There is a photograph of an ancient saddle at 14:32 - with a drawing of a horse and saddle at 14:41 - the drawing is inaccurate in so many ways i couldnt begin. The saddle shown on the horse looks completely different from the photograph of the ancient saddle. If we are going to take "experts" seriously, then museum artwork, which show ancient artifacts need to reflect expertise even at a fundamental level. If the artifact somehow gets destroyed then all we have left is an inaccurate drawing of it. This serves us no purpose if we claim to be interested in preserving ancient history. This isnt the first time i have seen from museums and universities very poor drawings that claim to represent relics, artifacts and costumes. I have come to distrust any and all drawings shown in museum displays and textbooks without having a photograph of the item in which to compare it.
Great comment Catherine. After the admitted shenanigans of The Smithsonian, I'm extremely hesitant to put much credit in their information, descriptions or entireties of their exhibits. They give us the "interpretations" they want us to believe.
Why are they going to record it on a videotape and then put it on the internet? Why not just record it directly digitally? Can these people not afford even a Galaxy s23?
I am not sure if the chariots referred to at 31:55 is the spoked wheel variety or not, but solid wheel chariots with decorated spokes have been found in non-Haprappan graves at Sanauli, Uttar Pradesh, India and were dated to 2000-1800 BCE.
What a great talk. Renfrew is great. He really puts to rest all those idiotic "conquering" indoe-eurpoean theories you see flying around the deep recesses of the web. And since he's studied it all his life, he's far more trustworthy.
i dont understand that why european/ american scholars declare everything ''western world/ western art',' for chinese everything lies in the west, even india, but for the europeans everything lies in the east except europe, so why dont they just state the obvious that certain art is indian, persian, central asian etc, why do they have to bring their agenda and claim ''western'' in everything it is like they mischievously putting stamp of europe in them.
I think western is used as they just mean not ‘Oriental’ - not eastern Asian. Western civilization started in Mesopotamia, right? It’s not European - just not Chinese - and maybe now considered Middle East by Europeans. China was the most advanced civilization for quite some time, so nearly anything else in Eurasia was considered Western from that.
The step or taklamaran desert was not that dry 4000 years ago, it is proof that there where lakes and they ate fish. And thats about nomads, they never overdue the grasing to kill the nature, they go to other place, and come back when vegatation regrows. And also they had their livestock and wheat, so they are in the safe side to survive all trouble of that time. And time to work to process nice fabrics. During Winter like in all pasture cultures.
Silk road is a trade road and it was a melting pot for all kinds of people.Tocharian alphabets is originated from Aramaic alphabet. It is well documented that the earliest Aramaic alphabet was from 500 BC during Achaemenid era in ancient Persia. The earlist Tocharian scripts found in Xinjiang China was dated 400 A.D whih is 1000 years later than Aramaic alphabet. That means people who speak Tocharian did not have their own written system from 5000 BC (according to Sir Renfrew's Anatolia theory) until they had contacted with ancient Persia, i.e. Tocharians had ancient language but much newer written system. Isn't this strange? From 5000BC to 500 BC, isn't possible that those Tocharians were living close to Aramaic people and left some trace in Ancient Persia? Why did archeoligist late only found their scrpits along the silk road in Xinjiang China which is thousands miles away? Isn't obvious Tocharians were merchants too and left their scripts along the silk road when they travel? If so, how can we say the 3000 year old Mummies found in Turfan (much earlier than Tocharian scripts) are Tocharians? It doesn't make any sense. There is 1500 years gap between the Mummies (3000 BC) and Tocharian scripts (400 AD).
When he is referring to the burial excavation, the slides are those of a map, and other mishaps during the lecture took away from its effectiveness. Was this intentional?
I really find the Adventure of finding these kind of places, even though i am no Academic and for from one, i do admire these Doctor's and such, i do wonder about those who really work hard in the elements in that part of the world. Thank you for sharing such information i cannot even begin to make since of, though i am familiar with the misinformation we were taught in School. Again, Thanks!
You prolly dont care at all but does anybody know a way to log back into an instagram account? I somehow lost the account password. I would love any help you can offer me
@Layton Abel I really appreciate your reply. I found the site thru google and im trying it out atm. Looks like it's gonna take a while so I will reply here later with my results.
RICE as a food source of the people living in the area of the silk road was not mentioned, why? It is a staple food for the chinese and could have been traded by them by way of the silk road up to the Levant, possibly up to Rome.
