It should be noted that a potato can also function as a battery. The ability to function as a battery is not an indication that it was used as one at all.
My thoughts on its use: someone was storing wine in pots and kludged together an unusual plug for their wine pot. Galvanic cell would accelerate some chemical reactions and dissolve metallic ions into the wine, giving it a distinct taste. Person tries wine later and thinks "wow, my shitty wine tastes different now and slightly less shitty. I'm going to fool around with some more wine and see what happens." No understanding of chemistry required, just someone noticing a weird change in their food or drink that didn't suck.
@@drmatt1984 Can the electrodes generate electricity without the potato (assuming no replacement for the potato's place in the sequence)? No? Then the potato "can also function as a battery". I do respect the pedantic correctness in respect to physics, but it's kind of irrelevant to the point of the statement. That being that a possible function of an item isn't indicative of its intended purpose.
@Grim FPV a car can function as a coffin but that's not what a car was made for, a condom can carry water but that's not what it was made to do. What something can do or be used for doesn't mean that's what it function was supposed to be.
I know what you mean - but Milo isn't an archeologist who is involved in academic research. He is a professional TH-camr with a college degree in something. Even if he is clearly passionate about this subject, he isn't an archeologist! It troubles me a bit that he claims frequently that he is an archeologist!
@@sabineb.5616except his degree is environmental scientist, he’s more often claimed to be a science educator before an archeologist, and the actual literal requirement to be an archeologist is have a bachelor’s degree in this or a related field, or have that degree with a significant amount of archeological education focused courses and credits…which he has. Which means he’s an archeologist
Milo did a reaction of your reaction and he was actually super appreciative of your criticisms. Also he agrees with your ritual explanation as you had sources and information he couldn't locate or access. I'd love to see you react to his reaction. He has a great deal of respect for your additions to his work.
Indeed! Milo and I have been corresponding and are hoping to work together on some future videos. So stay tuned to both our channels and you might see us on the same screen.
@@artifactuallyspeaking that'd be awesome. I found you through him, and I found him by looking up the Baghdad battery when a friend's kid chose it as his paper topic for his high school history class and I didn't want to look dumb when he asked me about it. You to have made me feel superficially superior to a 15 year old. Thanl you.
@@artifactuallyspeaking i just found milo's and then your video and this is genuinely so exciting! what a beautiful collaboration and meeting of minds! thank you for your good faith and kind, humorous engagement and incredible insight and commentary!!
This is a really good breakdown- it does suck how quickly the original primary sources can get buried, especially by Conspiracy theories that grasps at straws based of either nothing or very outdated information. It would be super cool if one day you and Milo did a collaboration on a Awful Archeology episode. I think it would be super insightful. ^^
It would be fun to collaborate. We've talked very briefly about it via email and if there's a topic that I can help him with, I'd love to work with him.
@@artifactuallyspeaking this is one of those where hearing it called a "conspiracy theory" makes me shudder in revulsion... who conspired to do what? It's about guessing what an ancient artifact was used for... not the JFK assassination. You do a great explanation of what is known, and why certain ideas are obviously wrong though. :D
I really hope you two get an opportunity to possibly collaborate on something. The combo of milo's youthful quirky "cool substitute teacher" vibes plus your soft spoken but thoughtful experience would make for some compelling and respectfully jovial back and forth.
May I say that I love the way Dr Hafford and Milo go back and forth on this, neither being rude about it, both just interested in giving us, the audience, the correct information. This is what every Internet argument should be like. Civilized, kind, compassionate, lead by expertise and attempting to get to the facts beneath the opinions.
This is the exact kind of reaction content I like. Expanding apon the original video's statement, giving more context to the situation at hand and correcting the things the original video got wrong. I just found you today but this content's really interesting. Keep it up!
Thank you! Some people apparently feel I was being too harsh. It was not my intention to be harsh or to ridicule, but rather to show the additional material I found. It's good to know that you've seen that.
@@artifactuallyspeaking Some people think any sort of correction is some sort of bullying. You were scholarly and polite and very clearly showed that the sources you were using were difficult to find and easily missed, even with careful research. I expect that Milo was thrilled to learn more about the circumstances of the finds. I have done some deep dives into researching some plants only to find, six months later, that I accidentally bump into a radically new fact from an unexpected source.
I would like to explain that sometimes education is being done for the sake of the non-conspiritors. The longer something goes unchallenged in the public the more likely it is to start being accepted by average people.
Love this content! I'm a fan of miniminuteman so its always a rare treat to see his points being expanded on from a more advanced point of view! Subscribed :D
I'm a fan as well, but his "woke" rants are usually free of essential and defining context, or he (once again) failed to check sources. Also, I don't understand why he needs to insert woke rants in a discussion about archeology. Bias of any kind, especially modern political bias, is completely unwelcome in any serious field of research, but any _real_ scientist knows that.
@@innocentbystander3317 If you don’t think bias is inherent to interpreting culture, then I doubt I’ll convince you otherwise in a comment. We’re getting better about it, and better at identifying it, but that’s the result of people calling it out. I’ll never cease to be amused by people complaining about anything “woke” when the alternative means staying asleep in a dream world.
When you said "putting in small slips of paper", I immediately said "oh, for prayer". Human beings have been stuffing small slips of paper with prayers & spells on them into random ass places for a very, very long time. I mean people are *still* doing it all over the world - most notably at the wailing wall in Jerusalem.
I thought the same. See also Shinto ema (small boards with prayers written on which are left at shrines). Though I'm hesitant to jump to any conclusion. Even if we knew for a fact that the papyri had prayers written on them, it could be similar to ema & the wailing wall, or it could be a blessing to keep the contents of the pot from spoiling, or the opposite, to wish for some processing of the contents to happen successfully. Archaeology should stick to the known data instead of speculation, IMO
@@RubelliteFae I think Brad's speculation, that these were most likely used for spells to protect the home, is a pretty solid guess based on the evidence that we do have. The presence of the iron nails found with them is pretty indicative of that being their purpose.
@@biosparkles9442 I wrote my reply before he started talking about this aspect, so I do now agree it's the best guess we have. I just err on the side of not guessing. Since my thirties I've been known to sit on a fence for years before picking a side. I think being too quick to make a choice can cause unforeseen setbacks and isn't usually necessary. Even more so in archaeology. Note though, that he didn't speculate on the purpose of the "spells." The bit about protection of the home was about the "magic bowls" found near the jars (and is better evidenced throughout the region).
Came here because Milo just did a video talking about how cool it was to have you respond to his content. People expanding the knowledge of others' knowledge is what powers the world
As a Historian, even I will say Archaeology from it's earliest days to the 1960's was 70% grave robbing. It wasn't until the 1960s and '70s that professional archaeologists established comprehensive ethical guidelines that brought a "stop" to that.. and by stop I mean slowed down as it still happens to this day.
Once people see there is money in it and it becomes more mainstream there is a problem. Many sites now might remain undisclosed to stop people looting them. Some are reburied. Though what amuses me is that many of these old sites that had not already been looted by the locals, (no doubt for preservation purposes!), would probably remain in the ground undiscovered since the locals cared so much about them.
As ethical as you think it is now, to us indigenous it's still just for profit grave robbing. At least you acknowledge how much worse the past was buy it's still nothing rosey
@@E.J.Crunkleton indigenous people of any country but in this case, Native Americans (since im Native American and that's all that I can talk about with knowledge) do not all share the same beliefs. My best guess is that they don't feel like the artifacts would be treated poorly or something like that.
I have to say I really love the idea of future archaeologists finding a pair of giant golden scissors and conspiracy theorists trying to prove there were giants living in our time with an affinity for golden tools.
@@danbrodt977 but conspiracy theorists aren’t archaeologists, they don’t default to ritual purposes. They default to whatever the fuck their stupid little minds can think of
If I remember correctly from a German article from a decade or so ago the whole battery-idea came to be because König found a piece of sassanian jewellry he believed to have been electro-plated and then went on to collect several more. We now know they were not, just really high end craftmansship, but it explains his reasoning since the leap to "ancient electricity" is a lot shorter if you already have something in hand you are convinced has been made with electricity.
I think this was a serious problem when archaeologists (who, obviously, are very knowledgeable about archeology but much less so about jewelry making and other arts and crafts), we're almost exclusively the only ones to determine what was the use of things. Nowadays, post it on twitter and within a few days you'll have a few proffesional jewelers debunking your theory/someone from some other profession finding out whats the original use of something
This video shows how incredibly hard it is to say things that are right. The basic facts surrounding this discovery are obscured and would not be easy to fact-check.
Well said. Considering so much of the context in this case seems to be only found in German, and there are so many English speaking creators trying to piece this together, it sounds like this one would have been extremely hard to fact check. I can absolutely understand how someone who is trying to be as comprehensive and accurate as possible would still have trouble piecing this together.
The fact that an upturned bowl used to catch malicious spirits gives me the mental image of treating de.ons the same way one does a spider when using a plastic cup to get it out of the house
Contrary to Hollywood, most supernatural bogeys are rock-stupid and most protective practices are easy to deploy. They're folk magical rituals. The priests and the fancy ceremonies are for the bogeys who are _not_ stupid or to hold off angry deities.
Thank you for this - It was really cool! And no, you didn't come across as critical of Milo at all. I'm a huge fan of Miniminuteman, and he is just what archaeology needs - young, enthusiastic, good looking, and irreverent. Everything the cliched image of archaeologists is not. I'm happy to accept the odd slip, particularly when , as you say, the surface information is so misleading or muddy... I will certainly be checking out your other videos! Thank you.
I really appreciate content like this, and it's really helpful for closing the gap between entertainment and information in a limited medium like an internet video. I love Milo, love his content, but there's necessarily going to be some simplifications and errors that slip through when one's making humorous content, and having this kind of clarification is great for making sure those don't become tripping hazards. A great series that does this is Extra History (who I absolutely don't need to shill for, but I will) where they'll have a "Lies" episode after every miniseries that covers those same inconsistencies and errors.
I agree, the thing with debunking these outrageous conspiracy theories is they will cling to any error in the argument against them as proof that they are right; no matter how small the error
@@valritz1489 i didn't even know that. I canceled my Patreon, unsubbed, and unfollowed the rest of their social media, and neither Dan nor Dan happened to bring it up at any point when i was paying attention.
