[photon_garden]

> The Maya Civilization, from Central America, was one of the most advanced ancient civilizations

The Maya are still around! I spent a few months in the Guatemalan highlands last year and all the kids in the village spoke Kaqchikel, one of the Mayan languages, at home.

(Young people speaking the language is key to language health.)

[tdeck]

The Maya are still around, but the Maya civilization's institutions were all destroyed. And the Spanish made a point of seeking out all the Maya books [1] they could find and burning them. So a lot of knowledge was lost.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maya_codices

[agentcoops]

For this reason, one of the most fascinating historical relics to me are the Incan Quipu [0]. Not only because their logic appears to be 'proto-computational' (at the very least a very complex system of encoding numeric and narrative information through sequences of knots that were also used directly for calculations), but since, neither in the form of a valuable material like gold nor obviously a book to be destroyed, a large enough number survived to this day. There are few traces of the past we know exist that might contain everything from astronomical calculations to old social-institutional histories.

They're comparable in that sense to the Heculaneum manuscripts, which researchers have lately made great progress on with deep learning [1]. I hope an equivalent initiative someday starts on the Quipu.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quipu [1] https://www2.cs.uky.edu/dri/herculaneum-papyrus-scrolls/

[pqtyw]

> narrative information through sequences of knots

It's unlikely any complex narratives could be encoded there, though.

Possibly a bit like the e.g. the Mycenaean Linear B script. Which is fully decoded and well understood. But despite having a full fledged writing system they mainly used it for accounting and such. They can tell us about how many goats, sheep and various good they had they had but don't tell as much about the society or history as such.

Heculaneum manuscripts are kind of the opposite from the Quipu in the sense that we have zero issues understanding the actual text/symbols just extracting them from the destroyed scrolls is rather complicated.

Minoan tablets are maybe a bit closer and little progress has been made there (then again we are fully capable of reading the script just have no clue about the language it was written in).

[agentcoops]

I agree with your point about the Heculaneum, but my understanding is we're far enough with research into the form of the Quipus to know that they aren't simply either a linear script or merely accounting data.

For a long time, it was thought that they indeed contained only the latter, but my certainly non-specialist grasp on the matter is that we now know they were used to encode much more than that. In addition to being used directly to verify calculations [0], they contained "histories, laws and ceremonies, and economic accounts" or, as the Spanish testified at the time: "[W]hatever books can tell of histories and laws and ceremonies and accounts of business is all supplied by the quipus so accurately that the result is astonishing"[1]. My---again crude---understanding is this was through embedding categories, names and relational data in addition to numbers, signaled not least through texture and color [2].

I likely come across as if I'm trying to over-inflate the Incan knots, but really it's just to say they appear to be a rather fascinating in-between of legal-administrative inscriptions, whose discovery transformed understanding of Roman institutions over the last century or so, and the straight-forward manuscripts of the Herculaneum.

[0] My elementary and probably out-of-date recollection: an emissary would come to towns with Quipus containing work orders, which would be validated with the community on the spot.

[1] https://www.jstor.org/stable/27087183

[2] https://read.dukeupress.edu/ethnohistory/article-abstract/65..., https://www.jstor.org/stable/483319

[brookst]

Quipus also make an appearance (alongside core rope memory, no less) in Harkaway’s excellent Gnomon.

[structuredPizza]

My immediate observation when I first learned of the Quipu and its use: nodes and edges.

Potentially a graph to be completed by the owner via verbal communication/interpretation as a supplement to the material instrument; a single source of information that could be interpreted differently depending on the societal role and vocation of the owner.

[Cantinflas]

The link doesn't mention "seeking out" those books, in fact it mentions catholic priests both burning and lamenting the burn.

[jacobolus]

They hunted down all of the libraries, collected all of the books inside, and burned them in massive bonfires, accidentally saving a total of like 3 books which had already been shipped back to Europe as trophies. I think there are also some remaining fragments of a few others. One Spaniard wrote about it:

> We found a large number of books in these characters and, as they contained nothing in which there were not to be seen superstition and lies of the devil, we burned them all, which they regretted to an amazing degree, and which caused them much affliction.