This isn't China proper. It's part of Central Asia that in which the Chinese are conquerors and colonists. In the ancient times under discussion here, this region was as almost as alien to the Chinese as the Ukraine is.
I thought I was a history major in college, even took two whole classes about the silk road alone. Anyway, a decade later and much more internet research and many more books into it, I've got to say without a doubt the entire narrative of 99.9% of all history, at least that of which we are told in Western society, is completely and utterly wrong, not just a little bit wrong, I mean like paradigm shatteringly wrong. If you were to ask me to explain that, I would probably stutter for about 15 minutes just deciding where to even start and whether to go backwards or forwards. I'd be better off at giving you a long and detailed source list, but not just sources also clues and hints that would direct you to unlikely sources. If you want something takes off the top of my head that's the most interesting if you're not a deep diver, look up all the explanations for every Capitol building in America, try to find construction photos, and look at what they're made out of in the intricacy compared to the level of technology we are believed to have had at that time. After you've done that, look around the world and try to come up with an explanation as to why every continent (well, Antarctica has yet to be proven here) but why are there these Greco-Roman type buildings in every continent on the planet including China up until about the early 20th century when a lot of them started getting repurposed, torn down or just outright blown up in some war. Take a look at all the cathedrals around the world, look at all the Muslim mosque, start looking deep into Peru and even Australia and you find without a doubt and inexplicably architecture all based in the same types of constructions and stylings all in a time when horse and buggies or maybe in some cases you had some steam trains or hot air balloons here and there, all built before highway systems, internet, even gasoline being a thing, all before trucking during a time when we are tall everyone is scattered about and unconnected. And for giggles, go try to figure out what in the world tartaria or Grand tartery really is. And I don't mean look at the standard definition of it being lands in Asia that Christians and Europeans didn't know or understand yet, actually read some really old books that mention it and talk about going there and give accounts about it and then ask yourself once more, is our technological progress really what we are told? Did anyone else know that there were ultra low frequency acoustic weapons all the way back in world war I that caused the landslides and flooded trenches? Did anyone know that microwave weapons were being produced during world war II before there was even a microwave oven in anyone's house? This is getting long, I could go on forever and this is just free flowing off the top of my head, not like I'm submitting a paper here or anything, but with any hope one day I actually will.
"Intentional" in the sense that the speaker did NOT really demonstrate any convincing evidence in his claim thus exercised "deliberate" mishap by accident as such as being pointed out, so that the audience was intended to be left with only the speaker's words and claims while deprived of the opportunity that was supposed to be due to the audience to challenge his claim if the proper slides of burial excavation sites had been properly shown at the juncture when he made his claim in the process?
And. Ujgur people are NOT Chinese people and this autonmous region those days were not China. So be always refering to it as China he accepts China expansion. Like calling Tibet China.
I am sorry, but as an experienced equestrian. I am able to put absolutely no credibility to this lecture after seeing the gross incompetence of the depiction of the horse tack. It is absolutely inconceivable that that is the manner in which this piece of kit was secured to the horse.
18+ minutes in and he's said nothing concrete about anything. Sure hope he communicates more clearly in writing than in lecturing!! So far, two references to other speakers who will be later and two unseen slides explained... I can use my time better than this.
Are the Schytians-Huns forbidden history Mr Renfrew ?? Not a word about them . Please study the Hungarian language and legends , Would not heart even the ancient geographical names too like Bator,Bihar Maghar Ur Uru-Solyma etc. by 1000,s A professor should have deeper analizis . Han dynasty maybe Hun too . Schytia east from Tarim basin to West Schytia to Danube basin
His lecture was more on the Tarim Basin and the Silk Road proper. Some of the Magyar may have come from an area that may have been at the teminus of one of the branches Silk Road, but if we consider the language itself, its pretty clearly a Uralic language, meaning that they probably originated near the Ural mountains. The Huns and Scythians are themselves probably from the eurasian steppes, meaning that they're far to the north and don't bear directly on the Silk Road -- unless we give the guy hours more to talk.. The Huns and Scythians are both, based on the evidence, probably not ethnically or linguistically distinct groups, either. They were not connected to the Han. They likely spoke Turkic languages in the former case and Iranian in the latter. I'm sorry that doesn't fit your nationalistic agenda, but that's the historical consensus we're working with here.