Also, Dan Carlin from Hardcore History made a great point in his Kings of Kings podcast series when he said that we have to understand that there are some actions that historical people took because they honestly, truly, completely believed that magic was real. Ironically, a lot of times the Ancient Aliens crowd will forget the mystical as an explanation, forget that even they have the benefit of hindsight. If in 3000 years someone starts theorizing that there must have been an epidemic of slug-like alien beings following us around, hence why we threw so much salt over our shoulders, it'd serve us right.
This is fundamental to understanding humanity. No different today, with people who carry around rocks and crystals for spiritual alignment or what-have-you, or any of the number of other pseudoscientific/religious practices people form their lives around. Imagine future peoples trying to fit those behaviors into a logical system without consideration of those erroneous/mystical/religious/whatever-phrase-you-want-to-describe-these-things-as perspectives. Humans always do things that make sense, but human sense doesn't always make sense.
@Unism Maybe this was your point, but I think most people are denouncing the more modern chattal slavery, and certain other people are quick to attempt to equivocate that form of slavery with pre-modern slavery for dubious "nationalistic" reasons... to say it's always existed and therefore "get over it" (chattal slavery). I also think it's fine to look at the distant past through a modern lens and acknowledge the brutality as a non preferable way for humans to treat one another, while also acknowledging that it was commonplace and existed for various reasons. I suppose one should pay close attention and carefully consider the conclusion being drawn when someone brings up that you cannot moralize slavery through a modern lens... There are often very non-academic interests behind such statements.
@Unism Well, I still do think it's necessary to moralize certain parts of history in general discussion, and to iterate the sheer scale of human suffering. Because some people are not always interested in hearing the aspects of history that don't reflect well on their political/racial/national faction, and draw very dangerous prescriptive conclusions when you don't fully spell it out. For instance, when speaking to certain audiences in detail about the Holocaust these days, you might need to explicitly state when someone in particular was bad or wrong. Perhaps among actual academics you can take a true bird's eye objective view without modern moral perspectives. Anyway I think you included enough nuance to override the white nationalist alarm when bringing up slavery, so I see no reason to detain you further.
@Unism I certainly agree that one of the main lessons from studying history should be that we are all capable of "evil" given particular circumstances, that good people are not born good and bad people aren't born or created mystically to be bad. I suppose I almost entirely agree with you when put that way. I guess the ambiguity for me is in what is meant by moralizing. For instance, I see no reason for teachers to spell out who they think the "bad guys" are or to even put things in terms of bad or good. I think kids will put things in those terms on their own given the facts. I do wonder whether some people say "moralizing" to mean teaching radical centrism, and requiring that there are plausible excuses for everything that could be interpreted as bad. For instance when discussing the abuses of slavery to have reassurances that some slaves were treated well, or basically to inject apologetics for every controversial topic. In the case of the Holocaust, you obviously teach the facts leading up... But then do you offer conclusions or analysis of those facts "the Nazis erroneously believed the Jews disproportionately controlled finance and were responsible for the loss of the great war"? That they actually did, but the Nazis "overreacted"? Maybe my oppositional view of reality limits my imagination of how history could be taught ideally.
Fascinating! I’m into “occult” stuff and the instant you said the jars were pinned in place, I “knew” those jars were used for magic. And the contents you listed with their variations? That, to me, makes it a pretty solid case for magic; a literal jar spell. Cuz, I mean, 10 nails hanging out in there? Nails are still used in groups like that in jar spells (though 9 or 13 is more common these days). Papyrus remains? Various chunks of metals? Pretty sure anyone familiar with folk magic practices would agree with you, sir. I agree. Those jars were used with magical intent.
I suspect that 'spell jars' (for lack of a better term) are found around the world. A written invocation, appropriate items made from certain materials, and a container (which may itself also serve a magical function): easy to make and use.
The second part of the "we don't really know, well it's likely for ritual" joke is also "that other thing? Yeah, we know exactly what it is, but we'll say it's for a fertility goddess"
Tooo be fair, there's places to this day where that kind of artifact IS used (and sadly not the way its form would suggest) in celebrations in honor of fertility deities. Like in Japan.
@@antonioscendrategattico2302 Check out the oldest (or second oldest) extant lingam in Parashurameshwara temple at Gudimallam. Besides the lingam itself, the upper engraving is of Lakulīśa, who is often ithyphallic. Moreover, later linga are actually the combination of lingam & yoni, even the abstracted versions. My interpretation (as a Hindu, not as an archaeologist) is that they symbolically represent that the reality we experience, _māyā,_ is the result of the comingling of _puruṣa_ & _prakrti_ (iconized as Śiva & Śakti). It is as though we are looking from within the "womb." With our individuated perspectives, we are unable to see past the edges of the illusion into actual reality, so the most we can see is their coming together (at best we can comprehend Saguṇa Brahman, but not Nirguṇa Brahman).
@@RubelliteFae What you're saying actually matches with what I've heard from someone who studied Hindu imagery and philosophical concepts so I have no problem accepting what you're saying. Sadly I can't add anything of my own - you're the expert here :D
The ritual idea feeling both like a slight cop out but also the best explanation given the evidence, reminds of how in paleontology, specifically concerning the non-avian dinosaurs, the best explanation for a lot of the strangest features you may find that don't have an obvious use is likely some kind of display structure to, in some way, be appealing to mates. that explanation even applies to things that may have other uses, like horns or a hollow crest connected to the animals naris(nose/nasal stuff). but like rituals its not something usually shown in the objects itself, and is *TECHNICALLY* an assumption based on other factors, or at least that's how it can be perceived, hence the cop out feeling of "you're just saying that cause you don't know for sure what it is or what it did". Rituals and mating displays are both things that are behavioral, and Its really rare to get an artifact or fossil that explicitly shows the exact behaviors of ancient people or especially animals. but even with that said, we do know about them and in time learn more.
I just watched a video of Milo's where he said he would be graduating from college soon, which I only point out because not only is the information about this find so muddied to being with, but also because it's important for people to understand, as an undergrad, AT BEST he's got access to his school's JSTOR/Academic search account, at WORST he's just going by internet resources. I say this to emphasize how much I appreciate this video because it adds so much to the original analysis, without attempting to shame it, but by using privileged access to information to add to it.
So what you're saying is that it was A MAGIC BATTERY?!?!?! Seriously, though, it was really interesting to hear such a detailed and informed opinion on such a contentious artefact. It's also fantastic that international experts are again able to assist the Iraqi people in preserving their cultural heritage after decades of suffering in isolation.
I appreciate that you even reacted to the drink.. You may be a bit more thorough than Milo but apparently his bar is better stocked. Great video. As someone who grew up reading schlock archaeology I appreciate the reintroduction of critical thinking. So-called harmless conspiracy theories leads to greater susceptibility to those that have real world impact in the present.
Came here from milos video, i love this wholesome interaction from one archeologist to another, and neither taking criticisms or disagreements personally. We need more of that in this world’
I don't know the book he os referring to, but as an outsider, I took Milo's objection to "ritual use" to be two things: 1: depending on your definition, couldn't any behaviour that is not purely biological (or at least in some way related to culture and thus see above) be categorised as 'ritual'? I know there is a strict definition, but academics trying to prove a point are prone to stretching definitions. And 2 (as an extension of 1): it may often be valid, that doesn't mean it isn't used as a copout. In biology you see "genotypic and/or fenotypic variation", in ecology we use "confounding environmental variables" or "intraspecific variation". To outsiders there's no context for 'ritual behaviour', so I thought his irk was ultimately that it is a statement that is shutting a door, giving the impression that there is no interest in ritual, opening the first crack for the crackpots.
I agree. 'Ritual' is not well defined. It can encompass so many things that saying something is ritual without explanation of what kind of ritual and how it may have been conducted (and having at least some evidence of that ritual) is a copout to be sure.
Archeologists: "We're not sure, but we think it may have been used for ceremonies" Women: "That's a (widget) for counting menses/ explaining pregnancy/ assisting births/ child care/ spinning, weaving or sewing/ preparing or storing food/ killing mice/ et al, ad nauseum Eta- the Venus of Willendorf is a perfect depiction of a woman who is very close to giving birth. That's not to say that it doesn't have several purposes, but it would have been very handy for young, inexperienced women.
@@user-zh4vo1kw1z oh, I hadn't heard that one, that's great! ~takes notes~ I'm also a fan of the general goddess theory. It just stands to reason that a fat, pregnant woman would represent fertility, abundance and desirability. But I do agree with you that pretty much everything back then would necessarily have been used for more than one purpose, tho. Endless consumerism has taught you and me that there's a tool for everything. I have 20+ knives, each one for cutting different types of meat or different locations on the carcass. I store those knives in special locations in my kitchen that is larger than most communal living areas during the Neolithic. They simply couldn't have had very many single purpose items. And I can certainly see ceremonies accompanying the birthing of babies, so that follows. Your theory fits too, because men. 😄
Great to see actual scholarly discourse where the ideas are being built upon/clarified/corrected, rather than attacked. Rare on TH-cam, thanks for this!
Came here from Milo's video and I just want to say Im really grateful for your expertise and the amount of time you spent on his video. I think Milo is gonna be great someday, and Im really glad you did this with his video. Thanks for your time Doc. You definitely deserve the like, view, comment, and subscription. Thanks for your expertise!
I think this really enphasises the necessity of a diverse discussion as it shows even the weirdest ideas can be used to test the more pragmatic ones and vice versa.
Another subscriber coming from Milo's direction, can't wait to see more content of you two, and your own videos as well. Your explanations were clear, to the point, and very engaging, so I really think that I'll enjoy the content of yours :)
It's so cool to see that Milo still has a lot of room for improvement in his research. I'd love to see him go back and address the inaccuracies in his vid to avoid unintentional missinformation
To be fair, Milo covers a lot of stuff, he can only spend so much time researching, this guy has specialised in Eastern archaeology for years, and a lot of the points here are quite obscure.
Dr Hafford,....i am here by way of Milo's channel and look forward to learning from you. As a near 60 year old man I live by few rules but one of them at the top of the list is simply to never stop learning new things.
Amazing video. I've recently discovered Milo's videos and really appreciate other looks into the same subject as anyone can miss something. Loved the reaction, I think this was great additive content to Milo's work and I hope you do more on any other videos he posts that you have information on.
Milo's videos are really good. Most of them are outside my field of the ancient Near East, but I had some additional information on this one, so it made sense to cover it. I'll keep enjoying his videos and see if there are others I can add anything to.
