Discussion: Early human society in the pre-neolithic

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • sgreger1
    Member
    • Mar 2009
    • 9451

    Discussion: Early human society in the pre-neolithic

    Hey, saw this cool temple which apparently may once again push back some fo the dates for when humans started building stuff and growing their own food.



    *The Temple at Gobekli Tepe

    In Turkey, there is an empty, uninhabited region overlooked by a ridge of mountains. On a hill at the base of those mountains is a temple unique in human history.

    Gobekli Tepe is a series of temples, built on top of each other over time. The oldest of 'layer' of temples is more than 11 000 years old. Do you understand how old that is?

    That's not just seven thousand years older than the Pyramids. Five thousand years older than the first cities in the fertile crescent. It's a thousand years before agriculture. The builders were nomads, living off of herds and foraging.

    It's before writing. So the whole thing was built by people whose knowledge had to be learned entirely in their lifetime and committed to memory. Can you imagine building a house with a group of people, when there aren't any diagrams or written instructions on length or weight? And the project took more than just your lifetimes? (Okay, maybe there were measured lengths of rope or something, but still.)
    So it existed almost alone on Earth, with no large permanent human settlements. Not in the middle of a city, or even near one, or at a time when our concept of 'cities' even existed. There are barely signs that people even lived at the site. It indicates humans who used it lived in nomadic villages nearby and it stood mostly empty. It was unimaginably unique at the time.

    We only think it was a temple because it was full of larger-than-life statues of humans and dozens of different animals. The concept of a bigger-than-life statue indicates respect and reverence, when it was believed that humans weren't sophisticated enough at the time to see themselves as gods, or worthy of worship.

    We know that Gobekli Tepe was in continuous use for more than three thousand years, and then buried. Not in an avalanche, not in a fire or storm. By hand. The entire ****ing complex was buried by hand. We know from the striations of earth that it was carried in from the land around and dumped. And it wasn't destroyed first, the buildings was intact. For whatever reason, after a 3 thousand year collaborative effort, someone came along and covered the whole thing in 500 cubic meters of soil.

    We do not know how a force large enough to construct, augment, and maintain such a substantial complex was mobilized and paid or fed in the conditions of pre-Neolithic society.

    Only 5% has been excavated. It's been picked at for decades because of competing claims on archeological rights. Who knows what else is in there.


    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gobekli_Tepe



    EDIT: To be clear, we refer to the Neolithic as the stone age and the paleolithic as the pre-stone age. This was built BEFORE the stone age in the pre-neolithic. That is how ****ing old this is.


    EDIT 2 for tom:

    This corresponds well with an ancient Sumerian belief that agriculture, animal husbandry and weaving had been brought to mankind from the sacred mountain Du-Ku, which was inhabited by Annuna (Annunaki)—deities, very ancient gods without individual names. Klaus Schmidt identifies this story as an oriental primeval myth that preserves a partial memory of the Neolithic.[16]
  • Darwin
    Member
    • Mar 2010
    • 1372

    #2
    Fascinating as this is I see little reason why isolated populations of human critters might have managed structures and methods hundred or even thousands of years "in advance" of the general run of homo sapiens. There are many many reasons why this local culture would have died out without their advances migrating farther abroad--disease, famine, conquest, etc. etc. Many of this culture's techniques might have survived as some sort of cultural or racial memory--knowledge clouded in mystery by time. This lot were simply far far before their time. Who knows how many close but no cigar moments occurred in the past dozen millenia? Now if they found such a culture that was, say, 100 thousand years old that would be a really big deal and very much harder to explain.

    Comment

    • Mykislt
      Member
      • Sep 2010
      • 677

      #3
      Lithos means stone. Paleo means old, neo means new. Paleolithic is the beginning part of the stone age, neolithic is the end of the stone age.

      I've recently witnessed with my own eyes a neolithic structure - Stonehenge. Of course it's not as old as Göbekli Tepe, but it certainly is mystical.

      Comment

      • sgreger1
        Member
        • Mar 2009
        • 9451

        #4
        Originally posted by Darwin View Post
        Fascinating as this is I see little reason why isolated populations of human critters might have managed structures and methods hundred or even thousands of years "in advance" of the general run of homo sapiens. There are many many reasons why this local culture would have died out without their advances migrating farther abroad--disease, famine, conquest, etc. etc. Many of this culture's techniques might have survived as some sort of cultural or racial memory--knowledge clouded in mystery by time. This lot were simply far far before their time. Who knows how many close but no cigar moments occurred in the past dozen millenia? Now if they found such a culture that was, say, 100 thousand years old that would be a really big deal and very much harder to explain.



