Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Hanslune

What is the oldest evidence of civilization?

95 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

Hanslune
Abramelin

My guess would be : Gobekly Tepe , or better, ancient Anatolia.

 

Edited by Abramelin
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
cormac mac airt
56 minutes ago, Hanslune said:

Culture/cultures sure but not sure that really qualifies as civilization. No evidence of domesticated livestock, no evidence of farming, no organized religion, no evidence of writing/record keeping, etc. 

cormac

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Susanc241

For me, a civilisation consists of a number of people who have chosen to live by the same shared attitudes and mores, to the benefit of all.  When people unite in this way, that is when you get the beginnings of organised communities who collaborate with building dwellings and shared areas like spiritual/religious sites and the equivalent of the town/community hall.  From there a hierarchy with laws and rules develop, protection of that group and trading with other groups.  That’s how I imagine a civilisation arises, anyway.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hanslune
2 hours ago, cormac mac airt said:

Culture/cultures sure but not sure that really qualifies as civilization. No evidence of domesticated livestock, no evidence of farming, no organized religion, no evidence of writing/record keeping, etc. 

cormac

Not as a civilization but the first trace of being civilized

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Piney
1 hour ago, jethrofloyd said:

DNA Stydy Finds Aboriginal Australians World\s Oldest Civilization

https://www.history.com/news/dna-study-finds-aboriginal-australians-worlds-oldest-civilization

An unprecedented DNA study has found evidence of a single human migration out of Africa and confirmed that Aboriginal Australians are the world’s oldest civilization.

They have the oldest accurate oral histories in the world describing migrations and megafauna that has been extinct for tens of thousands of years.

  • Like 6
  • Thanks 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
cormac mac airt
29 minutes ago, Hanslune said:

Not as a civilization but the first trace of being civilized

True but rather runs contrary to your thread title IMO. 
 

cormac

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DanL

I suspect that the answer to this question is about to start changing. For one thing the older people that have run the "science"of archeology are dying out and if they are not around suppressing any evidence that might refute one of their preferred theories there will be a lot of changes made in the next few years.  Also we are going to have to move in to sub-sea archeology in order to find the earlier signs of civilization that were built along side the coastal river mouths much as most of our biggest cities are now. At the end of the last Ice age to oceans rose and destroyed all of these places and they are now burred under the sand and mud on the shores of that older ocean. We now have ways to peal back the seas and the mud to see what it there and this is going to be like what LiDAR is going with the jungles as it reveals the many lost cities of the Aztec and Mayan civilization.

The oceans rose at least 300 feet at the end of the last ice-age. A rise like that would pout all of our major coastal cities under a lot of water. Before we invented the railroads a city couldn't grow too big unless it was near water for transporting big cargoes. Without that you were limited to the size that local farming and shipping in small amounts could feed the people of the city and get the food there before it rotted.

We will see. I think there will be a lot of new theories as the old crew dies out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Piney
16 minutes ago, DanL said:

I suspect that the answer to this question is about to start changing. For one thing the older people that have run the "science"of archeology are dying out and if they are not around suppressing any evidence that might refute one of their preferred theories there will be a lot of changes made in the next few years.

My old curator/boss (Alan Carman) who is now deceased created several paradigm shifts and I don't remember anyone of the older generation suppressing anything.......except for Hans holding in farts around a hot woman.  

16 minutes ago, DanL said:

  Also we are going to have to move in to sub-sea archeology in order to find the earlier signs of civilization that were built along side the coastal river mouths much as most of our biggest cities are now. At the end of the last Ice age to oceans rose and destroyed all of these places and they are now burred under the sand and mud on the shores of that older ocean. We now have ways to peal back the seas and the mud to see what it there and this is going to be like what LiDAR is going with the jungles as it reveals the many lost cities of the Aztec and Mayan civilization.

Underwater archaeology has been around for decades. It's just damn expensive and various technologies are finding things we thought weren't there. 

