Tag Archives: history

How to piss off historians

I don’t really care too much for archaeological sites and museum full of excavated relics. In all fairness, it’s probably ignorance, although I also think it’s a lot to do with the lack of interactivity. I like to do stuff, not just see things.

But I was staying two and a half hours from Santa Cruz in the little Bolivian town of Samaipata where their top attraction was the nearby historical site of El Fuerte (The Fortress). To bypass the whole shebang would be wrong.

But first: a trip to the Centro de Investigaciones Arqueológicas y Antropológicas in Samaipata itself where I paid 50Bs. (US$7.29 / £4.50) for joint entry to the museum and the site.

The curator unlocked door after door for me to reveal rooms full of cased cultural artefacts dating from 200-1550AD. Fragrance burners, double handled bowls with faces, drinking vessels used for rituals and a host of ornaments didn’t hold my attention for long. I’m sorry. I really tried to study the pieces, read the accompanying plaques, appreciate the handiwork but overall it was only marginally more interesting than I anticipated.

Am I really just a product of the push buttons, flashy lights and visuals generation? Or is that too easy a cop-out? I want to be interested, I want to discover, I want to learn. So why wasn’t I in love with this experience?

The film screening, again to a solo audience of me, was thankfully subtitled (any curious information in the museum was written in Spanish where I could just about pick out the odd comment but missed the flow of discussion and full meaning).

The film was actually pretty interesting, outlining El Fuerte’s strategic position between Asunción, Paraguay and Lima, Peru, and talking through the different occupations of the site from the Chané people of the Amazonian time through to the Incas and the invading Spaniards.

But it was still a lot of watching and listening and I wanted to be doing.

(Okay, I confess. In truth I was glad to gain a basic understanding before seeing the actual ruins. And actually, I only wish that I’d had a guide with me to translate and retell the stories of the various museum pieces).

I hoped, then, that the site itself would inspire some history love in me. Positioned 8km east of Samaipata, UNESCO certainly thinks El Fuerte is worth the hype having awarded it with World Heritage Site status back in 1998.

Time to get strapped into well-worn walking shoes, hike the rugged hill and find out why the place is so popular.

3 Comments

Filed under bolivia, culture, museums, south america

Why I’m not so sure that I’ll go with ‘Happy New Year’

The countdown begins, the clock strikes midnight, we all cheer and cuddle and kiss friends and family to celebrate the start of a new year. (Or, if you’re on the road, you kiss and cuddle total strangers). But why is it such an event? The pressure, the build-up, the inevitable anti-climax? The broken resolutions, the resulting guilt and frustration? Is it really worth all the emotional bother?

Personally, I love New Year, not so much New Year’s Eve, but New Year itself. It symbolises a new start, a clean slate, a chance to put past hurts behind you and begin positively with the next chapter of your life. But really, why should a date matter? Even more so when the date is flawed and our whole calendar is a corrupt twisting of older methods of time telling.

When you’re travelling I believe that you’re even more likely to bump into people who open your eyes to new ideas. This whole calendar concept was only really introduced to me a week or so ago when I asked a new friend how important Christmas and New Year were to him. ‘What’s more important,’ he said, ‘is that we’ve just had the longest day of the year, the summer solstice’ (I’m in New Zealand). He argued that the modern calendar is a bastardised way of organising the year that has little to do with the circular pattern of life during a solar/lunar year and more to do with politics, religion and self-interest. I did some basic research…

THE ROMAN CALENDAR

The old Roman calendar was ‘originally was determined by the cycles of the moon and the seasons of the agricultural year‘ and used to be ten months in length with an extra little bit for the winter period. The first day of the year was March 1st and if you know a little Latin then it makes sense that October, for example, would be the eighth month and December the tenth. Some time around 600 B.C. a Roman ruler called Pompilius introduced January and February in order to account for the preious gap in the calendar for winter, and made January the first month of the year. It was all still a bit unpredictable: some years had twelve months, others thirteen, and a year averaged between 355 and 378 days. Pompilus is supposedly also responsible for focusing the calendar on religion rather than landwork but more surprising is that the priests of the Roman Empire are said to have ‘exploited the calendar for political ends, inserting days and even months into the calendar to keep the politicians they favored in office’. So overall, a bit of an odd system and one that was most definitely fluid and corrupt.