Just watched Milo's response video ('BaghdadBattery') to this video, and after I finished his video, I immediately came here to subscribe and like. Of course this channel, of which I had been unaware, is a real treat. Thank you, Doctor.
I'd just like to chime in and say I think you did this wonderfully. Arguing a point without being demeaning is a fine line and I think you walked it very well. Maybe one day you all will collaborate? Fingers crossed
This is absolutely what I had hoped for. He has 5 other episodes. Please Please please, continue this debate content. Milo is fun and hilarious.. you sir, are well versed, continually learning, experienced, and and willing to accept more theory can be possible.
I hope Milo finds this video and brings it to the attention of the rest of his viewers. This was a very good analysis, and I appreciate your work on investigating the matter.
Absolutely loved it! As an archaeology student myself, I love to consume such informative and constructive back-and-forth conversations. Plus, deconstructing conspiracy theories is very entertaining to watch and engage in, so I always love to see the topic gaining some traction in the archaeological community. Thank you and cheers!
I love that context of artefacts has become so important, not only to archaeologists but to museums as well. I remember as a kid walking around the museums of Gothenburg (and there are MANY), looking at all the things, but they were all just items encased in glass or behind ribbon barriers. You got the look of the artefact, you got the smell of it in many cases (wherever the preservatives weren't too overpowering), but you never got any real context. Looking at even the smaller single-room museums today, they group artefacts together by where they were found, add backdrops to try and estimate how it may have looked and sometimes even add a splash of dirt, sand or rock at the bottom to give you that tiny extra immersion into the experience, and this makes it overly obvious what that artefact is and what it was used for. Context is key, always!
Respectfully, a lot of chicanery has made its way into academic papers in the past. It strikes me as a particularly charitable position to take to assume that a researcher whose livelihood and career depend on their findings being publishable would never or couldn’t possibly (perhaps without any nefarious reason) slip in some possible explanations such as “ritual purposes” when they’re really not sure what a find means. Archaeologists are only human, after all. That’s not to say, as you point out, that “it’s ritual” can never be a genuine suggestion as supported by evidence, but the converse - that it’s always supported and no one in the history of archaeology has ever used it as a hail-mary explanation - is equally unbelievable.
Yes well said. It may not be enough to accept such a diagnosis uncritically, especially from a leftist point of view because “ritual” has been used to explain virtually every misunderstood object and contributes to the false idea of humans in the past being low-tech. For example, most people still don’t appreciate that Mayans were mathematically and astrophysically more advanced than Europe until the fall of the Mayan civilization. Many of their achievements are written off as “ritual” because its been a neat explanation for the superiority of colonial powers and of Christendom.
Archeologists saying something is ceremonial, to me, is like when historians say that something's a ritual/ritualistic when they're "not quite sure that it is but could be I guess". I find that funny, I don't know how much of a joke that is vs reality but it sounds about right
Given the amount of ritual (religious and secular) in our lives, it's a decent explanation. The trouble comes when distinguishing between the remains of an actual ritual and the remains of a mundane activity. That turtle shell at the base of the cairn could simply mean a dead turtle; that broken knife could have been lost or cast aside.
I'm here because Milo set me! Love the content and would love to see you two do a regular collaboration. I think the cross pollination for the channels would be great.
Milo did a react video of sorts to this, really think you might enjoy the takes he had about what you said if you haven't had it pop up already. Enjoyed both videos and the react was the cherry on top as of now until further possible developments 🙏
Hey, I'm here because of Milo, Miniminuteman, who freaking LOVED this video! He just reacted to this (which was how I ended up here), and was so full of happiness, because he was learning so much more than he knew, before. Oh, and because you made a drink, and know and HAVE one of his favorite books, too! And how there was a top quality doctor of Archaeology like you that I wasn't aware of? I am so happy to have found you! I've been a follower of others here for awhile, now (Dr. Miano, for an example), but I always like finding more experts to learn from! So... here's a like and comment for your Almighty Algorithm, and a brand new sub, too!
I love how this video covers academic sources that are not in English and/or not online. Sadly, much "research" these days is limited to Google results. As a career librarian, I am always encouraging people to explore sources that have not been digitized (and that never will be).
Even before the internet, enthusiastic amateurs weren't as diligent as they could be (if they even had the resources) and trusted to what they could find. All it takes is a bad translation, or misunderstanding a term, or clumsy phrasing to send an otherwise intelligent, curious, person on the wrong trail. Then that person writes a book, which becomes another person's source who then _also_ writes a book or article, and so on and on until it's astounding that we can even identify the original artifacts, artworks, or stories on which modern claims are based.
I love the fact that in the day or so since you made this video, your subs have about tripled. This is exactly educational TH-cam at it's finest. Flashy, snarky generalists cast a wide net, and make fairly well researched videos that are far better than a random person could ever research. Then a specialist critiques the generalist's video, and the generalist signal boosts the specialist's response, allowing the portion of their viewership interested in the specialty find the specialist's other content and learn more.
Coming over from Milo! Have a sub. You rock, thanks for reacting to his video and giving us more information. Will we get a react of the react of the react? :p
i appreciate the additional context, commentary, and correcting incorrect information. regarding your criticisms of milo's presentation style, jokes, and references... keep in mind he is communicating to an audience who's primary understanding of archaeology is from pop culture and outdated science from their early education. he is both trying to correct misconceptions, debunk conspiracy theories, and convey what most people consider to be a very dry and complex topic in an engaging way. it might not be as exacting as academic-to-academic communication, but it is just as valuable to communicate in a way that doesn't isolate the laypeople who wish to learn more. jokes, memes, and pop culture references are excellent tools for keeping your audience attentive and engaged.
I absolutely agree that Milo's style is entertaining and that it makes learning fun. I don't want to discourage him in any way; in fact, I enjoy his style very much (and I wrote an email to him to say exactly that). The sources I found on this topic are difficult to come by and I made the same mistakes he did when I first looked into the topic.
@@artifactuallyspeaking I would love to see Milo speaking to more experts in the process of his research. As an academic myself, I understand completely why he doesn't (we're not exactly the most reliable people when it comes to replying to emails in a timely manner, or at all), but it would really improve the quality of his content. As much as I appreciate that no one has to have a PhD to be an expert on a topic (and I abhor the elitist way the academy operates on this assumption), Milo does only have an undergraduate degree in archaeology, which likely means he's missing a lot of the training on how to find, understand, and assess original source documents. That kind of skillset is difficult to learn and takes years of practise in my field (ecology), I imagine it only gets harder when the primary sources are mostly written in German, French and sometimes Greek, and you don't speak/read those languages. Anyway all that to say, I hope you continue to have correspondence with Milo, and I hope you are willing to offer him your time & mind every-so-often, especially when he's covering topics that relate to your specific field of expertise, and I hope he takes you up on that offer if it is there.
I thought this video was just as comprehensive as Milo's and in fact, a lot of Milo's videos get pretty technical, even explaining the nuclear physics behind radioactive dating techniques. I think the real issue is that, because Milo's content is so varied, he can only spend so much time researching so he can't be expected to be an expert in everything he talks about.
Found you from minuteman and he made a fantastic reaction to this video. Im a fan, im a stan, im so in love with your videos and hope you get nore traction. Thank you for teaching us and also being just a kind fun fellow. Adored, subbed, and going to binge all your videos soon
Came here from miniminiminuteman's reaction to -this- video. I hope you two could do a collaboration some time, even if it's just chatting over some cold Baghdad Batteries :)
Well, as far as I'm aware whatever it was this supposed battery was used for, is never mentioned in any contemporary texts. Add to that there was found only one, without context and the fact that the amount of electricity that it would have been able to produce, if it was indeed used for that, was too minute to be of any practical use, and it becomes an extra-ordinary claim without any of the extra-ordinary evidence that is required for such a claim.
It's worse than that, the thing simply isn't a battery, a battery needs two terminals, this thing doesn't have two terminals. So whatever it is, it isn't a battery.
@@harlequingnoll5 They did not know that ultra low voltage kills bacteria, there was no way for them to have discovered this even if they had successfully done so.
Fascinating! When I first read of the "Bagdad Batteries", my mind went immediately to an old custom brought to the area of Canada in which I live of "Witch Jars". They are still found buried around entrances, used to protect buildings from evil - often simple earthenware jars containing written spells, and iron nails, sealed shut with wax. Mankind still has rituals for protection, and as advanced as we would like to believe we are, we are not so different from our ancestors. Very enjoyable video!
I believe the Indiana Jones bit was intended to be more satirical or a joke, not an exact of example of archeologists of the time Edit: I really do love you filling in blank spots milo missed its awesome to see
Years ago I started the Hall of Ma'at website and message board. The site hosts articles written for the site and some republished articles that debunk conspiracy theories. We had a German armchair archaeologist who had dug up and read the original German article on the jars, he told us from what he read the jar were blessing jars. It sounds like he had things on the right track. Thank you
I sub to miniminuteman and that's how I saw your video. You did a great job delivering criticism in a way that allows us to learn. It would be great to see a collab between you and Milo. I hope you continue bringing archeology to us lay people.
Milo did a great video reacting to your response. I love the discourse and you're not being harsh. You're a professor, this is what you do. Context is important in anything, I immediately think of mushrooms, and being in mushroom forage groups. Without a picture of the mushroom in its environment, it's hard to tell a person what it is. We call it context. The witchcraft makes sense. Northern Europe pagans and heathens were doing the same thing which you do bring up at the end. I hope people are watching the end because it's the most important part of the video. I would hope if there are 10 scrolls in a jar, we hope they're blessings haha...
great video, I love the deeper discussion of the archaeological find and context. Good reminder that research is difficult and can be misleading if you rush it. Will be looking into your channel more!
I'm very glad you did this video, and in return miniminuteman did a reaction to it because that's how I learned about your channel. I'm currently binging your past videos and looking forward to what you produce in the future.
My question would be this: if it's a ritual, why were so few discovered? I understand that it shouldn't be as ubiquitous as oil lamps, but supposedly this ritual wasn't just the realm of one sect, as shown by the differences between the two sets. I suppose I would expect there to be more evidence above and beyond 10 examples if it was an established ritual, but maybe my intuition is ill-founded.
I would too, but I think the incantation bowls were the most common form of this kind of ritual and the jars were probably a secondary and less popular or well-known version. Incantation bowls are found very often, so it is clearly the most common protective device, but maybe there are more of these jars but broken and unrecognized?