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hanslune
16 minutes ago, DanL said:

I suspect that the answer to this question is about to start changing. For one thing the older people that have run the "science"of archeology are dying out and if they are not around suppressing any evidence that might refute one of their preferred theories there will be a lot of changes made in the next few years.  Also we are going to have to move in to sub-sea archeology in order to find the earlier signs of civilization that were built along side the coastal river mouths much as most of our biggest cities are now. At the end of the last Ice age to oceans rose and destroyed all of these places and they are now burred under the sand and mud on the shores of that older ocean. We now have ways to peal back the seas and the mud to see what it there and this is going to be like what LiDAR is going with the jungles as it reveals the many lost cities of the Aztec and Mayan civilization.

The oceans rose at least 300 feet at the end of the last ice-age. A rise like that would pout all of our major coastal cities under a lot of water. Before we invented the railroads a city couldn't grow too big unless it was near water for transporting big cargoes. Without that you were limited to the size that local farming and shipping in small amounts could feed the people of the city and get the food there before it rotted.

We will see. I think there will be a lot of new theories as the old crew dies out.

It doesn't require the old folks to die. You just need evidence. Speaking of that why do you think the water rose so fast that these lost civilization couldn't just move further inland? What they had not cities further on? The Ancient Egyptians, Xia and Sumerians didn't build exclusively on the coast they build inland.

Known Sumerian cities:

1352.jpg?v=1485680479

Known Xia cities:

Xia-Dynasty%20Map-0716L.jpg

Known old kingdom cities:

9b4f430231fda32a73fbc48458081ac3.jpg

Modern civilization also don't just build at the mouth of rivers also.

I'm not aware of any ancient civilization that built along the coast.

Hancock's unscientific opinions are really not a good source for you to use as evidence.

 

 

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hanslune
3 minutes ago, Piney said:

My old curator/boss (Alan Carman) who is now deceased created several paradigm shifts and I don't remember anyone of the older generation suppressing anything.......except for Hans holding in farts around a hot woman.  

Underwater archaeology has been around for decades. It's just damn expensive and various technologies are finding things we thought weren't there. 

If there were lost ancient civilizations lost on the coast line there would be plenty of evidence of their existence inland - or at least that has been the case in all known civilizations.

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hanslune
3 hours ago, cormac mac airt said:

True but rather runs contrary to your thread title IMO. 
 

cormac

Sorry Cormac that was my intent but I can see it could be taken the other way too.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Cookie Monster
7 hours ago, Hanslune said:

Carbon dating doesnt work on stone if we class civilization as being a city.

Bearing in mind there are several species on this planet that organise themselves into societies then if we move away from a civilization being a stone city I think its reasonable that human species would have had civilizations going back 100,000s of years.

Although that would have been tribal settlements made out of wood. Of course, finding wooden structures that old is nearly an impossible task.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hanslune
1 hour ago, Cookie Monster said:

Carbon dating doesnt work on stone if we class civilization as being a city.

What does that have to do with this? The dates provided are well outside the range C-14 dating can cover so ergo no C-14 dating was used.

From the link:

Quote

The hiatus level (DUN) composed of undisturbed aeolian sand overlying the M1 phase is dated by OSL to 69,000 ± 5,000 and 70,000 ± 5000 years BP, while OSL ages ranging from 74,900 ± 4,300 to 72,500 ± 4,600 years BP have been obtained for the upper part of the M1 phase, i.e. the units associated with the Still Bay techno-tradition.[2][4][10][30][31] Jacobs et al. 2013[4] consider the Still Bay sequence at Blombos Cave (with 95% confidence) to have begun only after 75,500 years BP and ended 67,800 years ago, lasting no longer than 6,600 years.[4] The true age of the Still Bay has been debated, and ages presented by Jacobs et al. 2013 has been challenged on methodological grounds[33][34][35] (see next paragraphs). TL ages for the M1 phase are 74,000 ± 5,000 and 78,000 ± 6,000 years BP.[1]

OSL = Optically-Stimulated Luminescence: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Optically_stimulated_luminescence

TL = Thermoluminescence dating: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermoluminescence_dating

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Gaden
2 hours ago, Piney said:

........except for Hans holding in farts around a hot woman.  