THE JULIAN CALENDAR

Julius Ceaser got a bit frustrated by this random system and decided to do a reform that was more structured: a twelve month calendar that was based somewhat on the solar year and where each month would have either 30 or 31 days, apart from February – the end of the year – which would have to be shortened to align with the solar system. Not wanting to be forgotten, in 44 B.C. Julius Ceaser changed the month Quintilis to Julius (July), a trick later employed by the emperor Augustus who changed Sextilis to, you guessed it, Augustus (August). All a bit self-indulgent. Augustus also supposedly wanted his month to be a full month, so after some shifting around, 31 days were assigned to the month of August. But there were still some problems with the Julian calendar, namely discrepancies when compared with the solar year that meant every few years everything went out of sync. Again, a bit of a flawed system.

THE GREGORIAN CALENDER

In 1582 Pope Gregory XIII devised a calendar that was much more in tune with the solar year and had a better ‘formula for calculating leap years’, but the UK decided to be sticklers and it was only in 1752 following the British Calendar Act of 1751 that Brits finally aligned with their neighbouring countries, losing 11 days in the process. It was also here that the beginning of the legal year is said to have been moved from March to January.

So surely the Gregorian, our current system, is a good system? But why can’t we work with something a bit more solar or lunar orientated? ‘The Muslim calendar is the only purely lunar calendar in widespread use today’ with religious celebrations occurring in relation to the moon’s waxing and waning and therefore the corresponding dates on a Gregorian calendar are pretty randomised. The Chinese calendar, as another example, is lunisolar, based on the cycles of the moon where ‘the beginning of the year can fall anywhere between late January and the middle of February’. Better systems more in tune with the earth and its surroundings?

So what?

Back to the present and my travels. For New Year’s Eve I was lucky enough to be invited to a gathering up near Whangerei, New Zealand, where I played beer pong and got tipsy and did a bit of bad dancing. All this discussion and research had left me a bit confused. Is it just because as human beings we crave a definite timeline as opposed to a more natural rhythm? Is counting days in such a methodical way necessary? What’s wrong with going by nature instead? Is New Year, as we know it, really New Year? March does indeed seem to make more sense to me with the onset of spring and the bursting through of plants, and lambs being born, and just that ‘new start’ feeling you get at that time of the year.

So was I going to turn down an invite to a little party because of new knowledge and a sense that our calendar was created in order to pander to political and religious and social activities rather than the natural ebb and flow of life, and as a result is a bit of a corrupt system? And that therefore New Year was a bit of a farce? No, of course not. It would have just been bad form. I went, I saw in the New Year and I conquered some time demons.

So, what the hell. Happy New Year. Really.

Leave a Comment

Filed under culture, new zealand, random

Ancient modern Ecuador: four facts

  1. There are three tribes remaining in Ecuador, two of which are nomadic and don’t want any communication with the rest of us. The third, the matriarchal Wuaorani tribe, allow contact. I wonder whether having a female chief affected the decision to be more open about sharing their culture (the other tribes are polygamous and maybe the male chiefs are more concerned with spreading their seed than spreading the word)? (I know, far too simplistic, and I do appreciate the difficulties in managing modern world contact to avoid adversely affecting national and cultural traditions.)
  2. In Inca times, when a chief died, his wife was given a drink containing a strong, lethal dose of mescaline so that she could go to ‘sleep’ with her husband and enter the next life with him.
  3. The size of the earrings of tribe members signifies their importance within the tribe, hence the leader will have some serious holiness going on. It made me think back to British tribes – modern day ones – where there seems to be a similar hierarchy in relation to the amount and size of the piercings (and tattoos).
  4. Huge, heavy four and a half metre blow pipes are still used today (I had a go with one; it’s difficult to hold but fairly straight forward to line up). A muscular anaesthetic, found in the jungle and supposedly utilised in modern western medicine, is placed on the darts. It paralyses the animal, usually a monkey, but doesn’t contaminate the meat.

1 Comment

Filed under culture, ecuador, museums, south america