@@artifactuallyspeaking makes sense that this ties into a more common ritual, in that this was the "greater banishing ritual" or grandaddy version of the others. Sheds light onto why there would be fewer artifacts. Thanks for your reply!
@@artifactuallyspeaking I've wondered for things of this nature if they were not routinely re-used for a new (or perhaps the same) purpose. Given the relative value of crafted objects such as jars that also have important practical use (not that ritualistic or magical protection is not a practical use to someone who believes in that practice) it stands to reason, to me anyway, that such objects would go on to have many recycled uses as long as they were still intact and useable. Perhaps to a new generation or some other people, who did not bury or use the object for that purpose it would seem like a perfectly good jar to use for something else. Given the age and near constant human habitation in many of these places for thousands of years, it is frankly miraculous that the bitumen jars we have found managed to make it undisturbed.
Here from Milo’s reaction to this video 😅 You’re an amazing reactionary scholar. I’m impressed and excited to see the rest of the videos on this channel. 👏
Thank you for making this! It's absolutely fascinating and I'm glad to see that the original video is mostly accurate. Still immensely cool to see further explanations and corrections from you!
I like the theory that it was like a "time capsule" without necessarily being found by mortal humans for the historical record. Mummification of messages or records for whatever purpose. The intention of tombs and the mummification of bodies is obviously to preserve them for as long as possible... so my guess is that by sealing papyrus/copper in a ceramic jar with a bitumen plug was to preserve some message or meaning for as long as possible. Whether it's for ritual magic or just the human desire to have a part of you exist longer than you do... Or yes, perhaps just to be found by other people later and have them know you existed. I personally think about this I can make and bury to communicate with future people.
Milo sent me here like many others I see as well. I'd just like to state that this has been a very insightful, informative and entertaining discussion. I've thoroughly enjoyed all three of these between the two of you and ultimately I'd love to see the two of you in face to face discussion. There's nothing like listening to a really good, respectful intellectual back and forth. Would love to see it one day. And thank you for all you do as well, so much respect for people out there providing their knowledge to the rest of us that are willing to hear it.
I actually never heard of what the jars might have actually been used for. That you bring up their use in mysticism, it reminds me of of some somewhat similar practices that (if I remember right, I think I first heard of this like 20 years ago) were done in medieval europe; materials or prayers/spells written down and placed in glass flasks or small pots and imbedded within the walls of a house to protect against witchcraft, or something similar that.
Thank you for such a clear and logical explanation. I've read about these things for years, and this is the first time I've heard anything approaching the full story.
This is an awesome video. This is how all reaction videos should be. Considered responses with clear citations. I love the bowls that you mentioned. For anyone who's interested in learning more about those, I highly recommend the Secret History of Western Esotericism Podcast, Episodes 146 & 147. The host interviews Gideon Bohak and Daniel James Waller on how those bowls were used in a Jewish context in Roman/Sassanian Mesopotamia.
Excellent video, probably one of the most detailed an accessible resources for the subject for people (I'm people) who have just skimmed the subject and watched Milo's video and moved on. I've wishy washied on the subject several times through the years and a past version of me feels vindicated by the likelihood the iron rod just had papyrus around it. You provide a lot of context that gets left out of the broader discussion that really neatly ties up a lot of the mystery. And honestly, I think the spell jar explanation is more interesting. Assuming it was a battery, it would have just been a one off discovery that faded away, a little cool, but for me personally way less cool than a long lasting living magical tradition I feel like there's some expertise brain poisoning (which sounds very harsh so just to be clear I'm not meaning it in a mean way, it's just the only way of phrasing that's coming to my brain right now) from Milo. There's a lot of noise on the subject from the conspiracy end of things where if you're mostly engaging with that side of the discussion there are some things you will just accidentally eat from the conspiracy theorists because it sounds like the plausible truth under all the nonsense, hence the acid claim and conflation of the two different sets of jars being stated seemingly without hunting down the original sources on those matters. I think a much less impactful, but similar, thing kinda happen with you towards the beginning of the video when you talk about other sites from the city that are more well known than the battery, and I'm sorry to say because those other sites don't really seem have the broader reach as the sensationalism around the battery. They're very interesting sites, after I type this I'm probably going to go look up the archway, but I think I can name drop the battery and have people know what I'm talking more readily. Those sites are probably more well known within purely archaeological circles, but I, personally at least, have never heard of them while also hearing about the baghdad battery many, many times over the years from a variety of sources and angles.
You make very good points here. I do have my biases -- we all do -- and recognizing our own is difficult. So I appreciate that you have pointed out (and been kind and balanced in doing so) that I have assumed that Ctesiphon and its Taq Kisra arch are well-known because of the circles I work in. You're definitely right that many people are more familiar with the battery. Thanks for your response!
@@artifactuallyspeaking it's a problem we all have to grapple with, and I'm certain there's a name for it that I'm simply blanking on. I do it pretty often myself with the subjects I'm versed in, like recently I caught myself assuming everyone knows about the history of horse domestication and how we bred them into the giants they are today
Great video, good counter arguments and good digging. I agree that publications in other languages than english are often overlooked. Another subscriber here!
I think this video is a great example of the importance of academia! Having people who are able to dig through these old documents to piece together the story of an artifact that has been so covered by conspiracies is a gift to everyone. Milo's video does a great job at debunking the conspiracy, and your video does a great job of illuminating more about the artifact itself!
This is such an interesting video because I've watched Milo since the beginning, and it's so cool to see someone else in the field giving their 2 cents; showing that not all archeologists think or feel the same about things. So glad your content was recommended to me! P.S. - Didn't realize how much Milo got incorrect :') Thank you for enlightening everyone !
Thank you for expanding on Milo's work with some of the harder to find research that he wasn't able to get his hands on! It's wonderful to see people working together to provide us with even more information and context for these artifacts!!
Have not finished the video yet, but this content and I LOVE that you addressed that even you said some stuff later proven to be wrong. to me “criticizing” your own previous beliefs/statements shows a committment to actually voicing the truths of the past
Yes, I have made many mistakes and still make them. I think it's important to admit them and confront them to see what I can learn rather than hide them. I made the same mistakes Milo did until I uncovered the older sources that are rather hard to find. And a lot of what Milo said was good, so it's important to point that out as well.
Found you thanks to Milo's video featuring this video! You've got a new sub from me 😁 I love the way you handled Milo's video and I love that you even tried the drink! Very fun. Looking forward to binge watching all your content!
Regarding the issues with taq-i kisra, is there any high quality 3D scans that have been done of the structure yet? Digital heritage is one of my areas of interest. it seems like it would be useful to not only have a preserved copy should more damage occur, but also could allow for simulations to be done that may help pinpoint weak areas!
I think a 3D model was made during the 2013-2014 reconstructions, though I don't have access to it. Some of that reconstruction has fallen now and we are currently working to figure out why. In the process we are making a new 3D model, but I'm not sure when that will be done or available.
@@artifactuallyspeaking It would definitely be useful to have a new, (and possibly higher quality) scan available to compare the scans, if you can obtain the older one. Good scans can detect changes by the millimetre!
![[#2024MAMA] G-DRAGON - 무제(Untitled, 2014)+POWER+HOME SWEET HOME+뱅뱅뱅+FANTASTIC BABY | Mnet 241123 방송](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/Ox29z5Nf1Uk/mqdefault.jpg)
It should be noted that a potato can also function as a battery. The ability to function as a battery is not an indication that it was used as one at all.
My thoughts on its use: someone was storing wine in pots and kludged together an unusual plug for their wine pot. Galvanic cell would accelerate some chemical reactions and dissolve metallic ions into the wine, giving it a distinct taste. Person tries wine later and thinks "wow, my shitty wine tastes different now and slightly less shitty. I'm going to fool around with some more wine and see what happens."
No understanding of chemistry required, just someone noticing a weird change in their food or drink that didn't suck.
This is one of the best analogies I've ever heard.
No they can't. They can provide electrolytes, but it's actually the electrodes (copper and zinc usually) inserted into them that generate the current.
@@drmatt1984 Can the electrodes generate electricity without the potato (assuming no replacement for the potato's place in the sequence)? No? Then the potato "can also function as a battery". I do respect the pedantic correctness in respect to physics, but it's kind of irrelevant to the point of the statement. That being that a possible function of an item isn't indicative of its intended purpose.
@Grim FPV a car can function as a coffin but that's not what a car was made for, a condom can carry water but that's not what it was made to do. What something can do or be used for doesn't mean that's what it function was supposed to be.
A perfect example of "youtube peer review". Correction and expansions done in good faith and with good humor.
Thank you so much for doing this
some body should peer review this though ... js
@@ValeriePallaorodo it yourself!
I know what you mean - but Milo isn't an archeologist who is involved in academic research. He is a professional TH-camr with a college degree in something. Even if he is clearly passionate about this subject, he isn't an archeologist! It troubles me a bit that he claims frequently that he is an archeologist!
@@sabineb.5616except his degree is environmental scientist, he’s more often claimed to be a science educator before an archeologist, and the actual literal requirement to be an archeologist is have a bachelor’s degree in this or a related field, or have that degree with a significant amount of archeological education focused courses and credits…which he has. Which means he’s an archeologist
@@ValeriePallaoro What are your issues with it?
Milo did a reaction of your reaction and he was actually super appreciative of your criticisms. Also he agrees with your ritual explanation as you had sources and information he couldn't locate or access. I'd love to see you react to his reaction. He has a great deal of respect for your additions to his work.
Indeed! Milo and I have been corresponding and are hoping to work together on some future videos. So stay tuned to both our channels and you might see us on the same screen.
@@artifactuallyspeaking that'd be awesome. I found you through him, and I found him by looking up the Baghdad battery when a friend's kid chose it as his paper topic for his high school history class and I didn't want to look dumb when he asked me about it. You to have made me feel superficially superior to a 15 year old.
Thanl you.
lets goooooooooooo!
@@artifactuallyspeaking i just found milo's and then your video and this is genuinely so exciting! what a beautiful collaboration and meeting of minds! thank you for your good faith and kind, humorous engagement and incredible insight and commentary!!
@@joleneonyoutubeSame! This is honestly great and I'm enjoying this a lot ^^
This is a really good breakdown- it does suck how quickly the original primary sources can get buried, especially by Conspiracy theories that grasps at straws based of either nothing or very outdated information.
