|
Post by King Kodiak on Mar 15, 2019 4:00:13 GMT -5
Choosing king of beasts is only a personal opinion. Not really. up to the year 1200 AD, the bear was considered “king of the beasts” in basically all of Europe. The bear cults were just overwhelming. Bears were thought to have special powers and to take human females. The church did not like these cults so it gave the title of “king of the beasts” to the lion.
|
|
|
Post by King Kodiak on Mar 15, 2019 4:04:15 GMT -5
Brobear: wow we basically wrote the same thing, i did not even see your message before i posted mine. Looks like we are on the same page, LOL.
|
|
|
Post by King Kodiak on Mar 15, 2019 4:17:36 GMT -5
THE LION WAS NOT ALWAYS THE KING, THE BEAR PRECEDED HIM FOR SEVERAL MILLENNIA. I WENT BACK IN TIME, WIDENED MY INVESTIGATION AND FINALLY ARRIVED AT THE CONVICTION THAT, IN A LARGE PART OF EUROPE, THE BEAR HAD BEEN KING OF THE BEASTS LONG BEFORE THE LION.
|
|
|
Post by BruteStrength on Mar 15, 2019 9:11:45 GMT -5
Choosing king of beasts is only a personal opinion. Nah a bear is definitely the king of beats.
|
|
|
Post by BruteStrength on Mar 15, 2019 9:13:30 GMT -5
See this is why the bear is much better than big cats because I don't hear of no lion cults or tiger cults.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 15, 2019 13:02:26 GMT -5
Again, thats a personal opinion. Based on somebodies own personal criteria.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 15, 2019 13:30:15 GMT -5
Choosing king of beasts is only a personal opinion. Much more to it than that korol. In all of Europe, among all the animals, the bears was the most feared, the most respected, the most admired, and the one worshiped in cults widespread throughout Europe. The oldest evidence being the skull of a brown bear buried with a man in a primitive tomb 80,000 years ago. Neanderthal man probably worshiped bears. For certain they showed them special honors. The oldest known statue ever discovered is that of a bear. Now, the lion was indeed hand-picked. The big African cat was decided upon and chosen by the Church as a replacement animal for the bear. Bear cults were too common. Also, there were many superstitious beliefs about the bear. And so, the Church waged war upon the bear and replaced his image with that of a lion. Well, that doesnt have anything to do with who is the king of beasts. Thats again another unscientific, subjective personal opinion. Just because what people would have thought about one animal who directly affected them in a country doesnt mean anything.
|
|
|
Post by King Kodiak on Mar 15, 2019 13:36:08 GMT -5
Again, thats a personal opinion. Based on somebodies own personal criteria. Bear cults. Not a single person. Most European people of the era before 1200 AD. Many bear cults in caves, rituals, wall carvings, cults with bear skulls, skeletons, oldest statue. Most cults had to to with the bear than any other animal.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 15, 2019 13:47:09 GMT -5
Maybe because thats in europe where bears directly affect their lives? Read my other post.
|
|
|
Post by King Kodiak on Mar 15, 2019 14:06:37 GMT -5
Maybe because thats in europe where bears directly affect their lives? Read my other post. Yeah we are talking about Europe before 1200 AD.
|
|
|
Post by brobear on Mar 15, 2019 14:08:04 GMT -5
Much more to it than that korol. In all of Europe, among all the animals, the bears was the most feared, the most respected, the most admired, and the one worshiped in cults widespread throughout Europe. The oldest evidence being the skull of a brown bear buried with a man in a primitive tomb 80,000 years ago. Neanderthal man probably worshiped bears. For certain they showed them special honors. The oldest known statue ever discovered is that of a bear. Now, the lion was indeed hand-picked. The big African cat was decided upon and chosen by the Church as a replacement animal for the bear. Bear cults were too common. Also, there were many superstitious beliefs about the bear. And so, the Church waged war upon the bear and replaced his image with that of a lion. Well, that doesnt have anything to do with who is the king of beasts. Thats again another unscientific, subjective personal opinion. Just because what people would have thought about one animal who directly affected them in a country doesnt mean anything. OK, you're trying to be a scientist about it. In that respect, no, there is no such animal as "The King of Beasts". We all know that. Nevertheless, the title is indeed earned by gaining the ( as I said ) fear, admiration, and/or respect. In ancient Europe, the bear was above all other animals revered by the vast majority of the people. In other parts of the world, other animals held this position. Consider that as far back as the Ice-Age, in Europe, among the mega-beasts, giant hyenas, and giant lions, it was the bear, both cave bear and brown bear that, suggested by evidence discovered, was given the greatest admiration ( possibly worship ) by both the Neanderthal and Cro-magnon peoples.
|
|
|
Post by brobear on Mar 15, 2019 15:03:07 GMT -5
So, exactly what is it about the bear that man-kind will place him above others equally as savage and dangerous? According to Michel Pastoureau, many animals of other parts of the world, such as the lion, the tiger, and the eagle, have been given special honors by its people, including even cults. But none to such a degree as the bear. Let's consider his great strength ( denied by die-hard cat lovers of course ). But then couple this strength with almost unsurpassed intelligence. So, here we have great strength coupled with great intelligence. But perhaps what these people saw too is the bear's human-like qualities. He is sometimes seen standing, sitting, or in other man-like positions. His food choices are like those of man. A bear with his hide removed has an uncanny appearance of being human.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 15, 2019 15:15:47 GMT -5
Again, there is no king of beasts, its a personal opinion. Maybe you are a irrational Neanderthal, but the world isnt and use their brain to admire the animal that is their spirit animal. No title is earned, its all an opinion regardless, especially by irrational people. Dont be a non-objective fanboy.
|
|
|
Post by tom on Mar 15, 2019 15:30:32 GMT -5
Korol, I think Brobear responded to you that scientifically there is no king of beasts with this statement.
