Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 5
Big Bad Voodoo

Göbekli Tepe-10 000 BC

298 posts in this topic

His argument for dating doesn't seem to address the artifact assemblages associated with the site that place it right in the early Neolithic.

And why do you think they'll find Balearic culture in Mesopotamia?

Similar to the circle stones of Menorca, the other sites around Gobeki tepe are square.:)

http://www.flickr.co...ras/5527852084/

http://www.ancient-w...key.htm#turkish sites

Edited by docyabut2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Similar to the circle stones of Menorca, the other sites around Gobeki tepe are square. :)

http://www.flickr.co...ras/5527852084/

http://www.ancient-w...key.htm#turkish sites

There's a basic similarity, yes, but that's not uncommon for many neolithic sites. But the Talayotic culture is also different in many aspects, including the distinctive talayots themselves and the city designs, as well as the navetes and other monuments. And they're really far away.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's a basic similarity, yes, but that's not uncommon for many neolithic sites. But the Talayotic culture is also different in many aspects, including the distinctive talayots themselves and the city designs, as well as the navetes and other monuments. And they're really far away.

The stone sites around Gobeki tepe are constucted in a square pattern, not like Gobeki tepe that is constructed in a circle pattern.

http://www.ancient-wisdom.co.uk/turkey.htm#turkish

Edited by docyabut2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fair enough mate, I understand.

But even if the 7000BCdate is correct, it's still only the early beginnings of the civilization, so it couldn't have spread that far out. that kind of spreading would take a far more developed one.

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

The wiki link gives the same date for Mehrgarh so it is correct.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gopekli_Tepe_BdW_2003-05_700px.jpg

I wonder if is it first temple ,can we talk about first religon?

i am not that bright about such things... but does any one see a star finder in these structures ...

that is to say , the flat top is where a second object is placed with the edge to point where the star is found in the sky. when seated in a place in the center , each direction of the sky has its post for star location .

building first the small western , then improvement in the northern larger... then tha master craftsman construct the greater to the southeast ... each to hold larger groups of master student / teacher class ....

that is to say , season effect the crops planting and harvest ... with housing and service building that are constructed on circle foundations

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i am not that bright about such things ... but those are not walls.... they are access walk ways for service personel to move something from or to one t shape to the next .

thats what make the form and function so transparent , the lower out side walk way was for access to the inner , as to not interfer with the viewer on the inner circle as they did their observations

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

that is no gate for guarding the inner spaces... it is designed as a fulcrum and lever for lifting some object of great weight up to the walk way ....

either a object of weight or of a delicate construction where great care needed to be taken ....

THE FOLLOWING IS TOTALY UNSUPPORTED SPECULATION:

{if i were asked to design something where a fluid bowl or vessel were being moved... that is pretty much what i would have done ... form and function would not require that size for water ... so its not water or blood... metal would not need the walk ways....

my guess is mercury in a bowl of iron or bronze... carried in a tripod , and weight in the area of 1 to 2 tons}

Edited by onereaderone

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[media=]

[/media]

the roof of a temple , beams supported by the t shapes is far and away more conventional . i see and understand this ... one out side wall and a inner supporting structure for the load bareing... yes , i do see this .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://en.wikipedia....ey_Civilization

The wiki link gives the same date for Mehrgarh so it is correct.

OK, the date is correct, but the problem remains the same, it's still only the early beginnings of the civilization. that still makes it about 1000 years shy of the beginning of 8000 BCE, when Göbekli Tepe was deliberately buried.

I can conceive the possibility of some kind of influence from Göbekli Tepe towards Mehrgarh, not the other way around

-SNIP-

THE FOLLOWING IS TOTALY UNSUPPORTED SPECULATION:

-SNIP-

As is about 85% of the posts you made just before that and after that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe it to be a hunters hall,were venerated hunters were honoured. Agriculturist must have buried the monument.

good speculation , and there is pattern of history common to your idea also....

but the soil needed to bury the site was greater than the energy to build the site in the first place...

far easier to distroy it... than bury it.... also the site shares common design with others of the area making it common and not unique for the honor of greater souls among them...

more likely the buried dead were done away with where they fell during the hunt .

that makes this a place of farm and crops .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Could it be possiable the circles were a calander or a record. Why would they build them and then buried them as they were built?