        Absolutely, I think this whole thing is fascinating.



        This raises some question though, about the history of architecture and such. The pyramids are an architectural masterpiece and we have always been amazed by the level of skill we see exhibited in their construction. But to imagine that crude mega-structures structures were being made 7 thousand years before the pyramids were commisioned is just astounding. They couldn't possibly have had any units of measurement or mathematics or anything, right? Maybe lengths of rope or something, I dunno.


        What is most amazing to me though is the ongoing collaborative effort it must have taken to maintain this thing for 3,000 years. I find it absolutely fascinating that this place was kept running for 3k years with no formal management or government or authority organizing it. No one ever took ownership of it and in 3,000 years no wars were fought over it and no evidence of conflict at all is present in either the dig site or in the paintings on the walls.

        Their common religious beliefs attracted them there and made them inclined to build upon it for thousands of years without anyone telling them to or making them do it. I think that we owe a lot of man's early ambition to religion, the common belief in a higher power that is instinctual to humans and exhibited in every culture ever studied seems to be the driving force that caused men to build structures like this and settle down in cities to worship around the temple.


        No one else sees this? That religious tendencies are clearly built into us in some way, or that we are for some reason pre-disposed to believing in a higher power? Even before there was religions or churches, as far back as history goes and even into pre-history we see evidence of spiritual/religious beliefs. Even the neanderthals had religious practices and they aren't even of the same species as us. It must have some survival advantage, it seems to be the reason why we built these great structures at a time when mankind was just chillin in the jungle.




        And you'r right, I bet history is filled with a million times where a small group of people invented stuff and then were conquored or otherwise killed, so no one would figure it out again for thousands of years. But really, 3,000 years they ran this thing without conflict, and then suddenyl they burried it one day and no one ever tried to dig it up again? I dunno, sounds kinda wierd, I am curious for what reason they decided to bury it. Maybe the religion changed or something, who knows.

        Comment

        • sgreger1
          Member
          • Mar 2009
          • 9451

          #5
          Originally posted by Mykislt View Post
          Lithos means stone. Paleo means old, neo means new. Paleolithic is the beginning part of the stone age, neolithic is the end of the stone age.

          I've recently witnessed with my own eyes a neolithic structure - Stonehenge. Of course it's not as old as Göbekli Tepe, but it certainly is mystical.


          Oh thank you for the correction! I was under the impression that it was kind of like an "old stone age" (paleolithic) and a "new stone age" (neolithic), so I thought when common folks refered to the "stone age" they ment the neolithic, my bad . Still, the state of the world at the time makes a structure like this extremely amazing, it must have been the only structure erected in the entire land, imagine! I would love to see stonehenge in person, how was it? That has always been one of my dreams is to travel the world and see these places.



          EDIT: Stonehenge wasn't even built until 9,000 years after this temple, I just looked it up. That's insane! Stonehenge is just like this temple though because it was an ongoing effort for a very long time. The place was built abandoned reclaimed and built on again for such a long time it's hard to even grasp.

          Comment

          • Darwin
            Member
            • Mar 2010
            • 1372

            #6
            Yeah three millenia is an impressive achievement right enough. This indicates a very stable and productive local environment and the non-presence of major competing cultures over that time--unusually lengthy circumstances in both regards. Further research may illuminate which one abruptly changed but in any case it was a heck of a good run--longer than all but possibly the full breadth of Egyptian culture.

            Comment

            • bpc720
              Member
              • Dec 2010
              • 188

              #7
              @sgreger1...you need to read the book Uriel's Machine...It is all about that stuff and a little weirder things as well...excellent read

              Comment

              • sgreger1
                Member
                • Mar 2009
                • 9451

                #8
                Originally posted by bpc720 View Post
                @sgreger1...you need to read the book Uriel's Machine...It is all about that stuff and a little weirder things as well...excellent read
                Sounds like a cool book, I was always interested in the book of enoch as well since it tells kind of an odd story whe compared to it's sister texts in the bible.

                I believe that all the stories of floods that we see in christianity and most other religions must have some basis in truth. It's a mythical tale of some large event that must have happened during pre-history and lives on only in these long-removed tall tales we see in the bible and elsewhere. As far as I knew there is no evidence that there ever was a worldwide flood, but I think the prevalence of this story in every culture means it must come from one single origina, and the story likely arised for a reason. Could have been a tsunami that took out the "known world" and everyone's been talking about it since. Who knows.


                So far there is no evidence that there ever was a great deluge, there would be lots of signs that water covered everthing, but it's not there. But there has to be some grain of truth in these stories, I think that the flood may be referencing a local event, and since the story was orriginally told by whoemever survived it they probably interpreted it as though "the whole world had been flooded" when it could have just been a super-tsunami that only affected one region.