[antognini]

It is worth noting that the friar who organized this book burning was recalled to Spain to stand trial on account of his actions.

[alex_smart]

It is also worth noting that he was absolved of all crimes and eventually consecrated as a bishop.

[Larrikin]

Why is that worth noting?

[vintermann]

Because it's not what most people expect.

There was pushback against a lot of the evils of colonialism - most of them unsuccessful, like this one. Maybe we can learn lessons for fighting against the institutional evils of our time.

[hnidiots3]

Because it might not have been the “Spanish”, but certain people who ruined history. So it’s not fair to blame a whole country for the actions of a few.

[hopelite]

I would say because it highlights that even back then there was the same kind of tension as today between those who believe they are doing right, those who also believe they are doing right, and right never ending up being done in the end. It’s like ideological, metaphysical, and psychological border disputes and skirmishes, i.e., human nature.

Also, failing upwards of those who serve the dominant system is clearly not just a modern phenomenon.

[wtcactus]

Because a previous commenter wrongly said, "the Spanish made a point of seeking out all the Maya books". It wasn't "The Spanish" it were some individual actors clearly acting against "The Spanish" crown wishes.

[pqtyw]

It's complicated in the sense that there were both people trying to burn and destroy anything and those trying to preserve the books and the language doing their own stuff in parallel.

[wudangmonk]

I guess that is implied since these things always happen this way, its not like book burners are just having a nice campfire and the books they dislike just happen to be close by.

[shadyKeystrokes]

Well, we could attempt to reconstruct it from history and similar landempires. We could take babylonian or russian history and transpose it into the language. Then recreate some superiority atrocity justification mythology ("gods chosen people"/"sinners-born-unpure"-must be purged.) Then we take all the tribes that sided with the spaniards, whose history they wiped out and invent some colorful horror-stories that other them. So, the spaniards of the new world getting trampeled by the old world, who brought gonorreha home,creating hyper puritan std ethics, voila.. nothing of value was lost.

[throwup238]

I was surprised to find out that there are still many indigenous groups with populations in the millions. My California public education made it seem like they were all pretty much wiped out save for those who survived to the various reservation systems.

My favorite group is the Mapuche who managed to hold out against the Spaniards until they were conquered by Chile and Argentina in the late 19th century. They managed to thwart the conquistadors for centuries! It wasn’t until the modern era where military logistics got good enough to unseat them and overcome the advantages they had.

[jcranmer]

Even in the US, the Indian Wars weren't finished until the 1890s. In fact, most of the big wars against the Native Americans took place after the American Civil War. One of the big faults I have with US history in the education system is that it tends to front-load the depiction of Native Americans in the Precolonial portion of history, with an echo in the Trail of Tears and forced migration in the 1830s, and largely edits them out of the history of the settling of the west, despite this process requiring a very violent dispossession of the existing inhabitants.

[t1E9mE7JTRjf]

> most of the big wars against the Native Americans

As I learned it, most of the conflicts were between not against. Native Americans, became a term as a general catch all but those peoples saw themselves as quite diverse, and as such is something of a misnomer.

[jcranmer]

It's really hard to read this comment as anything other than "don't worry about the genocidal policy of the US with regards to the natives, for they were a violent people."

Indeed, it's actually an example of problem I lamented: the disinterest in covering Native American history post-founding of the US. The last of major conflicts between different Native American tribes took place around the 1850s, the lingering effects of the Lakota being pushed onto the Plains [1]. From that point on, all of the main conflicts are between the US and the various Native American tribes for a variety of reasons, although mainly "the US wants your land and isn't going to take 'no' for an answer."

[1] If you want to analyze the broader historical context, you of course have to ask "why did the Lakota move onto the Plains?" and following that thread of logic leads you to the first cause being "the English settled on the eastern coast."

[t1E9mE7JTRjf]

> It's really hard to read this comment as anything other than "don't worry about the genocidal policy of the US with regards to the natives, for they were a violent people."