Edited by docyabut2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OK, the date is correct, but the problem remains the same, it's still only the early beginnings of the civilization. that still makes it about 1000 years shy of the beginning of 8000 BCE, when Göbekli Tepe was deliberately buried.

I can conceive the possibility of some kind of influence from Göbekli Tepe towards Mehrgarh, not the other way around

As is about 85% of the posts you made just before that and after that.

The date given is for the already established city/civilization in Mehrgarh and not the date of when the civilization started coalesce.Hence we can safely assume that since by 7000 BC they had a proper city or a relatively advanced dwellings the culture could have started coalescing a couple of millenia ago. Also the fact that the IVC was way more widespread then previously thought and new digs are revealing new evidence and pushing the anitquity of the IVC is also very suggestive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The date given is for the already established city/civilization in Mehrgarh and not the date of when the civilization started coalesce.Hence we can safely assume that since by 7000 BC they had a proper city or a relatively advanced dwellings the culture could have started coalescing a couple of millenia ago. Also the fact that the IVC was way more widespread then previously thought and new digs are revealing new evidence and pushing the anitquity of the IVC is also very suggestive.

Sorry but I disagree here. Mehrgarh is seen as a precursor to IVC, quite rightly. However, the period of which we talk, the Mehrgarh of Period I, from 7000 BCE to 5500 BCE (periods established by archaeologists), was Neolithic and aceramic, meaning without the use of pottery. The earliest farming in the area was developed by semi-nomadic people, living in simple mud buildings. It was far from the already well established city/civilization, that you seem to believe it was.

I grant that Mehrgarh is the earliest known precursor of the IVC, but we are still left with 1000 years in between Göbekli Tepe's burying of the temple and Mehrgarh. Then there is also the distance factor, nearly 4000 miles, in those times, that's quite a stretch.

The IVC might have been more widespread than previously thought, yes, but that still does not make it possible, the timing and distance just don't work.

Like I said, I can conceive the possibility of some influence from Göbekli Tepe towards Mehrgarh, not the other way around.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry but I disagree here. Mehrgarh is seen as a precursor to IVC, quite rightly. However, the period of which we talk, the Mehrgarh of Period I, from 7000 BCE to 5500 BCE (periods established by archaeologists), was Neolithic and aceramic, meaning without the use of pottery. The earliest farming in the area was developed by semi-nomadic people, living in simple mud buildings. It was far from the already well established city/civilization, that you seem to believe it was.

I grant that Mehrgarh is the earliest known precursor of the IVC, but we are still left with 1000 years in between Göbekli Tepe's burying of the temple and Mehrgarh. Then there is also the distance factor, nearly 4000 miles, in those times, that's quite a stretch.

The IVC might have been more widespread than previously thought, yes, but that still does not make it possible, the timing and distance just don't work.

Like I said, I can conceive the possibility of some influence from Göbekli Tepe towards Mehrgarh, not the other way around.

Apparently the bold portion above is something Harsh86_Patel doesn't understand, or chooses to ignore. While Mehrgarh was a city it did not meet the criteria for being a civilization. As has been pointed out many times, there are certain criteria that must be met in order to qualify as a civilization, to whit:

* Large urban centers

* Full-time specialist occupations

* Primary producers of food paying surpluses to deity or ruler

* Monumental architecture

* Ruling class exempt from manual labor

* System for recording information

* Development of exact, practical sciences

* Monumental art

* Regular importation of raw materials

* Interdependence of classes (peasants, craftspeople, rulers)

* State religion/ideology

* Persistent state structures

http://worldhistoryconnected.press.illinois.edu/6.3/brown.html

A city does not automatically qualify as a civilization, no matter how many times it's repeated.

cormac

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought the first time I said it had been sufficiently clear, but maybe I wasn't. While Mehrgarh is the precursor or even point of origin of the IVC, time wise the 1000 year gap and the nearly 4000 kilometres distance between the two make it next to impossible for Mehrgarh to have influenced Göbekli Tepe. The other way around is in this case a lot more plausible and even possible.