It would be super cool if one day you and Milo did a collaboration on a Awful Archeology episode. I think it would be super insightful. ^^
It would be fun to collaborate. We've talked very briefly about it via email and if there's a topic that I can help him with, I'd love to work with him.
@@artifactuallyspeaking that's really exciting! I hope it happens =]
Ohh I would love to watch that
@@artifactuallyspeaking Ohhhhh! This is exciting! I hope to see you collab in the future!
@@artifactuallyspeaking this is one of those where hearing it called a "conspiracy theory" makes me shudder in revulsion... who conspired to do what? It's about guessing what an ancient artifact was used for... not the JFK assassination.
You do a great explanation of what is known, and why certain ideas are obviously wrong though. :D
I really hope you two get an opportunity to possibly collaborate on something. The combo of milo's youthful quirky "cool substitute teacher" vibes plus your soft spoken but thoughtful experience would make for some compelling and respectfully jovial back and forth.
This guy feels like the regular teacher that Milo subs for lol.
it feels like a great professor and his cool TA
@@peggedyourdad9560 he does
Substitute teacher and tenured professor
Milo made a reaction to this so fingers are crossed
May I say that I love the way Dr Hafford and Milo go back and forth on this, neither being rude about it, both just interested in giving us, the audience, the correct information.
This is what every Internet argument should be like. Civilized, kind, compassionate, lead by expertise and attempting to get to the facts beneath the opinions.
This is the exact kind of reaction content I like.
Expanding apon the original video's statement, giving more context to the situation at hand and correcting the things the original video got wrong.
I just found you today but this content's really interesting. Keep it up!
Thank you! Some people apparently feel I was being too harsh. It was not my intention to be harsh or to ridicule, but rather to show the additional material I found. It's good to know that you've seen that.
@@artifactuallyspeaking Some people think any sort of correction is some sort of bullying. You were scholarly and polite and very clearly showed that the sources you were using were difficult to find and easily missed, even with careful research. I expect that Milo was thrilled to learn more about the circumstances of the finds. I have done some deep dives into researching some plants only to find, six months later, that I accidentally bump into a radically new fact from an unexpected source.
i was gonna say something similar to this is worse grammar, but this is the comment I wanted on the video I wanted lol. i agree with ya killroy
@@tomgentile4850
I would like to explain that sometimes education is being done for the sake of the non-conspiritors. The longer something goes unchallenged in the public the more likely it is to start being accepted by average people.
Love this content! I'm a fan of miniminuteman so its always a rare treat to see his points being expanded on from a more advanced point of view! Subscribed :D
I'm a fan too! In this case I just had a little more information I wanted to share and reacting seemed the best way to do it.
Me three! I would love miniminuteman to see this. :)
I'm a fan as well, but his "woke" rants are usually free of essential and defining context, or he (once again) failed to check sources. Also, I don't understand why he needs to insert woke rants in a discussion about archeology.
Bias of any kind, especially modern political bias, is completely unwelcome in any serious field of research, but any _real_ scientist knows that.
@@innocentbystander3317 If you don’t think bias is inherent to interpreting culture, then I doubt I’ll convince you otherwise in a comment. We’re getting better about it, and better at identifying it, but that’s the result of people calling it out.
I’ll never cease to be amused by people complaining about anything “woke” when the alternative means staying asleep in a dream world.
@@innocentbystander3317 wake up from the matrix 😎😎😎😎😎😎😎😎😎😎😎😎😎😎😎
I have no idea why I typed this lmao.
When you said "putting in small slips of paper", I immediately said "oh, for prayer". Human beings have been stuffing small slips of paper with prayers & spells on them into random ass places for a very, very long time. I mean people are *still* doing it all over the world - most notably at the wailing wall in Jerusalem.
I thought the same. See also Shinto ema (small boards with prayers written on which are left at shrines).
Though I'm hesitant to jump to any conclusion. Even if we knew for a fact that the papyri had prayers written on them, it could be similar to ema & the wailing wall, or it could be a blessing to keep the contents of the pot from spoiling, or the opposite, to wish for some processing of the contents to happen successfully. Archaeology should stick to the known data instead of speculation, IMO
@@RubelliteFae I think Brad's speculation, that these were most likely used for spells to protect the home, is a pretty solid guess based on the evidence that we do have. The presence of the iron nails found with them is pretty indicative of that being their purpose.
@@biosparkles9442 I wrote my reply before he started talking about this aspect, so I do now agree it's the best guess we have. I just err on the side of not guessing.
Since my thirties I've been known to sit on a fence for years before picking a side. I think being too quick to make a choice can cause unforeseen setbacks and isn't usually necessary. Even more so in archaeology.
Note though, that he didn't speculate on the purpose of the "spells." The bit about protection of the home was about the "magic bowls" found near the jars (and is better evidenced throughout the region).
I’d go for mezuzah before wailing wall. Similarly ritualistic.
theres litterlally no reason to leap to that conclusion though.
Came here because Milo just did a video talking about how cool it was to have you respond to his content. People expanding the knowledge of others' knowledge is what powers the world
Me, too!
As a Historian, even I will say Archaeology from it's earliest days to the 1960's was 70% grave robbing. It wasn't until the 1960s and '70s that professional archaeologists established comprehensive ethical guidelines that brought a "stop" to that.. and by stop I mean slowed down as it still happens to this day.
Once people see there is money in it and it becomes more mainstream there is a problem.
Many sites now might remain undisclosed to stop people looting them. Some are reburied.
Though what amuses me is that many of these old sites that had not already been looted by the locals, (no doubt for preservation purposes!), would probably remain in the ground undiscovered since the locals cared so much about them.
As ethical as you think it is now, to us indigenous it's still just for profit grave robbing. At least you acknowledge how much worse the past was buy it's still nothing rosey
@@stonedsasquatch how do you feel about the Indegenious guides that work with anthropologists and archeologists?
@@E.J.Crunkleton indigenous people of any country but in this case, Native Americans (since im Native American and that's all that I can talk about with knowledge) do not all share the same beliefs. My best guess is that they don't feel like the artifacts would be treated poorly or something like that.
That’s a conspiracy theory about archeology, most archeology isn’t about graves.
I have to say I really love the idea of future archaeologists finding a pair of giant golden scissors and conspiracy theorists trying to prove there were giants living in our time with an affinity for golden tools.
Right, I hadn't ever even thought about that, but it's spot on to be sure. Made me chuckle.
Nah, when in doubt, it's always a religious object.
@@danbrodt977 but conspiracy theorists aren’t archaeologists, they don’t default to ritual purposes. They default to whatever the fuck their stupid little minds can think of
Don’t forget the giant keys
@@LongForgottenJ- Giant novelty folding knives. I've seen them in catalogs. Scaled-up versions of regular pocketknives.
If I remember correctly from a German article from a decade or so ago the whole battery-idea came to be because König found a piece of sassanian jewellry he believed to have been electro-plated and then went on to collect several more. We now know they were not, just really high end craftmansship, but it explains his reasoning since the leap to "ancient electricity" is a lot shorter if you already have something in hand you are convinced has been made with electricity.
I think this was a serious problem when archaeologists (who, obviously, are very knowledgeable about archeology but much less so about jewelry making and other arts and crafts), we're almost exclusively the only ones to determine what was the use of things.
Nowadays, post it on twitter and within a few days you'll have a few proffesional jewelers debunking your theory/someone from some other profession finding out whats the original use of something
@@valeryasteel4167 the more interdisciplinary nature of archeology in modern day is definitely a big advantage in correctly interpreting finds
This video shows how incredibly hard it is to say things that are right. The basic facts surrounding this discovery are obscured and would not be easy to fact-check.
Well said. Considering so much of the context in this case seems to be only found in German, and there are so many English speaking creators trying to piece this together, it sounds like this one would have been extremely hard to fact check. I can absolutely understand how someone who is trying to be as comprehensive and accurate as possible would still have trouble piecing this together.
Milo reacted to this react video. He was quite giddy to have such a qualified expert reacting to and correcting his content. Was great to see
The fact that an upturned bowl used to catch malicious spirits gives me the mental image of treating de.ons the same way one does a spider when using a plastic cup to get it out of the house
Contrary to Hollywood, most supernatural bogeys are rock-stupid and most protective practices are easy to deploy. They're folk magical rituals. The priests and the fancy ceremonies are for the bogeys who are _not_ stupid or to hold off angry deities.
Thank you for this - It was really cool! And no, you didn't come across as critical of Milo at all.
I'm a huge fan of Miniminuteman, and he is just what archaeology needs - young, enthusiastic, good looking, and irreverent. Everything the cliched image of archaeologists is not. I'm happy to accept the odd slip, particularly when , as you say, the surface information is so misleading or muddy...
I will certainly be checking out your other videos!
Thank you.
Wow, I love this content. You really expand on Milo’s video and clarify and correct with all your sources. So great
I really appreciate content like this, and it's really helpful for closing the gap between entertainment and information in a limited medium like an internet video. I love Milo, love his content, but there's necessarily going to be some simplifications and errors that slip through when one's making humorous content, and having this kind of clarification is great for making sure those don't become tripping hazards.
A great series that does this is Extra History (who I absolutely don't need to shill for, but I will) where they'll have a "Lies" episode after every miniseries that covers those same inconsistencies and errors.
I don't think I've seen Extra History. Will check them out for sure!
I agree, the thing with debunking these outrageous conspiracy theories is they will cling to any error in the argument against them as proof that they are right; no matter how small the error
I used to be really fond of Extra Credits and Extra History before I learned more about James.
@@Finvaara Valid, for sure. If nothing else, he's no longer there.
@@valritz1489 i didn't even know that. I canceled my Patreon, unsubbed, and unfollowed the rest of their social media, and neither Dan nor Dan happened to bring it up at any point when i was paying attention.
Also, Dan Carlin from Hardcore History made a great point in his Kings of Kings podcast series when he said that we have to understand that there are some actions that historical people took because they honestly, truly, completely believed that magic was real. Ironically, a lot of times the Ancient Aliens crowd will forget the mystical as an explanation, forget that even they have the benefit of hindsight.
If in 3000 years someone starts theorizing that there must have been an epidemic of slug-like alien beings following us around, hence why we threw so much salt over our shoulders, it'd serve us right.