                Comment

                • sgreger1
                  Member
                  • Mar 2009
                  • 9451

                  #9
                  Originally posted by danielan View Post
                  The last glacial period ended 10,000 years ago. Logically, sea level has increased since then (say 200 feet over 12,000 years - since terminal pleistocene). Since many cultures hug the coasts - my pet theory is that there could have been relatively large civilizations that are now under water. I'm not a freak about it - and there isn't much accepted evidence, but when I am bored - I like to surf around and read about this sort of thing. Like the Okinawan undersea "ruins" - the ruins off the coasts of India, etc.

                  But, if we evaluated our civilization through what was left sticking out after a 200 foot increase in sea level - we would look simpler than we are. http://www.globalwarmingart.com/wiki/Special:SeaLevel

                  THIS THIS THIS THIS! This is exactly it right here and I think that eventually we will find more evedence of this. It makes the most sense.


                  In early times, it seems almost as if everyone who could decided to established their settlements near the water so they could fish and stuff. And with the glacial period ending, sea levels must have risen dramatically over the period of a few hundred years. The flooding almos surely didn't happen at once, but the whole "developed" world could have been destroyed by even a minor rise in sea levels during this time, giving rise to these myths about water destroying society and forcing us ro rebuild.


                  I've said it here before and i'll say it agin, I really think the flood stories have a basis in truth, that it is just a story of some important event that happened in pre-history. Looking at all the dates, it seems like instead of a dramatic worldwide flood, it may have just been a relatively quick rise in sea levels, and since a lot of people lived near the water it could have gotten rid of most of the cities. This is also probably where myths about atlantis came from, an "advanced" (to them) pre-apocalyptical society that was eaten by the ocean. Makes sense to me.



                  It appears to me that humans have had a few cycles, I think our history may go back further than we think, or at least what we accomplished and when. The book of enoch tells a story where this guy Enoch is in some way made aware of the posibility of some future cataclysm, and he is told "by the gods" how to build an observatory and learn how to follow the celestial bodies as they move across the horizon. With this he could predict when the asteroid or whatever was going to hit and therefore avert certain disaster. Do I think it's true? No, but I think it's story is probably true in a sense. I think we have figured out math and astronomy and other relatively complex stuff a few times before, but I think nature has wiped us out or thinned our numbers more than once before.


                  Remember, during the end of that glacial period we are talking about scientists believe that as few as 1,000 breeding pairs survived the sea level increase. For all intents and purposes this means mankind died out and a single village worth of people was left to rebuild, more or less. It's consistent with your flood theory because we can see genetically that at some point all but a small number of humans died, and those humans had to rebuild from the ground up. Like you said, we only look on the surface and make our estimates based on that. Not too many places where we have dug 200 feet of soil out so it will be a long time till we know what lies further down.



                  If I had to take a random guess, I would say that, all things beign cyclical in nature, humans have probably been kicked down a peg once or twice before and were forced to start all over. Religious stories and myths are filled with this concept of "we built it, god destroyed it through natural disasters, we rebuilt it". Rinse and repeat. Will probably happen again, we have routine extinctions here on earth and we've been doing good since it's been quiet on earth for the past several thousand millenia, but soon enough we'll see some big event come kill everything off, it happens like clockwork every so often and I doubt something suddenly changed that just because we are here.


                  If our entire society was destroyed and covered in 200 feet of mud, it would be thousands of years before they ever found out about us. If they waited too long, the evidence would be gone. Almost nothing survives the time periods we are tlaing about here, hundreds of thousands of years don't leave a whole lot behind, no newspapers or paper records will last that long on the material we write on today.

                  Comment

                  • charmando
                    Member
                    • Oct 2010
                    • 151

                    #10
                    [QUOTE=sgreger1;388054]

                    No one else sees this? That religious tendencies are clearly built into us in some way, or that we are for some reason pre-disposed to believing in a higher power? Even before there was religions or churches, as far back as history goes and even into pre-history we see evidence of spiritual/religious beliefs. Even the neanderthals had religious practices and they aren't even of the same species as us. It must have some survival advantage, it seems to be the reason why we built these great structures at a time when mankind was just chillin in the jungle.
                    /QUOTE]

                    We are pre-disposed to belief in a higher power because there is no way to know about the inanimate forces that connect everything in the universe. (as of now. For all I know there may be some dramatic change in human conscious tomorrow which explains everything) Fear stems from the ignorance of causes and mankind invents superstition to explain causal forces attempting to eliminate fear.

