It could very well be yet another example of bad translation methods based on modern contextual influences and gross unfounded presumptions about past cultures. Traditional archaeology has proven itself to be extremely...
- chicken-scratched glyphs determine the provenance of the block they're envgraved into.
- assuming a single linear culture was responsible for everything we see there.
Lacking a basic understanding of human nature:
- neglecting to consider that a latter culture would reuse and adapt artifacts, structures, etc., remaining from a previous culture.
- using the presence of the most recent culture to date the provenance of the entire vicinity.
- not taking into account the intelligence of the ancients, the true complexity and advanced nature of the stonework, the resources (knowledge, energy, tools, methods) required to achieve that stonework, and the time required for technological development.
How can any of us ever know, when all we can do is think?