It's actually the ever approaching immortal snail, not a slug. /lh
This is fundamental to understanding humanity. No different today, with people who carry around rocks and crystals for spiritual alignment or what-have-you, or any of the number of other pseudoscientific/religious practices people form their lives around. Imagine future peoples trying to fit those behaviors into a logical system without consideration of those erroneous/mystical/religious/whatever-phrase-you-want-to-describe-these-things-as perspectives.
Humans always do things that make sense, but human sense doesn't always make sense.
@Unism Maybe this was your point, but I think most people are denouncing the more modern chattal slavery, and certain other people are quick to attempt to equivocate that form of slavery with pre-modern slavery for dubious "nationalistic" reasons... to say it's always existed and therefore "get over it" (chattal slavery). I also think it's fine to look at the distant past through a modern lens and acknowledge the brutality as a non preferable way for humans to treat one another, while also acknowledging that it was commonplace and existed for various reasons. I suppose one should pay close attention and carefully consider the conclusion being drawn when someone brings up that you cannot moralize slavery through a modern lens... There are often very non-academic interests behind such statements.
@Unism Well, I still do think it's necessary to moralize certain parts of history in general discussion, and to iterate the sheer scale of human suffering. Because some people are not always interested in hearing the aspects of history that don't reflect well on their political/racial/national faction, and draw very dangerous prescriptive conclusions when you don't fully spell it out. For instance, when speaking to certain audiences in detail about the Holocaust these days, you might need to explicitly state when someone in particular was bad or wrong. Perhaps among actual academics you can take a true bird's eye objective view without modern moral perspectives. Anyway I think you included enough nuance to override the white nationalist alarm when bringing up slavery, so I see no reason to detain you further.
@Unism I certainly agree that one of the main lessons from studying history should be that we are all capable of "evil" given particular circumstances, that good people are not born good and bad people aren't born or created mystically to be bad. I suppose I almost entirely agree with you when put that way. I guess the ambiguity for me is in what is meant by moralizing. For instance, I see no reason for teachers to spell out who they think the "bad guys" are or to even put things in terms of bad or good. I think kids will put things in those terms on their own given the facts. I do wonder whether some people say "moralizing" to mean teaching radical centrism, and requiring that there are plausible excuses for everything that could be interpreted as bad. For instance when discussing the abuses of slavery to have reassurances that some slaves were treated well, or basically to inject apologetics for every controversial topic. In the case of the Holocaust, you obviously teach the facts leading up... But then do you offer conclusions or analysis of those facts "the Nazis erroneously believed the Jews disproportionately controlled finance and were responsible for the loss of the great war"? That they actually did, but the Nazis "overreacted"? Maybe my oppositional view of reality limits my imagination of how history could be taught ideally.
Fascinating! I’m into “occult” stuff and the instant you said the jars were pinned in place, I “knew” those jars were used for magic. And the contents you listed with their variations? That, to me, makes it a pretty solid case for magic; a literal jar spell.
Cuz, I mean, 10 nails hanging out in there? Nails are still used in groups like that in jar spells (though 9 or 13 is more common these days). Papyrus remains? Various chunks of metals? Pretty sure anyone familiar with folk magic practices would agree with you, sir.
I agree. Those jars were used with magical intent.
I'm also into "occult" stuff, and I totally agree
I suspect that 'spell jars' (for lack of a better term) are found around the world. A written invocation, appropriate items made from certain materials, and a container (which may itself also serve a magical function): easy to make and use.
The second part of the "we don't really know, well it's likely for ritual" joke is also "that other thing? Yeah, we know exactly what it is, but we'll say it's for a fertility goddess"
Tooo be fair, there's places to this day where that kind of artifact IS used (and sadly not the way its form would suggest) in celebrations in honor of fertility deities. Like in Japan.
@@antonioscendrategattico2302 Yes. Shaivite linga are another example.
@@RubelliteFae I've heard that linga aren't supposed to be phalluses though - they just look kinda like that.
@@antonioscendrategattico2302 Check out the oldest (or second oldest) extant lingam in Parashurameshwara temple at Gudimallam. Besides the lingam itself, the upper engraving is of Lakulīśa, who is often ithyphallic.
Moreover, later linga are actually the combination of lingam & yoni, even the abstracted versions. My interpretation (as a Hindu, not as an archaeologist) is that they symbolically represent that the reality we experience, _māyā,_ is the result of the comingling of _puruṣa_ & _prakrti_ (iconized as Śiva & Śakti). It is as though we are looking from within the "womb." With our individuated perspectives, we are unable to see past the edges of the illusion into actual reality, so the most we can see is their coming together (at best we can comprehend Saguṇa Brahman, but not Nirguṇa Brahman).
@@RubelliteFae What you're saying actually matches with what I've heard from someone who studied Hindu imagery and philosophical concepts so I have no problem accepting what you're saying. Sadly I can't add anything of my own - you're the expert here :D
The ritual idea feeling both like a slight cop out but also the best explanation given the evidence, reminds of how in paleontology, specifically concerning the non-avian dinosaurs, the best explanation for a lot of the strangest features you may find that don't have an obvious use is likely some kind of display structure to, in some way, be appealing to mates. that explanation even applies to things that may have other uses, like horns or a hollow crest connected to the animals naris(nose/nasal stuff).
but like rituals its not something usually shown in the objects itself, and is *TECHNICALLY* an assumption based on other factors, or at least that's how it can be perceived, hence the cop out feeling of "you're just saying that cause you don't know for sure what it is or what it did".
Rituals and mating displays are both things that are behavioral, and Its really rare to get an artifact or fossil that explicitly shows the exact behaviors of ancient people or especially animals. but even with that said, we do know about them and in time learn more.
To this day people do bizzare things with strange implements
I just watched a video of Milo's where he said he would be graduating from college soon, which I only point out because not only is the information about this find so muddied to being with, but also because it's important for people to understand, as an undergrad, AT BEST he's got access to his school's JSTOR/Academic search account, at WORST he's just going by internet resources.
I say this to emphasize how much I appreciate this video because it adds so much to the original analysis, without attempting to shame it, but by using privileged access to information to add to it.
So what you're saying is that it was A MAGIC BATTERY?!?!?!
Seriously, though, it was really interesting to hear such a detailed and informed opinion on such a contentious artefact. It's also fantastic that international experts are again able to assist the Iraqi people in preserving their cultural heritage after decades of suffering in isolation.
so what you're saying is its a mystery jar
I appreciate that you even reacted to the drink.. You may be a bit more thorough than Milo but apparently his bar is better stocked.
Great video. As someone who grew up reading schlock archaeology I appreciate the reintroduction of critical thinking.
So-called harmless conspiracy theories leads to greater susceptibility to those that have real world impact in the present.
I love how 2 informed adults converse like adults in a civil manner. You got a sub from me.
Came here from milos video, i love this wholesome interaction from one archeologist to another, and neither taking criticisms or disagreements personally. We need more of that in this world’
I don't know the book he os referring to, but as an outsider, I took Milo's objection to "ritual use" to be two things:
1: depending on your definition, couldn't any behaviour that is not purely biological (or at least in some way related to culture and thus see above) be categorised as 'ritual'? I know there is a strict definition, but academics trying to prove a point are prone to stretching definitions.
And 2 (as an extension of 1): it may often be valid, that doesn't mean it isn't used as a copout. In biology you see "genotypic and/or fenotypic variation", in ecology we use "confounding environmental variables" or "intraspecific variation".
To outsiders there's no context for 'ritual behaviour', so I thought his irk was ultimately that it is a statement that is shutting a door, giving the impression that there is no interest in ritual, opening the first crack for the crackpots.
I agree. 'Ritual' is not well defined. It can encompass so many things that saying something is ritual without explanation of what kind of ritual and how it may have been conducted (and having at least some evidence of that ritual) is a copout to be sure.
@@artifactuallyspeaking I allways asumed "ritual" was pseudo Latin for "no clue".
Archeologists: "We're not sure, but we think it may have been used for ceremonies"
Women: "That's a (widget) for counting menses/ explaining pregnancy/ assisting births/ child care/ spinning, weaving or sewing/ preparing or storing food/ killing mice/ et al, ad nauseum
Eta- the Venus of Willendorf is a perfect depiction of a woman who is very close to giving birth. That's not to say that it doesn't have several purposes, but it would have been very handy for young, inexperienced women.
@@nobody8328 it has also been called a masturbatory aid, but I think that might apply to every find.
And also a use that doesn't exclude ceremonies.
@@user-zh4vo1kw1z oh, I hadn't heard that one, that's great! ~takes notes~
I'm also a fan of the general goddess theory. It just stands to reason that a fat, pregnant woman would represent fertility, abundance and desirability.
But I do agree with you that pretty much everything back then would necessarily have been used for more than one purpose, tho. Endless consumerism has taught you and me that there's a tool for everything. I have 20+ knives, each one for cutting different types of meat or different locations on the carcass. I store those knives in special locations in my kitchen that is larger than most communal living areas during the Neolithic. They simply couldn't have had very many single purpose items.
And I can certainly see ceremonies accompanying the birthing of babies, so that follows. Your theory fits too, because men. 😄
Great to see actual scholarly discourse where the ideas are being built upon/clarified/corrected, rather than attacked. Rare on TH-cam, thanks for this!
Came here from Milo's video and I just want to say Im really grateful for your expertise and the amount of time you spent on his video. I think Milo is gonna be great someday, and Im really glad you did this with his video. Thanks for your time Doc. You definitely deserve the like, view, comment, and subscription. Thanks for your expertise!
Came here after seeing Milo's reaction to your reaction. Your delivery was so impressive I just had to come here and subscribe.
Thanks!
I think this really enphasises the necessity of a diverse discussion as it shows even the weirdest ideas can be used to test the more pragmatic ones and vice versa.
Another subscriber coming from Milo's direction, can't wait to see more content of you two, and your own videos as well. Your explanations were clear, to the point, and very engaging, so I really think that I'll enjoy the content of yours :)
It's so cool to see that Milo still has a lot of room for improvement in his research. I'd love to see him go back and address the inaccuracies in his vid to avoid unintentional missinformation
To be fair, Milo covers a lot of stuff, he can only spend so much time researching, this guy has specialised in Eastern archaeology for years, and a lot of the points here are quite obscure.
Milo did, and he's so happy about it!
Dr Hafford,....i am here by way of Milo's channel and look forward to learning from you. As a near 60 year old man I live by few rules but one of them at the top of the list is simply to never stop learning new things.