                    Comment

                    • sgreger1
                      Member
                      • Mar 2009
                      • 9451

                      #11
                      Originally posted by charmando View Post
                      We are pre-disposed to belief in a higher power because there is no way to know about the inanimate forces that connect everything in the universe. (as of now. For all I know there may be some dramatic change in human conscious tomorrow which explains everything) Fear stems from the ignorance of causes and mankind invents superstition to explain causal forces attempting to eliminate fear.


                      Yah of course, but that doesn't change the fact that it exists. I mean no god has to exist for people to be inclined to believe that he does. Think about it, we develop inteligence one day and yet are stuck in the jungle to ponder the universe. Naturally, based on the way our brains are programmed to work, we start assuming that someone must have "created" it and that some "higher power" must controll all the processes like the sun rising and setting. Sure we know now that it's all bullshit, but it is clear that since the very beginning humans seem predisposed to believing that a god exists.


                      I am happy that this is the case, even if it did lead to all of our religious conflict later on, we can't forget that religion and beer is the reason why humans built the modern world for the most part.


                      I didn't mean to imply that there must be a god just because lots of people believe in one, I just mean that we must admit that humans have always seemed to believe in god(s) since the begining, and that this belief caused them to build things like the pyramids or this temple. The desire to build monuments to our gods may have been the reason why we invented the concept of building things in the first place, humans seemed happy living in the forest for a long time, then suddenly huge religious empires rose to power and these became the first proto-states. I think religion played a big part in the development of mankind, sadly, like all things, it is no longer needed and is currently causing more harm than good, but again that is my subjective opinion and may be completely wrongh as it is shaded with my own biasis.




                      Early religions seemed to worship animals, than later on nature, the sun etc, then we started worshipping the other heavenly bodies, and then we started thinking of god as a single guy sitting up there dictating it all. I think our opinions on religion have changed a lot over time and understanding this may help us understand how humans think in general. There are few forces in human culture that hold as much weight as religion, it's pretty much been the driving force behind everything since the begining from where i'm standing.

                      Comment

                      • ratcheer
                        Member
                        • Jul 2010
                        • 621

                        #12
                        I studied this stuff extensively about 15-20 years ago. They may seem far-fetched, but I also recommend the works of Zecharia Sitchin, who presents a case that the Annunaki were the patterns of our "gods". He thinks they colonized earth many thousands of years ago from some other location in outer space. They are mentioned in Genesis.

                        Tim

                        Comment

                        • Mordred
                          Member
                          • Dec 2009
                          • 342

                          #13
                          Very interesting, thanks for bringing this to my attention. I don't buy the "aliens posing as gods" kind of ideas, but discoveries like these show us how little we truly know about ancient history. I'll look into this more when I have some time.

                          Comment

                          • Roo
                            Member
                            • Jun 2008
                            • 3446

                            #14
                            Agriculture and the domestication of animals were the most significant events to our development. Without them people simply would not have had time to build monuments or ponder the hereafter. With these advancements it is possible to store and preserve foodstuffs for later consumption, allowing for a class system of farmers, workers (builders), merchants, priests, and kings, giving rise to your pyramids and such.

                            Comment

                            • sgreger1
                              Member
                              • Mar 2009
                              • 9451

                              #15
                              Originally posted by ratcheer View Post
                              I studied this stuff extensively about 15-20 years ago. They may seem far-fetched, but I also recommend the works of Zecharia Sitchin, who presents a case that the Annunaki were the patterns of our "gods". He thinks they colonized earth many thousands of years ago from some other location in outer space. They are mentioned in Genesis.

                              Tim

                              Yah i've read his stuff. My issue with his claims is that he is the only one who has this interpretation of the Summerians it seems. It is his translations that are used to make these claims and everywhere I looked on the internet just linked to his work.


                              I know that mainstream historians state that the Summerians believed the annunaki lived on this aprticular mountain and it was on that mountain from which the gods brought knwoledge of agriculture and astronomy and pottery and medicine etc. I like the ancient alien hypothesis a lot but again there is no evidence in favor of it at this time other than the fact that we know people were reporting UFO sightings back then, and the religious texts seem to allude to humans talking to someone who came from the sky.

                              Remember though, we can't read a tribal legend from several thousand years ago and believe it at face value.


                              The annunaki are mentioned in genesis, but that' only because the jews plagarized a lot of the torah from older works that were commonly available at the time of their writing. The story of genesis is kind of like a dumbed down version of the orriginal story told by the sumerians, but for the torah they left out a lot of the things that didn't jive with the new religion they were trying to start sothey only left ina passing reference to giants and the annunaki.



                              I want to believe that so much but I just don't know how they could have come here and taught us everything and not left a single trace of their existence behind.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X