This is a wild jump to make. I'm not sure I can take your comment in good faith as being serious.

[jcranmer]

I had the benefit of being able to write that comment after seeing the other replies you wrote to sibling comments, and those comments reinforce the impression that you believe in the inaccurate stereotype of Indians as "noble savages."

[idiotsecant]

Prior to western colonization of course the native people had conflicts, just not at the scale the colonizers could achieve. During the genocide of the natives some tribes used it as an excuse to kill their enemies, sometimes to curry favor with a technologically superior force, and sometimes just to kill their enemies. Some fought back against the invaders, with varying degrees of success. Most people just died.

None of that makes it less of a war against the native americans.

[t1E9mE7JTRjf]

> None of that makes it less of a war against the native americans

No that's exactly what it makes it, as their conflicts subtract from those with newer arrivals. Different groups fighting each other, and then other different groups from Europe came, and made allegiances with specific local groups, then collaborated in their conflicts.

It's worth understanding that 'western colonization' wasn't a singular coherent force. There were different foreign groups with different interests - who were fighting with each other in North America.

Similarly there were 'Native Americans' (quotes as this is a colonial term) pursuing their own interests, even going to Europe. I'm not sure it's your perspective but there is a popular historic image of native americans being a defenceless people who foreigners came and wiped out which simply isn't correct, and ironically quite colonial.

[idiotsecant]

There were plenty of regional wars among the native Americans. None of them resulted in widespread genocide and construction of concentration camps and reservations. In the initial Spanish 'not western colonization' nearly 8 million people died. By the 1900s there was nearly an 80% reduction in population and western populations were in possession of their resources.

Western nations came, they defeated their enemy, and they took their territory. What else do you call that?

[sethammons]

Look up the american bison. The US government's official policy was to eliminate bison to eliminate Indians/First Peoples. Mountains of skulls. In under a decade, the bison population was pushed down from 30-60M to approximately 500 individuals.

Did tribes fight and war and capture slaves? Yes. They did that for forever. Then colonization and disease and westward expansion. Look up the Trail of Tears, the genocide and/or ethnic cleansing.

Your education may align with propaganda. Even today, first people nations are actively having their history taken. Pete Hegseth, sec of def/war, has pushed to close the door on the massacre of wounded knee, enshrining the medals earned for slaughtering woman and children. https://www.nytimes.com/2025/09/27/us/hegseth-wounded-knee.h....

Look up how the US government stole native kids and sent them catholic schools to have the Indian taught out of them. A system that was purpose built to stop their way of life. Or forced, non-consented sterilization of native woman that was happening in the 60s and 70s.

If you somehow didn't know the US government's history of conflict and abuse of Native Americans, you should question your formal education. And you should do some light research.

[t1E9mE7JTRjf]

you seem used to issuing commands. best of luck with that approach. your cherry picked data points may be correct, but they are also misleading absent broader historical context. these groups had largely diminished already (as is well documented by historians of the period), so your subsequent points about x/y/z impact although valid don't carry weight. imo data driven arguments trump emotional appeals. Trail of tears and similar are powerful and empathy inducing for sure, but don't change the facts around which my comment was based. your presentation skews things to a false dichotomy of one group against another which is inaccurate and unproductive. current politicians (left or right) in the US don't change history (and no I didn't bother reading your nytimes link...).

> Did tribes fight and war and capture slaves? Yes. They did that for forever.

sounds like you're confused what point you are arguing.

[hitarpetar]

> these groups had largely diminished already (as is well documented by historians of the period

this is an obvious contradiction. how could colonial historians know that "these groups had diminished" before colonialism when they weren't there? troll better

[estearum]

Genocide is bad even if the victims are imperfect human beings

[tdeck]

This is also a difference in outcomes between traditional colonialism (where indigenous people were viewed as a source of labor) and settler colonialism (where indigenous people are viewed simply as "in the way"). That's not to say that traditional colonialism is in any way acceptable, however.

[gausswho]

The Mapuche even expanded their territorial control, in large part to their acquisition and mastery of Spanish horses.