@@niclas9990 you may well be right. Yet the imperial desire of Western Europeans linking everything (Huns and Scythians) to IndoEuropean origin justifies their ongoing approach of “superiority”. Nacionalista is a symptom of resistence to being ignored and not seen for who we are őr might be. The language and the culture and the genes are not one and the same
The subject is tops....few themes come back time after time and still demand such huge attention....except fm sheep in Amerika...they rather enjoy the Kardashians....jejeje
Go to 4:50 if you want to skip the intro and the intro to the intro.
Thank you!
Thank you!
Love the preliminaries too!
Lecture starts at 5:15.
Actually starts at about 3:30
JonFrumTheFirst thank you
Thanks! I was just about to post the same! The talk really begins at 4.50.
The 'Witches of Subeshi' are a few of the often forgotten mummies of the Silk Road. A lecture regarding these other finds would be rather informative.
There is a photograph of an ancient saddle at 14:32 - with a drawing of a horse and saddle at 14:41 - the drawing is inaccurate in so many ways i couldnt begin. The saddle shown on the horse looks completely different from the photograph of the ancient saddle. If we are going to take "experts" seriously, then museum artwork, which show ancient artifacts need to reflect expertise even at a fundamental level. If the artifact somehow gets destroyed then all we have left is an inaccurate drawing of it. This serves us no purpose if we claim to be interested in preserving ancient history. This isnt the first time i have seen from museums and universities very poor drawings that claim to represent relics, artifacts and costumes. I have come to distrust any and all drawings shown in museum displays and textbooks without having a photograph of the item in which to compare it.
Great comment Catherine. After the admitted shenanigans of The Smithsonian, I'm extremely hesitant to put much credit in their information, descriptions or entireties of their exhibits. They give us the "interpretations" they want us to believe.
I am in complete agreement with both previous comments.
Colin Renfrew is the best! Thank you for this.
Mallory has some good points too , slightly divergent - yet part of the ongoing academic investigation of the period.
Why are they going to record it on a videotape and then put it on the internet? Why not just record it directly digitally? Can these people not afford even a Galaxy s23?
What's with the full screen slides? Not synched properly
i dare anyone to have a full beer everytime the speaker says "ah"
I am not sure if the chariots referred to at 31:55 is the spoked wheel variety or not, but solid wheel chariots with decorated spokes have been found in non-Haprappan graves at Sanauli, Uttar Pradesh, India and were dated to 2000-1800 BCE.
Has anyone measured “The Witches Hat” against the gold hats kept at Berlin Museum für Vor- und Frühgeschichte?
Why so many armchair scholars in the comments?
They want a chance to ride their hobby horses.
What a great talk. Renfrew is great. He really puts to rest all those idiotic "conquering" indoe-eurpoean theories you see flying around the deep recesses of the web. And since he's studied it all his life, he's far more trustworthy.
Love the sites,artefacts and preserved bodies that are shown - very interesting to look at.
i dont understand that why european/ american scholars declare everything ''western world/ western art',' for chinese everything lies in the west, even india, but for the europeans everything lies in the east except europe, so why dont they just state the obvious that certain art is indian, persian, central asian etc, why do they have to bring their agenda and claim ''western'' in everything it is like they mischievously putting stamp of europe in them.
This is a GENERAL lecture.
Sometimes terminology is loose.
Get over it. This isnt a peer reviewed journal article.
I think western is used as they just mean not ‘Oriental’ - not eastern Asian. Western civilization started in Mesopotamia, right? It’s not European - just not Chinese - and maybe now considered Middle East by Europeans. China was the most advanced civilization for quite some time, so nearly anything else in Eurasia was considered Western from that.
Well indoeuropean seems to be loosely called west throughout the lecture, including india & persia and so on
Was the Tarim wetter back then?
Look into the changes in the climate for the past 15,000 or so years. There are computer generated models of it.
The step or taklamaran desert was not that dry 4000 years ago, it is proof that there where lakes and they ate fish. And thats about nomads, they never overdue the grasing to kill the nature, they go to other place, and come back when vegatation regrows. And also they had their livestock and wheat, so they are in the safe side to survive all trouble of that time.
And time to work to process nice fabrics. During Winter like in all pasture cultures.
Lord Renfrew is the GOAT! 👌
very interesting!!!
Simply fasinating!