And as rightly pointed out by Cormac, there are a few missing criteria for it being called a civilisation in the first place. I'm not even sure if it could qualify as city as such.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Apparently the bold portion above is something Harsh86_Patel doesn't understand, or chooses to ignore. While Mehrgarh was a city it did not meet the criteria for being a civilization. As has been pointed out many times, there are certain criteria that must be met in order to qualify as a civilization, to whit:

http://worldhistoryc.../6.3/brown.html

A city does not automatically qualify as a civilization, no matter how many times it's repeated.

cormac

If one of trait is not fullfilled from list you quoted do we still talk about civilization or culture?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If one of trait is not fullfilled from list you quoted do we still talk about civilization or culture?

If one or more traits were not fulfilled a person could still be talking about a culture or settlement. But they're definitely NOT talking about a civilization.

cormac

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If one or more traits were not fulfilled a person could still be talking about a culture or settlement. But they're definitely NOT talking about a civilization.

cormac

What Indus valley civilization or Harappans developed as exact practical science?

Aztecs didnt have writting system, so were they settlement or civilization?

Edited by the L

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What Indus valley civilization or Harappans developed as exact practical science?

Aztecs didnt have writting system, so were they settlement or civilization?

Astronomy is a science and would have been necessary to determine the correct time of year for many things, to include agriculture. They also had math and metallurgy.

Says who? They had a pictographic/ideographic writing system. And for cultures who didn't have an official writing system, like those of South America, they used quipu's which were another means of recording information.

cormac

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Astronomy is a science and would have been necessary to determine the correct time of year for many things, to include agriculture. They also had math and metallurgy.

Says who? They had a pictographic/ideographic writing system. And for cultures who didn't have an official writing system, like those of South America, they used quipu's which were another means of recording information.

cormac

Illyrians then fullfill all traits from list you quoted yet we called them tribes.

Quipu were not letters,words....rather numbers.(?)

Edited by the L

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Illyrians then fullfill all traits from list you quoted yet we called them tribes.

Quipu were not letters,words....rather numbers.(?)

The Ilyrians were not a well defined group of peoples, but rather a conglomeration of related peoples with no real central point of government. That's not the same thing as being a civilization.

* System for recording information

cormac

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Ilyrians were not a well defined group of peoples, but rather a conglomeration of related peoples with no real central point of government. That's not the same thing as being a civilization.

* System for recording information

cormac

They used Greek alphabet. We just dont have nothing preserved from them. But we know they used it. (coins)

Wrong. They so called tribes were divided but some of them were highly organized with central point.

They even have had colonies.

Also, at one point in time they have had empire.(twice)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They used Greek alphabet. We just dont have nothing preserved from them. But we know they used it. (coins)

Wrong. They so called tribes were divided but some of them were highly organized with central point.

They even have had colonies.

Also, at one point in time they have had empire.(twice)

So right off the bat they've taken themselves off the list, since the Greek alphabet didn't belong to them to begin with.

This also works against them as they were not one, singular group of peoples under a central point of government during their existance, nor did they exist collectively as a peoples known as "Illyrian". And while the Illyrians had a few kingdoms they never had an actual "empire", which is a much greater level of control than the Illyrians would ever achieve. And yes I realize you wish to see them as separate from and more important than they actually were in an historical context, but they weren't. They never reached the point of qualifying as either a civilization nor an empire.

cormac

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 5

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.