Hey clad

[cladking]

Do you feel you can trust historical sources, clad? They certainly had a different point of view and didn't have snopes.com...

Generally, yes.

But "trust" may be way too big of a word. People have a unique way of viewing reality that has evolved over the eons. Most people in any given culture share this viewpoint. It is a construct not only of education and language but is passed down to us from birth.

Most ancient peoples considered accuracy and truthfullness to be related, important, and necessary. If they didn't understand something they wouldn't relate it and if they did they'd be certain that it conformed to their understanding. People today play very fast and loose with ideas and facts. Even scientists will relate things that are so wholly ambiguous they could be describing anything from a firefly to a supernova.

There is a strong tendency for facts to get twisted in a generational chinese telephone but the end product is usually quite close to the initial reality. Myth is probably intentionally designed to allow a more accurate retelling. Much of the reality of ancient Egypt is visible in the myths. It appears that before the invention of writing this accuracy was even much higher since there were oral traditions which were passed down verbatum. When writing appeared the oral traditions ceased as superfluous and most human history was lost. (probably)

I found a new resource that might open up a lot of new leads. I'll get back to you on it.

I also wrote out a list of referents this morning for another site. I'll place it in a different post.