How would you even quantify "King of Beasts" What does that mean? Strongest, biggest, best fighter, what?? Your right it's a name nothing more. It's given to an animal by humans as Brobear stated that was worshiped, admired etc. for what ever reason or belief they had at the time.
|
|
|
Post by brobear on Mar 15, 2019 18:58:53 GMT -5
Thank you Tom. And the point is, that today the lion carries the title of King of Beasts. He was carefully hand-picked by the ancient Church. I don't think that the Church could have made a better choice. Here at the Domain, we have a topic titled, "Bears Surviving in Africa". We openly admit that in Africa, the grizzly's status in the food chain would be third place after the crocodile and the lion. Then we must look at more. The lion's regal mane, his loud roar, and the fact that he has a harem of females that serve him, and usually a coalition of males that fight together making the lion virtually undefeatable by any other predator. We here at the domain do not deny the lion this honor. But, the bear was equally as deserving. All this in the hearts and minds of men; for the animal remain clueless of the concept. One last thought; the title of "king of Beasts" was not bestowed upon either by a panel of scientists. There is more to life than scientific data.
|
|
|
Post by King Kodiak on Mar 15, 2019 19:12:38 GMT -5
DOUG PEACOCK. THE INDIANS THOUGHT THAT THESE BEARS WERE GODS SENT DOWN TO EARTH TO MAKE MEN HUMBLE.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 15, 2019 19:27:47 GMT -5
Thank you Tom. And the point is, that today the lion carries the title of King of Beasts. He was carefully hand-picked by the ancient Church. I don't think that the Church could have made a better choice. Here at the Domain, we have a topic titled, "Bears Surviving in Africa". We openly admit that in Africa, the grizzly's status in the food chain would be third place after the crocodile and the lion. Then we must look at more. The lion's regal mane, his loud roar, and the fact that he has a harem of females that serve him, and usually a coalition of males that fight together making the lion virtually undefeatable by any other predator. We here at the domain do not deny the lion this honor. But, the bear was equally as deserving. All this in the hearts and minds of men; for the animal remain clueless of the concept. One last thought; the title of "king of Beasts" was not bestowed upon either by a panel of scientists. There is more to life than scientific data.
There is also more to life than delusionalism and referring to somebody elses favoritism for satisfy your own fanboyism. Its all a personal opinion, if you like bears, you say bears are the king. If you like lions you say lions are the king. Doesnt make any animal king. Its a personal opinion based on personal criterian. Science is something debatable, it is an observation of objective facts, something that didnt exist until the past few hundred years along with democracy (if you are smart enough) to take advantage of.
|
|
|
Post by King Kodiak on Mar 15, 2019 19:39:12 GMT -5
Understood, every side thinks their favorite animal is the “king of the beasts”, we all agree there. But what you are not understanding is the fact that up to the year 1200 AD, in Europe, the animal that was thought by MOST people to the “king of the beasts” was the bear more than any other animal. We already told you why, alot more bear cults, rituals, men being buried next to bear skulls. Not to mention that bears always beat lions in the Roman games. Bears were the “original” king of the beasts. Then the church gave the lion that name because it waged war on the bear, not because the lion did anything to deserve it.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 16, 2019 2:31:16 GMT -5
Lions are called the king of the beast because of their mane, majestic roar, and the ability to rule prides (which is basically their kingdom). Just as a king has many wives, so does the lion but one on one, a brown bear is stronger than a lion.
|
|
|
Post by brobear on Mar 16, 2019 4:23:12 GMT -5
korol says: There is also more to life than delusionalism and referring to somebody elses favoritism for satisfy your own fanboyism. Its all a personal opinion, if you like bears, you say bears are the king. If you like lions you say lions are the king. Doesnt make any animal king. Its a personal opinion based on personal criterian. Science is something debatable, it is an observation of objective facts, something that didnt exist until the past few hundred years along with democracy (if you are smart enough) to take advantage of. You really don't get it. We are talking about one single animal ( the bear ) among thousands of species, that man-kind ( two species of them ) placed above all others for tens of thousands of years. We are talking about how bears were perceived in peoples minds. But, yes we also look at bears through the eyes of a scientist. I realize that wild animals do not crown kings. And, this is not about "I say the bear is the "King of Beasts". This is not about our person perceptions here at the Domain. It is history. Scientifically; bears are omnivores who evolved to become at size-parity ( measured from nose to rump ) much heavier and physically stronger that any big cat. Also far superior in intelligence. Does this crown the bear as king? No. A cat is a superior hunter and can certainly beat any bear in the high-jump or distance-jump. Do we here at the domain admire the bear? Yes.
|
|