That's understandable. I main point is that in pursuing such knowledge it's probably better to look at the raw information first, then expand from that. The problem when you point to a certain group being behind something so long ago you are relying on the information provided by such group to even believe they were in it. Only victors write history after all. A just as likely scenario is that those in power posthumously adopted achievers in the past to be part of their group.
I have kept this vague intentionally, as throughout history it's a very common theme from European to Asian dynasties to rewrite history and build established heroes of legend as being their own. The simplest example that applies here is the adoption of the Roman empire of Greek gods, going so far as to rename them and claim they were always their gods.
That's understandable. I main point is that in pursuing such knowledge it's probably better to look at the raw information first, then expand from that. The problem when you point to a certain group being behind something so long ago you are relying on the information provided by such group to even believe they were in it. Only victors write history after all. A just as likely scenario is that those in power posthumously adopted achievers in the past to be part of their group.
I have kept this vague intentionally, as throughout history it's a very common theme from European to Asian dynasties to rewrite history and build established heroes of legend as being their own. The simplest example that applies here is the adoption of the Roman empire of Greek gods, going so far as to rename them and claim they were always their gods.