eyeofhorus33 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Sam
>
> You wrote:
>
> "When you say someone believed in countless
> gods and effective magic you are necessarily
> calling them bumpkins."
>
> What nonsense.
>
> Does anyone consider Ancient Greeks or Romans, or
> for that matter modern day Hindus - who also
> "believed in countless gods" to be
> "bumpkins" ?
>
> Please stop promoting this ridiculous assertion -
> you are the only person who is convinced of it,
> and each time you incorporate it into your
> discussion you do yourself a disservice.

Sorry eoh but you've made an erroneous assumption. CK isn't the only person convinced of it.
Egyptologists are still calling the AE "primitive" which is pretty much the same thing as 'bumpkin'.
Sometimes they try to reconcile the primitive tools and primitive religion with adjectives such as 'highly skilled' (skill compensating for the primitive tools).

The Greeks and Romans had many gods but they also had wheels, pulleys, chariots, books, libraries, a political system, plumbing, etc etc. All that they had would not qualify for bumpkin/primitive so it's no surprise they are not called bumpkins. You probably wouldn't, but I would, call modern Hindus 'bumpkins' because of their views of women.

Guess it all comes down to what you consider to be intellectually advanced. Yes I know these are the finer points of a debate but you might consider reflecting on why Egyptologists still call the AE primitive.