Global Flood th-cam.com/video/LKUnDW_a7Cg/w-d-xo.html
Sometimes the pictures don't match what the speaker is saying. Very frustrating indeed.
I should think that would be the fault of the speaker.
Uh em ah... good uhh point.. he probably um didn’t advance the uh slides properly
"Disney professor of Archaeology" ... what a title.
Silk road is a trade road and it was a melting pot for all kinds of people.Tocharian alphabets is originated from Aramaic alphabet. It is well documented that the earliest Aramaic alphabet was from 500 BC during Achaemenid era in ancient Persia. The earlist Tocharian scripts found in Xinjiang China was dated 400 A.D whih is 1000 years later than Aramaic alphabet. That means people who speak Tocharian did not have their own written system from 5000 BC (according to Sir Renfrew's Anatolia theory) until they had contacted with ancient Persia, i.e. Tocharians had ancient language but much newer written system. Isn't this strange? From 5000BC to 500 BC, isn't possible that those Tocharians were living close to Aramaic people and left some trace in Ancient Persia? Why did archeoligist late only found their scrpits along the silk road in Xinjiang China which is thousands miles away? Isn't obvious Tocharians were merchants too and left their scripts along the silk road when they travel? If so, how can we say the 3000 year old Mummies found in Turfan (much earlier than Tocharian scripts) are Tocharians? It doesn't make any sense. There is 1500 years gap between the Mummies (3000 BC) and Tocharian scripts (400 AD).
Visit the Penn Museum in Philadelphia! Incredible place.
When he is referring to the burial excavation, the slides are those of a map, and other mishaps during the lecture took away from its effectiveness. Was this intentional?
I really find the Adventure of finding these kind of places, even though i am no Academic and for from one, i do admire these Doctor's and such, i do wonder about those who really work hard in the elements in that part of the world. Thank you for sharing such information i cannot even begin to make since of, though i am familiar with the misinformation we were taught in School.
Again, Thanks!
You prolly dont care at all but does anybody know a way to log back into an instagram account?
I somehow lost the account password. I would love any help you can offer me
@Kyler Kieran instablaster ;)
@Layton Abel I really appreciate your reply. I found the site thru google and im trying it out atm.
Looks like it's gonna take a while so I will reply here later with my results.
Tibet still needs to become independent
Facts derived from partial truths laced with personal preferences is a danger for the Historian on the path for a greater understanding.
RICE as a food source of the people living in the area of the silk road was not mentioned, why? It is a staple food for the chinese and could have been traded by them by way of the silk road up to the Levant, possibly up to Rome.
marilou pring Thought all those folks ate wheat and millet via bread. No dry rice farming outside of China west.
Agreed, majority of Chinese that eat rice live south of the Yangtze river. The Northern Chinese had more wheat and millet
This isn't China proper. It's part of Central Asia that in which the Chinese are conquerors and colonists. In the ancient times under discussion here, this region was as almost as alien to the Chinese as the Ukraine is.
I thought I was a history major in college, even took two whole classes about the silk road alone. Anyway, a decade later and much more internet research and many more books into it, I've got to say without a doubt the entire narrative of 99.9% of all history, at least that of which we are told in Western society, is completely and utterly wrong, not just a little bit wrong, I mean like paradigm shatteringly wrong.
If you were to ask me to explain that, I would probably stutter for about 15 minutes just deciding where to even start and whether to go backwards or forwards. I'd be better off at giving you a long and detailed source list, but not just sources also clues and hints that would direct you to unlikely sources.
If you want something takes off the top of my head that's the most interesting if you're not a deep diver, look up all the explanations for every Capitol building in America, try to find construction photos, and look at what they're made out of in the intricacy compared to the level of technology we are believed to have had at that time.
After you've done that, look around the world and try to come up with an explanation as to why every continent (well, Antarctica has yet to be proven here) but why are there these Greco-Roman type buildings in every continent on the planet including China up until about the early 20th century when a lot of them started getting repurposed, torn down or just outright blown up in some war.
Take a look at all the cathedrals around the world, look at all the Muslim mosque, start looking deep into Peru and even Australia and you find without a doubt and inexplicably architecture all based in the same types of constructions and stylings all in a time when horse and buggies or maybe in some cases you had some steam trains or hot air balloons here and there, all built before highway systems, internet, even gasoline being a thing, all before trucking during a time when we are tall everyone is scattered about and unconnected.