Amazing video. I've recently discovered Milo's videos and really appreciate other looks into the same subject as anyone can miss something. Loved the reaction, I think this was great additive content to Milo's work and I hope you do more on any other videos he posts that you have information on.
Milo's videos are really good. Most of them are outside my field of the ancient Near East, but I had some additional information on this one, so it made sense to cover it. I'll keep enjoying his videos and see if there are others I can add anything to.
@@artifactuallyspeaking Stefan Milo (a different Milo 😄) also has a fantastic channel about archaeology.
Just watched Milo's response video ('BaghdadBattery') to this video, and after I finished his video, I immediately came here to subscribe and like. Of course this channel, of which I had been unaware, is a real treat. Thank you, Doctor.
I'd just like to chime in and say I think you did this wonderfully. Arguing a point without being demeaning is a fine line and I think you walked it very well. Maybe one day you all will collaborate? Fingers crossed
This is absolutely what I had hoped for. He has 5 other episodes. Please Please please, continue this debate content. Milo is fun and hilarious.. you sir, are well versed, continually learning, experienced, and and willing to accept more theory can be possible.
Sounds like a buddy cop series, Milo is the goofy eccentric new guy and this guy is the no-nonsense veteran teaming up to fight pseudo archaeology.
I hope Milo finds this video and brings it to the attention of the rest of his viewers. This was a very good analysis, and I appreciate your work on investigating the matter.
He did, and he loved it!
Milo just did a response to this video. He was very appreciative about all the extra information you gave him.
Absolutely loved it! As an archaeology student myself, I love to consume such informative and constructive back-and-forth conversations. Plus, deconstructing conspiracy theories is very entertaining to watch and engage in, so I always love to see the topic gaining some traction in the archaeological community.
Thank you and cheers!
I love that context of artefacts has become so important, not only to archaeologists but to museums as well.
I remember as a kid walking around the museums of Gothenburg (and there are MANY), looking at all the things, but they were all just items encased in glass or behind ribbon barriers.
You got the look of the artefact, you got the smell of it in many cases (wherever the preservatives weren't too overpowering), but you never got any real context.
Looking at even the smaller single-room museums today, they group artefacts together by where they were found, add backdrops to try and estimate how it may have looked and sometimes even add a splash of dirt, sand or rock at the bottom to give you that tiny extra immersion into the experience, and this makes it overly obvious what that artefact is and what it was used for.
Context is key, always!
Respectfully, a lot of chicanery has made its way into academic papers in the past. It strikes me as a particularly charitable position to take to assume that a researcher whose livelihood and career depend on their findings being publishable would never or couldn’t possibly (perhaps without any nefarious reason) slip in some possible explanations such as “ritual purposes” when they’re really not sure what a find means. Archaeologists are only human, after all. That’s not to say, as you point out, that “it’s ritual” can never be a genuine suggestion as supported by evidence, but the converse - that it’s always supported and no one in the history of archaeology has ever used it as a hail-mary explanation - is equally unbelievable.
Yes well said. It may not be enough to accept such a diagnosis uncritically, especially from a leftist point of view because “ritual” has been used to explain virtually every misunderstood object and contributes to the false idea of humans in the past being low-tech. For example, most people still don’t appreciate that Mayans were mathematically and astrophysically more advanced than Europe until the fall of the Mayan civilization. Many of their achievements are written off as “ritual” because its been a neat explanation for the superiority of colonial powers and of Christendom.
BobbyBroccoli's series "How to lose a Ph.D in 127 pages" is a great example of what can happen and what is no doubt currently happening
milo sent me, and i’m glad for both of you. scientists rock
Archeologists saying something is ceremonial, to me, is like when historians say that something's a ritual/ritualistic when they're "not quite sure that it is but could be I guess". I find that funny, I don't know how much of a joke that is vs reality but it sounds about right
Given the amount of ritual (religious and secular) in our lives, it's a decent explanation. The trouble comes when distinguishing between the remains of an actual ritual and the remains of a mundane activity. That turtle shell at the base of the cairn could simply mean a dead turtle; that broken knife could have been lost or cast aside.
I'm here because Milo set me! Love the content and would love to see you two do a regular collaboration. I think the cross pollination for the channels would be great.
Milo did a react video of sorts to this, really think you might enjoy the takes he had about what you said if you haven't had it pop up already. Enjoyed both videos and the react was the cherry on top as of now until further possible developments 🙏
Hey, I'm here because of Milo, Miniminuteman, who freaking LOVED this video! He just reacted to this (which was how I ended up here), and was so full of happiness, because he was learning so much more than he knew, before. Oh, and because you made a drink, and know and HAVE one of his favorite books, too!
And how there was a top quality doctor of Archaeology like you that I wasn't aware of? I am so happy to have found you! I've been a follower of others here for awhile, now (Dr. Miano, for an example), but I always like finding more experts to learn from! So... here's a like and comment for your Almighty Algorithm, and a brand new sub, too!
I love how this video covers academic sources that are not in English and/or not online. Sadly, much "research" these days is limited to Google results. As a career librarian, I am always encouraging people to explore sources that have not been digitized (and that never will be).
Even before the internet, enthusiastic amateurs weren't as diligent as they could be (if they even had the resources) and trusted to what they could find. All it takes is a bad translation, or misunderstanding a term, or clumsy phrasing to send an otherwise intelligent, curious, person on the wrong trail. Then that person writes a book, which becomes another person's source who then _also_ writes a book or article, and so on and on until it's astounding that we can even identify the original artifacts, artworks, or stories on which modern claims are based.
Love that you did this, such respectful and knowledgeable discourse is a pleasure to see.
The scissor comparison was incredibly insightful
I love the fact that in the day or so since you made this video, your subs have about tripled. This is exactly educational TH-cam at it's finest. Flashy, snarky generalists cast a wide net, and make fairly well researched videos that are far better than a random person could ever research. Then a specialist critiques the generalist's video, and the generalist signal boosts the specialist's response, allowing the portion of their viewership interested in the specialty find the specialist's other content and learn more.
Coming over from Milo! Have a sub. You rock, thanks for reacting to his video and giving us more information. Will we get a react of the react of the react? :p
Gave this a watch after Milo reacted to it. Good to see work getting checked and no one being upset by it^_^
i appreciate the additional context, commentary, and correcting incorrect information.
regarding your criticisms of milo's presentation style, jokes, and references... keep in mind he is communicating to an audience who's primary understanding of archaeology is from pop culture and outdated science from their early education. he is both trying to correct misconceptions, debunk conspiracy theories, and convey what most people consider to be a very dry and complex topic in an engaging way. it might not be as exacting as academic-to-academic communication, but it is just as valuable to communicate in a way that doesn't isolate the laypeople who wish to learn more. jokes, memes, and pop culture references are excellent tools for keeping your audience attentive and engaged.
I absolutely agree that Milo's style is entertaining and that it makes learning fun. I don't want to discourage him in any way; in fact, I enjoy his style very much (and I wrote an email to him to say exactly that). The sources I found on this topic are difficult to come by and I made the same mistakes he did when I first looked into the topic.
@@artifactuallyspeaking I would love to see Milo speaking to more experts in the process of his research. As an academic myself, I understand completely why he doesn't (we're not exactly the most reliable people when it comes to replying to emails in a timely manner, or at all), but it would really improve the quality of his content. As much as I appreciate that no one has to have a PhD to be an expert on a topic (and I abhor the elitist way the academy operates on this assumption), Milo does only have an undergraduate degree in archaeology, which likely means he's missing a lot of the training on how to find, understand, and assess original source documents. That kind of skillset is difficult to learn and takes years of practise in my field (ecology), I imagine it only gets harder when the primary sources are mostly written in German, French and sometimes Greek, and you don't speak/read those languages.
Anyway all that to say, I hope you continue to have correspondence with Milo, and I hope you are willing to offer him your time & mind every-so-often, especially when he's covering topics that relate to your specific field of expertise, and I hope he takes you up on that offer if it is there.
I thought this video was just as comprehensive as Milo's and in fact, a lot of Milo's videos get pretty technical, even explaining the nuclear physics behind radioactive dating techniques. I think the real issue is that, because Milo's content is so varied, he can only spend so much time researching so he can't be expected to be an expert in everything he talks about.
Here from Milo's channel. I really enjoyed your video when he reacted to it, so here I am. :)
Found you from minuteman and he made a fantastic reaction to this video. Im a fan, im a stan, im so in love with your videos and hope you get nore traction. Thank you for teaching us and also being just a kind fun fellow. Adored, subbed, and going to binge all your videos soon
Came here from miniminiminuteman's reaction to -this- video.
I hope you two could do a collaboration some time, even if it's just chatting over some cold Baghdad Batteries :)
Well, as far as I'm aware whatever it was this supposed battery was used for, is never mentioned in any contemporary texts. Add to that there was found only one, without context and the fact that the amount of electricity that it would have been able to produce, if it was indeed used for that, was too minute to be of any practical use, and it becomes an extra-ordinary claim without any of the extra-ordinary evidence that is required for such a claim.
It's worse than that, the thing simply isn't a battery, a battery needs two terminals, this thing doesn't have two terminals.
So whatever it is, it isn't a battery.
Very low voltage has been found to disrupt microbes. but how would ancients know that and how could we prove they knew that?
@@harlequingnoll5 They didn’t and you can’t.
@@CChissel well I can't because I'm not an assistant physics professor from University of Arkansas in 2020
@@harlequingnoll5 They did not know that ultra low voltage kills bacteria, there was no way for them to have discovered this even if they had successfully done so.
Fascinating! When I first read of the "Bagdad Batteries", my mind went immediately to an old custom brought to the area of Canada in which I live of "Witch Jars". They are still found buried around entrances, used to protect buildings from evil - often simple earthenware jars containing written spells, and iron nails, sealed shut with wax. Mankind still has rituals for protection, and as advanced as we would like to believe we are, we are not so different from our ancestors. Very enjoyable video!
If it was a battery, it was absolutely used by either a jeweler or weaponsmith (for electroplating or etching)
I believe the Indiana Jones bit was intended to be more satirical or a joke, not an exact of example of archeologists of the time
Edit: I really do love you filling in blank spots milo missed its awesome to see
Got to love the dedication, he even tried the mix drink on top of tracking down obscure German documents form the sixties. New sub, hope to see more.
