This is topic Historical Basis Question in forum Discussions About Orson Scott Card at Hatrack River Forum.


To visit this topic, use this URL:
http://www.hatrack.com/ubb/main/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=1;t=005326

Posted by Jenos (Member # 12168) on :
 
I just recently reread Pastwatch, and after reading it for the first time in a few years, one big thing struck me. How valid is the theory that slavery emerged from human sacrifice? Did OSC simply formulate this theory based entirely on the evidence he presents in the book, or are there actual historians/anthropologists/etc who actually support this(and if there are, could you please point me toward them)?
 
Posted by Javert (Member # 3076) on :
 
Is that what he says in the book? I haven't read it in years. Might have to pick it up again.

As a very, very, very amateur historian, it has always been my guess that slavery emerged as a natural consequence of war. Which you might be able to argue is an abstract form of human sacrifice, if you believe you're fighting to satisfy a deity.
 
Posted by Sean Monahan (Member # 9334) on :
 
It's been years since I read it as well, but I don't recall OSC formulating this theory in the book. I recall that the slavery conquest of Europe over the New World was a result of removing the human sacrifice conquest of the New World over the East, but not that slavery arose from human sacrifice directly.

But like I said, it's been years so I could be wrong.
 
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
 
I remember that idea from OSC's story "Atlantis", which was significantly shortened to become a chapter in Pastwatch.
 
Posted by Jenos (Member # 12168) on :
 
*spoilers*

The idea was more that in Atlantis, which is discovered via Pastwatch, one innovative thinker decided not to kill the human sacrifices but instead use them for labor, as a result this thinker started gaining status in the society with the new source of labor, and the practice caught on and replaced human sacrifice. The argument put out in the book, among other arguments, is that this was the reason the tribes in the America did not adopt slavery - they retained human sacrifice and as such never stepped away from it.

I'm curious if that theory holds any actual weight - are there anthropologists who support the idea that human sacrifice is what evolved into slavery?

Also, I was wondering if the whole potential invasion of europe that is put forth in the book also has any actual basis.
 
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
 
I know of no historical basis for this idea. I'd guess that it sprang fully formed from the author's head.

[ March 21, 2010, 12:14 AM: Message edited by: mr_porteiro_head ]
 


Copyright © 2008 Hatrack River Enterprises Inc. All rights reserved.
Reproduction in whole or in part without permission is prohibited.


Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classic™ 6.7.2