And for giggles, go try to figure out what in the world tartaria or Grand tartery really is. And I don't mean look at the standard definition of it being lands in Asia that Christians and Europeans didn't know or understand yet, actually read some really old books that mention it and talk about going there and give accounts about it and then ask yourself once more, is our technological progress really what we are told?
Did anyone else know that there were ultra low frequency acoustic weapons all the way back in world war I that caused the landslides and flooded trenches? Did anyone know that microwave weapons were being produced during world war II before there was even a microwave oven in anyone's house?
This is getting long, I could go on forever and this is just free flowing off the top of my head, not like I'm submitting a paper here or anything, but with any hope one day I actually will.
Delusion.
@@JJ-sv9nr context
🎩 The tall hat reminds me of the Berlin Golden Hat which was a calendar showing moon cycles.
🌑🌒🌓🌔🌕🌖🌗🌘🌑
Yes, the Urnfield Culture.
This was a great conference. Time is coming round for another :)
Blocked by CHINA is your answer... YES....YOU are not allowed ONLY HE WAS
Wow
No mention of space lizards -this is bullshit! no, no -great lecture suite, cheers Penny.
Scientists like Renfrew these days talk like politicians.
"Intentional" in the sense that the speaker did NOT really demonstrate any convincing evidence in his claim thus exercised "deliberate" mishap by accident as such as being pointed out, so that the audience was intended to be left with only the speaker's words and claims while deprived of the opportunity that was supposed to be due to the audience to challenge his claim if the proper slides of burial excavation sites had been properly shown at the juncture when he made his claim in the process?
LOL
Yes Mr. Renfrow, Uigur ladies are beautiful.
And. Ujgur people are NOT Chinese people and this autonmous region those days were not China. So be always refering to it as China he accepts China expansion. Like calling Tibet China.
Neglecting L. N. Gumilev’s synthetic theories.
Do these people not know how to use a microphone what the hell
I am sorry, but as an experienced equestrian. I am able to put absolutely no credibility to this lecture after seeing the gross incompetence of the depiction of the horse tack. It is absolutely inconceivable that that is the manner in which this piece of kit was secured to the horse.
18+ minutes in and he's said nothing concrete about anything. Sure hope he communicates more clearly in writing than in lecturing!! So far, two references to other speakers who will be later and two unseen slides explained... I can use my time better than this.
The inland sea (Tlakamakan) was there, and the Tartars the first Aryans, they came down 12500 years ago.
What a rubbish
Dude loves using passive-voice sentences when concluding on any controversial matter. Makes his position seem more neutral.
... because that never happens with professors?
Yes; that's one of the main reasons for using the passive voice.
On the other hand, your use of the word 'dude' here seems glaringly inappropriate.
Are the Schytians-Huns forbidden history Mr Renfrew ?? Not a word about them . Please study the Hungarian language and legends , Would not heart even the ancient geographical names too like Bator,Bihar Maghar Ur Uru-Solyma etc. by 1000,s A professor should have deeper analizis . Han dynasty maybe Hun too . Schytia east from Tarim basin to West Schytia to Danube basin
His lecture was more on the Tarim Basin and the Silk Road proper. Some of the Magyar may have come from an area that may have been at the teminus of one of the branches Silk Road, but if we consider the language itself, its pretty clearly a Uralic language, meaning that they probably originated near the Ural mountains. The Huns and Scythians are themselves probably from the eurasian steppes, meaning that they're far to the north and don't bear directly on the Silk Road -- unless we give the guy hours more to talk.. The Huns and Scythians are both, based on the evidence, probably not ethnically or linguistically distinct groups, either. They were not connected to the Han. They likely spoke Turkic languages in the former case and Iranian in the latter. I'm sorry that doesn't fit your nationalistic agenda, but that's the historical consensus we're working with here.
@@niclas9990 you may well be right. Yet the imperial desire of Western Europeans linking everything (Huns and Scythians) to IndoEuropean origin justifies their ongoing approach of “superiority”. Nacionalista is a symptom of resistence to being ignored and not seen for who we are őr might be. The language and the culture and the genes are not one and the same
outdated
Disney professor.....
Says the man with Faerun vids.
disney professor of the mcdonald institute, university of california, burger king
The subject is tops....few themes come back time after time and still demand such huge attention....except fm sheep in Amerika...they rather enjoy the Kardashians....jejeje
Blah blah blah blah blah! Get to the talk! I hate all the introductions!!!