

Share this post


Link to post

I believe the debate is on whether or not there were wheels used for transportation or easement of labor.

Probably a millstone, partly quarried by some post-conquest Indians.

There are other such stones in Latin America -- indistinguishable from

Spanish mill-stones, and undatable as being pre-conquest.

The wheels on toys are more to the point. Most ancient peoples at

least understood the principle of rolling heavy objects on cylinders --

on cut logs, for example. The wheel set with an axle is merely a

development of log-rolling; and no doubt been invented in many

places, in different ages.

If the Aztecs had vast plains of wheat-land, through which to race

war-chariots, they probably would have invented such contraptions.

But, pulled by slaves, dogs, or bison, such chariots would have

been useless on long excursions.

Perhaps some day, somebody will discover the remains of a

preColumbian dog-travois, equipped with wheels.

Candy_and_mato-Nationals-June,2005.jpg

So what?

UD

Share this post


Link to post

But we are using non-nephite cultures to prove what they did or didn't do. I don't buy into the Mesoamerica LGT. I honestly believe they are a lost tribe not to be found in current cultures.

Course I also believe in the theory of Atlantis, so I am a nutjob. :P

JMS

To be more correct, the issue of wheels arises from the BofM's mention of chariots, which critics (and some apologists) believe imply the use of wheels. While could one feasible stretch oneself enough to call an enormous round stone a wheel, to say that this implies the possible existence of wheel-toting chariots seems to be far too much of a stretch. Of course this all begs the question of whether or not Joseph was accurately translating a Nephite term for wheeled carriers, or if he was conceptually translating a Nephite concept to match his own 19th century worldview.

Share this post


Link to post

To be more correct, the issue of wheels arises from the BofM's mention of chariots, which critics (and some apologists) believe imply the use of wheels. While could one feasible stretch oneself enough to call an enormous round stone a wheel, to say that this implies the possible existence of wheel-toting chariots seems to be far too much of a stretch. Of course this all begs the question of whether or not Joseph was accurately translating a Nephite term for wheeled carriers, or if he was conceptually translating a Nephite concept to match his own 19th century worldview.

I contend that they were wheeled Chariots.

JMS

Share this post


Link to post

I contend that they were wheeled Chariots.

JMS

The problem is not so much the existence or understanding of the wheel as a means of work, but rather if the Nephites possessed all of the necessary technologies to utilize the wheel. For example, I have a pretty good understanding of the concepts behind a wheel. But I could not produce one either strong or circular enough to use on a wagon. Nor do I have the technology to build an axle or a cart. Had I these technologies, they themselves would leave tell-tale signs in the archaeological evidence. Nothing of the sort exists.

Share this post


Link to post

I contend that they were wheeled Chariots.

JMS

Of course --

And so did Brigham Young's personal secretary,

Elder George Reynolds:

Zarahemla-chariot.jpg

Always nice to see that somebody in the Church stands up for tradition.

UD

Share this post


Link to post

The problem is not so much the existence or understanding of the wheel as a means of work, but rather if the Nephites possessed all of the necessary technologies to utilize the wheel. For example, I have a pretty good understanding of the concepts behind a wheel. But I could not produce one either strong or circular enough to use on a wagon. Nor do I have the technology to build an axle or a cart. Had I these technologies, they themselves would leave tell-tale signs in the archaeological evidence. Nothing of the sort exists.

A lost civilization has a hard time producing evidence. Expecially if the evidence was destroyed during that civilization's destruction.

JMS

Share this post


Link to post

To be more correct, the issue of wheels arises from the BofM's mention of chariots, which critics (and some apologists) believe imply the use of wheels. While could one feasible stretch oneself enough to call an enormous round stone a wheel, to say that this implies the possible existence of wheel-toting chariots seems to be far too much of a stretch. Of course this all begs the question of whether or not Joseph was accurately translating a Nephite term for wheeled carriers, or if he was conceptually translating a Nephite concept to match his own 19th century worldview.

We need to be more precise than this...

The only mention of a wheel in the BOM that I could find is a quotation of Isaiah 5

28 Whose arrows shall be sharp, and all their bows bent, and their horses

Share this post


Link to post

A lost civilization has a hard time producing evidence. Expecially if the evidence was destroyed during that civilization's destruction.

JMS

CFR. Actually, when civilizations are catastrophically destroyed, they are more likely to produce artifacts

Share this post


Link to post

CFR. Actually, when civilizations are catastrophically destroyed, they are more likely to produce artifacts

Share this post


Link to post

You missed the key word...

A lost civilization has a hard time producing evidence

Pompey isn't "lost" any more. Shall we add Troy to that list?

But your sarcasm ie Atlanatis etc. etc. is duely noted.

You can add Troy if you want, but it wasn't destroyed in a manner that preserved it, like Pompey.