...

 Well, who hasn't done that? I can't be the only one that while on a date, walked around the back of the car after I closing her door for her.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hanslune

oops deleted

 

Edited by Hanslune
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thanos5150

Culture and civilization are not one and the same. Neanderthal had culture more sophisticated than the Blombos cave dwellers, for example, but this is not "civilization".  

Though there must be a progenitor(s) yet to be found, for me the oldest thing closest to what we would call civilization would be the Gravettian Dolni Věstonice dating to c 26,000BCE. 

Dolni Vestonice Jewellery, Pottery, Tools and other artifacts

Dolni Vestonice Home Page

 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Kenemet

Hans, you need to distinguish between culture and civilization.

Beads do not prove an organized government, agriculture, transportation, or social hierarchy.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hanslune
18 minutes ago, Kenemet said:

Hans, you need to distinguish between culture and civilization.

Beads do not prove an organized government, agriculture, transportation, or social hierarchy.

Exactly I meant for a singular aspect that points to civilization or being civilized not a civilization itself. Fun with English!

Edited by Hanslune
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Wepwawet

I would agree with the posts that state that civilization should be defined by humans living in permanent settlements with agriculture and system of governance. If we look at artifacts, or even a single dwelling here and there, then the bower bird could be described as having a civilization. Rooks have a seeming system of governance, and I'm stretching things here I know, but no artifacts and a rather shifting form of settlement and certainly no agriculture, except by borrowing ours, so only have half of the equation to form a civilization. Do ants and termites have a civilization even though they lack the ability to make stuff, except their homes. Bees ?

Edited by Wepwawet
  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Piney
23 minutes ago, Wepwawet said:

I would agree with the posts that state that civilization should be defined by humans living in permanent settlements with agriculture and system of governance. If we look at artifacts, or even a single dwelling here and there, then the bower bird could be described as having a civilization. Rooks have a seeming system of governance, and I'm stretching things here I know, but no artifacts and a rather shifting form of settlement and certainly no agriculture, except by borrowing ours, so only have half of the equation to form a civilization. Do ants and termites have a civilization even though they lack the ability to make stuff, except their homes. Bees ?

Some ants herd aphids so they can be considered " settled pastoralists".  :yes:

 

.......don't hit me Harte. :unsure2:

  • Like 3
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Piney
Quote

Archaeologist Dragoslav Srejović, who first explored the site, said that the sculptures of this size so early in human history and original architectural solutions, define Lepenski Vir as the specific and very early phase in the development of the prehistoric culture in Europe.[2] The site is noted for its level of preservation and the overall exceptional quality of the artifacts. Due to the fact that the settlement was a permanent and planned one, with organized human life, architect Hristivoje Pavlović labeled Lepenski Vir as "the first city in Europe".[3]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lepenski_Vir

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Jarocal
5 hours ago, Kenemet said:

Hans, you need to distinguish between culture and civilization.

Beads do not prove an organized government, agriculture, transportation, or social hierarchy.

Every one of the features you attribute for a component of civilization or the first steps toward one (as is Han's question though not clearly articulated at first) needs Hans to provide a operational definition of the terms.

Is agriculture as we view it today? Fields of monoculture plantings aimed at producing a single crop or does something similar to the agroforestry techniques exhibited by Native Americans meet his criteria of agriculture? Things like MesoAmerican Chinampas are readily apparent where it took longer to recognize the canal/causeway systems in the Beni. I've read some research in the Amazon where they are studying dispersal of tree species around sites that may indicate that the indigenous population altered the landscape to increase the number of preferred species near the settlements.

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.