> Meaning the ancients did have civilization, even
> highly advanced civilization, we just don't
> recognize it as such because it's different in
What do you suggest would be the nature of a "highly advanced civilization" so different it would be unrecognizable as such to us today? What is seen prior to 10,000BC is easily recognizable for what it is which does not hint at such things.
> Agriculture is often named as a prerequisite for
> civilization. Even though humans for tens of
> thousands of years were perfectly capable of
> civilization, it didn't happen because they didn't
> have agriculture.
> Let's take the highly conservative wikipedia, and
> what it says about the "History of agriculture"
Agriculture involves the domestication of
> plants. Data from molecular and archaeological
> research generated over the past 15 years now
> makes it clear that agriculture began
> independently over a much larger area of the globe
> than was once thought, and included a diverse
> range of taxa. At least 11 regions of the Old and
> New World were involved as independent centers of
> origin, encompassing geographically isolated
> regions on most continents, but several more have
> been suggested.
> It developed independently in at least 11
> Doesn't this strike you as very strange?
It would if I took this as face value. I think the "independent invention" is debatable which I am sure they are going by the difference in the crops/strains themselves as evidence of such which says nothing about the diffusion of the agricultural methods in the first place.
From this Wiki article which I cite for convenience:
It was not until after 9500 bc that the eight so-called founder crops of agriculture appear: first emmer and einkorn wheat, then hulled barley, peas, lentils, bitter vetch, chick peas and flax. These eight crops occur more or less simultaneously on Pre-Pottery Neolithic B (PPNB) sites in the Levant, although the consensus is that wheat was the first to be grown and harvested on a significant scale.
Now that I find very strange.
Also, case in point RE diffusion:
On Cyprus the oldest agricultural settlement ever found on a Mediterranean island has been discovered in Klimonas. Between 9100 and 8600 bc organized communities were farming and built half-buried mud brick communal buildings 10 meters in diameter surrounded by dwellings that were likely also used to store the village's harvests. Remains of carbonized seeds of local plants and grains introduced from the Levantine coasts (including emmer, one of the first Middle Eastern wheats) have also been found at Klimonas.
Also note the evidence of "mud brick communal buildings" c. 9100-8600BC on an island in the Mediterranean:
Also quite interesting.
> For 50,000 years humans didn't engage in
> agriculture, then, after several thousand years of
> global devastation and upheaval, it develops
> independently all over the globe.
The Americans have legends about civilizers from across the sea, "gods" like Quetzalcoatl, who taught the indigenous people agriculture among other things associated with "civilization".
> Either an ancient advanced civilization didn't
> engage in agriculture like post-glacial humans
> did, or all traces got erased. But the knowledge
> was clearly there.
Traces are starting to be found, like at Ohallo II in the Levant. Just like agriculture could not have sprung up overnight in the Levant, neither could the stone work of Gobekli Tepe which is but one of several sites from this "civilization" suggesting an even earlier origin. Interesting that Gobekli Tepe appears in around 9500BC, most sophisticated from its beginnings, and at the same time the so-called "founder crops" show up in the nearby Levant.
> At least I can't think of
> another way to have have it spring up
> independently like this.
Perhaps it actually did not.
> So perhaps we don't recognize the traces they left
> because they did things differently.
Agriculture is swell and all, but just to have the rudimentary beginnings of it does not in and of itself give rise to "civilization" and should be noted that pottery, i.e. the ability to store grains, is part and parcel the success of agriculture which has long been suggested what gave rise to it on a larger scale in the first place.
Edited 7 time(s). Last edit at 19-Apr-16 16:02 by Thanos5150.