But funny you should mention Troy. Troy's status came from an arrogant presupposition that it was mythical despite tons of historical evidence referring to it. In fact, that it is how it was found. By following the evidence. Unlike the Book of Mormon, there is no evidence. Troy was referenced in both surviving artwork and literature. The question is, why did they consider it to be mythical. Now I would really be impressed if you used the same argument to try to plead that Olympus is real. That is more akin to the BoM arguments.

Share this post


Link to post
Of course --

And so did Brigham Young's personal secretary,

Elder George Reynolds:

Zarahemla-chariot.jpg

Always nice to see that somebody in the Church stands up for tradition.

UD

Indeed.

Question, Unk: the architecture, flora and stuff there in the picture: does that look midwestern to you? Great Lakes perhaps?

Or maybe there is another tradition being stood up for there?

Regards,

Pahoran

Share this post


Link to post

Indeed.

Question, Unk: the architecture, flora and stuff there in the picture: does that look midwestern to you? Great Lakes perhaps?

Or maybe there is another tradition being stood up for there?

Regards,

Pahoran

The Romans?

Share this post


Link to post
The Romans?

The leaning monolith in the left foreground looks Roman to you?

Uhh -- okaaaay.

(Closes the door and tiptoes away softly.)

Regards,

Pahoran

Share this post


Link to post

The leaning monolith in the left foreground looks Roman to you?

Uhh -- okaaaay.

(Closes the door and tiptoes away softly.)

Regards,

Pahoran

No. Just the Romans on the chariot and horses.

I'm just playing with ya.

And that monolith doesn't look anything to me.

Share this post


Link to post
No. Just the Romans on the chariot and horses.

I'm just playing with ya.

Well that makes sense; I asked Unk about "the architecture, flora and stuff" and you related that to the chariot and horses. I'm glad you weren't serious.

Regards,

Pahoran

Share this post


Link to post

...

I asked Unk about "the architecture, flora and stuff"

...

Carthago...

Nova Carthago delenda est!

THE GENIUS OF OBLIVION.

And hence Columbia's first inhabitants,

The authors of these monuments of old;

And their destruction, I may sing perchance

If haply this, my tale, so featly told,

Escape Medusan critic's withering glance,

And in my country's favor live enroll'd,

As not unworthy of her smile -- but this,

A hope I may not cherish -- or dismiss. *

---

* In the selection of Tyrians for my adventurers, I was guided,

merely by the circumstance of their superiority in maritime knowledge,

connected with their power, wealth, and enterprising industry. Since

writing my poem, however, I have learned that there is a tradition,

that Hanno, a Carthagenian, came ages ago to America. Mr. Seldon,

also, in his description of the Caraibs who inhabited the Antilles,

conjectures, that they might be descendants from some Phoenicians or

Carthagenians driven by accident to the West-lndies. He remarks,

"that there is no difficulty attending the belief, that a "Carthagenian

vessel with both men and women on "board, might have got into the

trade winds, and been driven by them to the West-lndies; where,

feeling the impossibility of returning, they might have formed a

settlement."

Now Carthage, it is well known, was a colony from Tyre, and it is

but reasonable to conclude that the inhabitants of the mother country

would possess equal skill in navigation, and enterprize in adventure

with their colonists.

http://olivercowdery.com/texts/1823geni.htm#n7

UD

.

Share this post


Link to post

It's common knowledge by the critics of the BOM that the Indians and aboriginal inhabitants of the Americas were too dumb to know anything about the wheel. Yet they carved 300 ton stones with such precision and transported them over 25 miles up hill and placed them so precisely that a cigaret paper cant fit between them.

One of three stone wheels found at Tiwanaku, Bolivia.

Stone_Wheel_Tiwanaku.jpg

Another found half way up a mountian.

http://home.earthlink.net/~rnisbet/millwheel.html

Then we have all the Toys with their wheels.

http://www.precolumbianwheels.com/

Knowledge of the wheel was certianly here during BOM times.

So were the roads.

Not to derail

Share this post


Link to post

Ah, today is Thursday, Mesoamerican parallel day. The first link you provide, tells us the following (emphasis mine):

We know that the Incas did not have the wheel. It is also pretty clear that the Spanish did no quarrying at Kachiqhata. They didn't need to. They simply tore down existing structures and re-used the stones for their own purpose.

So why is this wheel here, perched so nicely 2,000 feet above the river in the quarries? It is apparently a millwheel, 62" in diameter with a good part of the back side split off. (You can see a hairline crack around the circumference of the remaining piece.) Whoever attempted to make this wheel obviously lacked the skill of those who quarried stones for the temple. An expert quarryman would have seen this fracture coming and found another rock for the job.

Google further informs me that Tiwanaku was particularly famous for NOT having had the benefit of the wheel. In what way is the OP " replying to wheels, an anachronism" other than confirming it?

Share this post


Link to post
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...