Re: No Roman Invasion?
- From: nospam@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Wed, 13 Jul 2005 07:38:32 GMT
So you're even talking rubbish when you say you're killfiling someone?
Fascinating.
Apparently on date Mon, 11 Jul 2005 19:16:26 GMT, Philip Deitiker
<Donevenask@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> said:
>nospam@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx says in
>news:i0b5d1lj33k86tlupolg0a5310qsutjcpn@xxxxxxx:
>
>> It's quite possible this burial was by Hss rather than Hns, even
>> though the corpse was Hns. As I recall, it is unique if Hns, but
>> fairly typical of Hss. And as I say, we can reasonably assume
>> they regarded this as a worthwhile investment of time and goods,
>> rather than a disposal of the remains of dinner.
>
>Burial has a functional reasoning, if you are in competition with
>carnivores you don't want to become familiar with eating the remains
>of the dead of the species as they might seek to eat that species
>when other prey items are scarce aside from losses due to
>competition. As a result it is better to bury the dead, or throw them
>in the back of a cave and let the cave bugs get them.
>
> There is a psychological component also, one might have a natural
>fear of certain predatory animals and one might have negative imagry
>seeing those animals prey on ones loved one, particularly a child,
>even though the child is dead. There was a show about Japanese Snow
>Monkeys where the mother lost a child and she continued to carry the
>child for an extended period afterward. There is an instinctive bond
>between mother and child that developes during the later part of the
>pregnancy that has little to do with social contact, and to some
>degree it remains throughout the life of a child.
>
>
> Judging religion or spirituality by burials, IMHO, is a waste of
>time, as one spiritualist said, 'let the dead bury the dead'. The
>enterment of remains it a natural behavior that satisfies the need to
>grief the loss within intelligent and social animals. Within the
>context of spirituality it serves as social healing and a means
>within the bounds of tradition to relieve pain of loved ones.
>Extending these traditions further than that aspect is the realm of
>religion.
> I think the way to judge these things in proper is to look at the
>pioneers or the situation in africa. According to religion and
>ceremonies, ceremonies often last a certain number of days and people
>are supposed to mourn a certain length of time. But the pioneers
>frequently buried people where they died, and the ceremonies lasted a
>bit longer than it took to dig the grave. In africa, with the rise of
>AIDS, mourning periods were reduced from a year, to a month, to a
>week. These addition of luxorious traditions to funerals is simply an
>embellishment of the basic ceremony.
>
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: No Roman Invasion?
- From: Philip Deitiker
- Re: No Roman Invasion?
- References:
- Re: No Roman Invasion?
- From: Michael Kuettner
- Re: No Roman Invasion?
- From: Doug Weller
- Re: No Roman Invasion?
- From: Michael Kuettner
- Re: No Roman Invasion?
- From: Philip Deitiker
- Re: No Roman Invasion?
- Prev by Date: Re: About urban gardening in Roman period.
- Next by Date: Re: T-Rex latest
- Previous by thread: Re: No Roman Invasion?
- Next by thread: Re: No Roman Invasion?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|