If pre-colombian South America lacked writing, doesn't this negate the axiom that a state cannot exist without written language?
wait, that's not an Inca painting.
That's eight-deer
or eight-dog
>>821924
ceramics
Protip: take a lesson from biology, there are always exceptions to the rule.
>a state cannot exist without written language
A State needs division of labor.
>>821939
eight-deer was a legendary aztec ruler
observe the number of beads and the animal head on the right of the painting
their names always began with a number because they all had first names literally signifying their date of birth.
>>821944
hm, interesting point, except can we apply positive science rules to humanities?
>>821945
division of labour is a necessary but not adequate condition
or are you saying they were stuck in civilisation-building limbo?
No, they were well-structured states.
>>821947
>hm, interesting point, except can we apply positive science rules to humanities?
It wasn't meant literally, but it certainly seems to be a common pattern.
>>821924
What axiom is that?
State is a fucking broad term. A bunch of tribal confederacies can form a state if they have some sort of council to govern shit among them. Like Steppe Nomads in Central Asia for the longest time.
>>821924
You're confused. History cannot exist without written records (though we now make an exception for reliable oral records that survived to the present day, as these systematically get recorded.) Some also claim that writing is a obligatory feature for civilizations, in the absence of which we should be talking about cultures rather than civilizations.
But none of this means prehistoric polities were stateless.
>>821956
the reasoning behind it is that orders cannot be official until written, because oral speech can be falsified. Decrees, orders and regulations should be recognisable and not be open to interpretation, to give you a loose definition of the axiom.
>>821924
I always thought writing followed the state. You establish an order and eventually bureaucrats trying to regulate and manage start writing.
The Mayans developed a state and a written language.
The again I think there are only like four civilizations that developed written language on their own and didn't copy from neighbors who had written language: China, Egypt, Mayan, Mesopotamia or Babylon.
>>821965
but isn't all history, the history of civilisations? And aren't all civilisations class societies?
If there were cultures in South America that were proven to be class societies, how can we not fit them into history?
>>821966
>Oral speech can be falsified
>Written orders can't be falsified
What bizarro dimension do you hail from?
>>821976
You've managed to commit 3 logical fallacies in 3 sentences. Impressive.
>>821981
If there is care taken of putting an order down on paper, there will be blame for it not being carried out. Also, the written word will reach far from the center carrying one message. Writing protects the message from not being remembered, from being interpreted according to the perception of the messenger etc.
>>821947
>their names always began with a number because they all had first names literally signifying their date of birth.
That's so awesome.
And way more interesting than the current hispanic system.
>>821995
and most importantly, it proves to the recipient the validity of the order.
>>821954
And the structure comes from the division of labor, not the existence of a scribe class while almost everyone else is illiterate.
>>822073
division of labour, per se, is what the name is: specialisation.
I am talking about hierarchical structures.
There is also another problem to the marxian axiom: commerce; they didn't have money, according to (western) historians. But they certainly had surplus. Did they engage in commerce?
See, we know they had surplus, otherwise they wouldn't have a class society. They (i.e. pre-colombian cultures/civilisations) also had a state. But they managed to maintain it without written language.
>>822085
>division of labour, per se, is what the name is: specialisation.
>I am talking about hierarchical structures.
They are one and the same, because some specialize in ruling the place, as they are raised from birth just for that.
>Did they engage in commerce?
Worst case scenario, you still have barter and/or primitive currency like salt, corn, etc.
>>822116
>They are one and the same, because some specialize in ruling the place, as they are raised from birth just for that
true, good point
>Worst case scenario, you still have barter and/or primitive currency like salt, corn, etc.
yes, I thought about that.
But what about the argument of writing?
There is a state. But there is no writing.
>>821969
What about Ge'ez ( Ethiopian) script?
>>822135
the point is, you need to have writing to have a state, according to the marxian axiom. But in this case, of South America, there has been lack of writing during the greatest empires' eras. How could that be?
>>821924
Who said a state cant exist without writing?
>>822421
it's a marxian axiom
>>822713
So it's writen in the bible :^)
>>822750
at least I question it
>>822750
no, it has a reasoning behind it, but it was obviously too much of a burden for you to read the thread.
![033-quipus-knuepfschnuere-farbenbeispiel[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/FjHXcSU.jpg "033-quipus-knuepfschnuere-farbenbeispiel[1].jpg")
Supposedly the Inca state used pic related instead of writing letters between cities. Very interesting.
>>823456
is this scripture however or a method of accounting?
>>821924
google quipu
>>822135
>What about Ge'ez ( Ethiopian) script?
Comes originally from Egyptian.
Indus Valley script may have been independent, and there were potentially more, it's not clear if they were fully able to express language or only partially. Nsibidi in Nigeria, inca knot/rope shit or those easter Island runes for example. Some people think of the vinca symbols as a script too.
>>823472
a nemotechnical system with color codes
yeah it was used to keep records of stuff like taxes, etc. but also for military communications