Years ago I started the Hall of Ma'at website and message board. The site hosts articles written for the site and some republished articles that debunk conspiracy theories. We had a German armchair archaeologist who had dug up and read the original German article on the jars, he told us from what he read the jar were blessing jars. It sounds like he had things on the right track. Thank you
Thank you Brad for taking the time to carefully research, refute claims and explain the context of these fascinating artifacts. Great job!
I sub to miniminuteman and that's how I saw your video. You did a great job delivering criticism in a way that allows us to learn. It would be great to see a collab between you and Milo. I hope you continue bringing archeology to us lay people.
I'm here from Miniminuteman, I'm now a subscriber to your channel.
Milo did a great video reacting to your response. I love the discourse and you're not being harsh. You're a professor, this is what you do. Context is important in anything, I immediately think of mushrooms, and being in mushroom forage groups. Without a picture of the mushroom in its environment, it's hard to tell a person what it is. We call it context. The witchcraft makes sense. Northern Europe pagans and heathens were doing the same thing which you do bring up at the end. I hope people are watching the end because it's the most important part of the video. I would hope if there are 10 scrolls in a jar, we hope they're blessings haha...
Best breakdown on this subject I have ever seen.
Thanks!
I love that miniminuteman reacts to the reaction of himself. It's so godamn wholesome
great video, I love the deeper discussion of the archaeological find and context. Good reminder that research is difficult and can be misleading if you rush it. Will be looking into your channel more!
I'm very glad you did this video, and in return miniminuteman did a reaction to it because that's how I learned about your channel. I'm currently binging your past videos and looking forward to what you produce in the future.
My question would be this: if it's a ritual, why were so few discovered? I understand that it shouldn't be as ubiquitous as oil lamps, but supposedly this ritual wasn't just the realm of one sect, as shown by the differences between the two sets. I suppose I would expect there to be more evidence above and beyond 10 examples if it was an established ritual, but maybe my intuition is ill-founded.
I would too, but I think the incantation bowls were the most common form of this kind of ritual and the jars were probably a secondary and less popular or well-known version. Incantation bowls are found very often, so it is clearly the most common protective device, but maybe there are more of these jars but broken and unrecognized?
@@artifactuallyspeaking makes sense that this ties into a more common ritual, in that this was the "greater banishing ritual" or grandaddy version of the others. Sheds light onto why there would be fewer artifacts. Thanks for your reply!
@@artifactuallyspeaking I've wondered for things of this nature if they were not routinely re-used for a new (or perhaps the same) purpose. Given the relative value of crafted objects such as jars that also have important practical use (not that ritualistic or magical protection is not a practical use to someone who believes in that practice) it stands to reason, to me anyway, that such objects would go on to have many recycled uses as long as they were still intact and useable.
Perhaps to a new generation or some other people, who did not bury or use the object for that purpose it would seem like a perfectly good jar to use for something else. Given the age and near constant human habitation in many of these places for thousands of years, it is frankly miraculous that the bitumen jars we have found managed to make it undisturbed.
Here from Milo’s reaction to this video 😅
You’re an amazing reactionary scholar. I’m impressed and excited to see the rest of the videos on this channel. 👏
Thank you for making this! It's absolutely fascinating and I'm glad to see that the original video is mostly accurate. Still immensely cool to see further explanations and corrections from you!
Coming here from Miniminuteman! Really interested in your work and I am about to go on a watching spree.
I like the theory that it was like a "time capsule" without necessarily being found by mortal humans for the historical record. Mummification of messages or records for whatever purpose. The intention of tombs and the mummification of bodies is obviously to preserve them for as long as possible... so my guess is that by sealing papyrus/copper in a ceramic jar with a bitumen plug was to preserve some message or meaning for as long as possible. Whether it's for ritual magic or just the human desire to have a part of you exist longer than you do... Or yes, perhaps just to be found by other people later and have them know you existed. I personally think about this I can make and bury to communicate with future people.
Milo sent me here like many others I see as well. I'd just like to state that this has been a very insightful, informative and entertaining discussion. I've thoroughly enjoyed all three of these between the two of you and ultimately I'd love to see the two of you in face to face discussion. There's nothing like listening to a really good, respectful intellectual back and forth. Would love to see it one day. And thank you for all you do as well, so much respect for people out there providing their knowledge to the rest of us that are willing to hear it.
I remember about thirty minutes ago when you only had 4k subs. Simpler times.
Just saw Milo react to your reaction. This stuff is great. Would love to see you react to more of his stuff or even collaborate with him.
I actually never heard of what the jars might have actually been used for. That you bring up their use in mysticism, it reminds me of of some somewhat similar practices that (if I remember right, I think I first heard of this like 20 years ago) were done in medieval europe; materials or prayers/spells written down and placed in glass flasks or small pots and imbedded within the walls of a house to protect against witchcraft, or something similar that.
Yes, those are typically called 'witch bottles' and they do have many aspects that are similar to these more ancient jars.
Miniminuteman sent me here to subscribe. Love knowledge and learning. Excited
If you haven't heard yet Milo reacted to this video
I’m so glad you took the time to respond to Milo! I was grinning nearly as much as him while watching!!
I love to see some reactions for this content. Thanks for adding your expertise to the discussion
Thank you for such a clear and logical explanation. I've read about these things for years, and this is the first time I've heard anything approaching the full story.
This is an awesome video. This is how all reaction videos should be. Considered responses with clear citations. I love the bowls that you mentioned. For anyone who's interested in learning more about those, I highly recommend the Secret History of Western Esotericism Podcast, Episodes 146 & 147. The host interviews Gideon Bohak and Daniel James Waller on how those bowls were used in a Jewish context in Roman/Sassanian Mesopotamia.
Milo reacted and admitted his wrongs and says he enjoys the dialog with you. I think you two should do a video together
Excellent video, probably one of the most detailed an accessible resources for the subject for people (I'm people) who have just skimmed the subject and watched Milo's video and moved on. I've wishy washied on the subject several times through the years and a past version of me feels vindicated by the likelihood the iron rod just had papyrus around it.
You provide a lot of context that gets left out of the broader discussion that really neatly ties up a lot of the mystery. And honestly, I think the spell jar explanation is more interesting. Assuming it was a battery, it would have just been a one off discovery that faded away, a little cool, but for me personally way less cool than a long lasting living magical tradition
I feel like there's some expertise brain poisoning (which sounds very harsh so just to be clear I'm not meaning it in a mean way, it's just the only way of phrasing that's coming to my brain right now) from Milo. There's a lot of noise on the subject from the conspiracy end of things where if you're mostly engaging with that side of the discussion there are some things you will just accidentally eat from the conspiracy theorists because it sounds like the plausible truth under all the nonsense, hence the acid claim and conflation of the two different sets of jars being stated seemingly without hunting down the original sources on those matters.
I think a much less impactful, but similar, thing kinda happen with you towards the beginning of the video when you talk about other sites from the city that are more well known than the battery, and I'm sorry to say because those other sites don't really seem have the broader reach as the sensationalism around the battery. They're very interesting sites, after I type this I'm probably going to go look up the archway, but I think I can name drop the battery and have people know what I'm talking more readily. Those sites are probably more well known within purely archaeological circles, but I, personally at least, have never heard of them while also hearing about the baghdad battery many, many times over the years from a variety of sources and angles.
You make very good points here. I do have my biases -- we all do -- and recognizing our own is difficult. So I appreciate that you have pointed out (and been kind and balanced in doing so) that I have assumed that Ctesiphon and its Taq Kisra arch are well-known because of the circles I work in. You're definitely right that many people are more familiar with the battery. Thanks for your response!
@@artifactuallyspeaking it's a problem we all have to grapple with, and I'm certain there's a name for it that I'm simply blanking on.
I do it pretty often myself with the subjects I'm versed in, like recently I caught myself assuming everyone knows about the history of horse domestication and how we bred them into the giants they are today
I’m actually here from Milo’s channel to see your whole video. Excellent information relayed in an enjoyable manner, here as well as there.
Great video, good counter arguments and good digging. I agree that publications in other languages than english are often overlooked. Another subscriber here!
I think this video is a great example of the importance of academia! Having people who are able to dig through these old documents to piece together the story of an artifact that has been so covered by conspiracies is a gift to everyone. Milo's video does a great job at debunking the conspiracy, and your video does a great job of illuminating more about the artifact itself!
This is such an interesting video because I've watched Milo since the beginning, and it's so cool to see someone else in the field giving their 2 cents; showing that not all archeologists think or feel the same about things. So glad your content was recommended to me!
P.S. - Didn't realize how much Milo got incorrect :') Thank you for enlightening everyone !
Thanks!
And to be fair, Milo made the same mistakes almost everyone makes. He didn't have access to some hard to find sources.
Thank you for expanding on Milo's work with some of the harder to find research that he wasn't able to get his hands on! It's wonderful to see people working together to provide us with even more information and context for these artifacts!!
Have not finished the video yet, but this content and I LOVE that you addressed that even you said some stuff later proven to be wrong. to me “criticizing” your own previous beliefs/statements shows a committment to actually voicing the truths of the past
my only recommendation is to add links and timestamps for your sources!
Yes, I have made many mistakes and still make them. I think it's important to admit them and confront them to see what I can learn rather than hide them. I made the same mistakes Milo did until I uncovered the older sources that are rather hard to find. And a lot of what Milo said was good, so it's important to point that out as well.
I think this is a very good idea. I'm not all that well versed in TH-cam yet, but I'll look into ways to do that. Thanks!
Found you thanks to Milo's video featuring this video! You've got a new sub from me 😁 I love the way you handled Milo's video and I love that you even tried the drink! Very fun. Looking forward to binge watching all your content!
Regarding the issues with taq-i kisra, is there any high quality 3D scans that have been done of the structure yet? Digital heritage is one of my areas of interest. it seems like it would be useful to not only have a preserved copy should more damage occur, but also could allow for simulations to be done that may help pinpoint weak areas!
I think a 3D model was made during the 2013-2014 reconstructions, though I don't have access to it. Some of that reconstruction has fallen now and we are currently working to figure out why. In the process we are making a new 3D model, but I'm not sure when that will be done or available.
@@artifactuallyspeaking It would definitely be useful to have a new, (and possibly higher quality) scan available to compare the scans, if you can obtain the older one. Good scans can detect changes by the millimetre!
I love that he actually made the drink omg