[pjbk]

They also mainly continued to be loyal to the Spanish crown after Argentina and Chile went through their independence, and carried out the final pacification of the Mapuche territories in the 19th century. By then only a very small part of the population had not mingled with Europeans.

[pqtyw]

Relatively (adjusted by area and duration) not that many people from Spain moved to the Americas between 1500 and ~1800, especially compared to the British colonies in North America.

So they couldn't murder/expel (unlike the British/American colonists) most of the native population (especially considering that North America was much less densely inhabited to begin with) if they wanted someone to work in the mines and plantation (again relatively not that many slaves were imported to the mainland colonies as well).

France was similar (except they struggled even more with getting enough people to move to the colonies).

[WalterBright]

The Commanche also held out until after the Civil War.

[beerandt]

Was always weird to me how "the French and Indian War" had Indian involvement almost over emphasized to pretend like it wasn't the extension of a European war...

While all the other American conflicts with tons of Indian involvement (both sides, esp civil war) had it downplayed.

One of my first realizations of slant put on history.

[tdeck]

It's more properly a campaign of the Seven Years War, which was almost a world war of its time.

[beerandt]

>like it wasn't the extension of a European war...

[tdeck]

My comment wasn't intended as a "correction", just adding that historians seem to refer to this war by a different name these days. At least in the textbooks I learned from, it was discussed in the context of the Seven Years War.

[pqtyw]

The French and Indian war began 2 years before the war in Europe. So in a way it was the other way around (of course there were much more important factors than what was effectively an ongoing proxy war in faraway colonies)

[bboygravity]

I've been in towns in Mexico where the kids ONLY speak a Mayan language. No Spanish or English.

I asked for directions and just got blank stares until someone who spoke Spanish in the village explained, lol.

[xandrius]

Where for example? I'm curious!

[amypetrik8]

I was just in Silver Spring MD, just outside of Washington, DC, and I noticed that all those kids moved from Guatamala to DC! The American dream! All the kids in Silver Spring spoke Kaqchikel, one of the Mayan languages, at home. We need more Kaqchikel-speaking children in the Silver Spring area to add to diversity, so that it's not just a primarily Spanish-speaking-only area, but a Spanish-and-Kaqchikel speaking area.

[piokoch]

That is not that simple. They never invented the wheel, the Maya calendar cycled over 5128, which is not really convenient, numeric system was also rather uncomfortable, strange numerals working in 19-base system (but they have invented zero). In addition to that they've invented sadistic religion with human sacrifices and their culture was very aggressive, what finally put Maya civilization to an end, as everyone around happily joined European conquerors to get rid of Mayans ASAP.

[alephnerd]

> In addition to that they've invented sadistic religion with human sacrifices and their culture was very aggressive, what finally put Maya civilization to an end, as everyone around happily joined European conquerors to get rid of Mayans ASAP

That was the Aztec, an entirely different culture from the Mayans. The Mayan Kingdoms lasted until 1697.

[selimthegrim]

Mayans also did sacrifice, but it was mainly PoWs/losers in battle or of ballgames

[Throaway195]

The Mayans and the Amazon cultures more generally have been shown to have created monumental walkways and structures that we are only now uncovering form the jungle growth via lidar. The idea that they were technologically backwards is far out of date.

[AngryData]

They had the wheel, they just didn't find many practical uses for it without having either beasts of burden or nice relatively flat paved roads.

Wheels are great if you have something stronger than a human to pull it, or you only have to move it a short distance, or if you have a hard paved road. But pulling carts or wagons or wheelbarrows through rough terrain or muddy roads with just human power is absolute trash and not worth the effort, and moving things over small short distances alone isn't worth the specialized labor and cost of making decent wheel and axle systems without machine tools.

If you are still unsure, ask yourself why hikers and campers don't pull a cart or push a wheelbarrow everywhere they go instead of using a backpack even though they can have ultra light aluminum construction with pneumatic tires and ball bearing axles. All the effort you would save by using a wheelbarrow on smooth parts of your path would be undone by just a handful of random sticks or rocks you run into with it along the way.