I come to you /x/ for the first time in 6 years of imageboarding. I'm a /pol/ack from another chan.
I've been researching what seems to be the oldest known man-made structure excavated in the year 2000, called Göbekli Tepe, in modern day Turkey. Carbon dating dates the structure to around 10,000 BC. Information on the internet is sparse and vague, and the whole thing's discovery seems to have been downplayed. The thing is mysterious as fuck and the excavators give no clear answers as to what its function may have been, let alone how it was constructed in the Paleolithic era when we were supposedly hunter gatherers, requiring knowledge of masonry, physics (to move it) and an evolved religious form.
Allegedly it was a temple constructed for worship in between hunting/gathering cycles. Tribes would meet up there and sacrifice animals and worship deities. There's artistic depictions of various animals on the stone pillars, including a few depictions of decapitated heads. But I don't buy that shit.
What are its implications /x/? Aside from ancient aliens please, I seek a deeper metahistory. Pic related is a model.
>hunter gatherers moving multiple 20 ton stone pillars for miles for purpose of art
>plus the structure is ugly af and those people probably weren't modernists in their artistic taste
Speaking of, the animals included appear to be:
bulls, crocodiles, dogs/wolves, large flightless birds, boars, ants, serpents, scorpions, and lions.
What really disturbing is that a lot of them are carved as smiling and toothy. Pic related. I can't find any traditional "prey" animals represented outside of the boar.
Another exaggeratedly toothy animal.
I reckon it's a relic from an unknown ancient civilisation. I mean there probably isn't much left besides that, considering its age, so it's not surprising it's only been found recently.
And personally I find it difficult to believe that modern humans were just dicking around for 200,000 odd years before suddenly (relatively speaking) starting to form advanced civilisations. Even the most durable buildings usually don't last much more than a few thousand years. Hell even plastics and radioactive materials would be gone in less than 10000.
Archaeology student dropping in- it's weird but not necessarily impossible. The earliest agriculture occurred in the fertile crescent, and some of the earliest that we know about predates this site. So these people probably were sedentary farmers and we just haven't found the remains of their village yet.
But it is definitely early, and I'll do some research when I get the time- the iconography of this temple is definitely wierd.
I believe it was constructed just after the Ice Age, they must have used some kind of light or sound to mark and cut the stone. I read this structure is unnaturally precise which leads to believe they must have knew something about how to manipulate the laws of physics on a fundamental level in a way we can understand but have somehow forgotten.
There's stories of a guy who rediscovered this with some kind of "cones" and built a coral structure, he took his secrets with him, here's a link.
Maybe Gobekli Tepe was built in the exact same way?
>you could die making this
>the amount of effort required
>MUH CAVE DRAWINGS
>but tribe wants something cool to look at
>implying cultures build something without purpose or function
>how could they into masonry if they were barely into agriculture?
That's like saying:
>how can you like sex if you don't like anal?
Listen, this was after the Ice Age, so it would be easy to surmise that not only was it beginning to get hotter, but nature flourish as a result, and what does more nature attract? animals. what do animals attract? hungry people.
for example, egypt was literally an oasis filled with trees, it wasn't always a desert.
It wouldn't be hard to hunt if everything is pretty much a next door supermarket of wild animals to stab and spit-roast.
>masonry implies stone buildings, permanent structures
>permanent structures implies sedentary societies, or societies which are non nomadic, in-place
>which require a stable food source of either agriculture or domestication of animals
why would they be masons if they hadn't settled down yet? what use would they have of mining big rocks
Yes, they used old rocks. No, what you said is stupid. Unless they also filled it in with layers of equally old dirt and refuse.
Tthe dating is from the matter that the site was buried in. The rock was clearly not formed 10,000 years ago.
In ancient Sumeria there would be nomadic tribes that would come and take over small city states, eventually becoming like the town previous inhabitants and building upon it. In which case another nomadic tribe would proceed to do the same. It's possible for nomadic, non mason like people's to settle such environments. Entire generations of people can live amongst long lost, non related cultural developments.
Most important structure in human history. A temple to the gods, man invented agriculture to stay closer to the shrine.
This is the point where history began. Where man stopped being a beast and started being human. No longer just a heard of dumb beast wandering around, living at the whims of nature and animal. Farming, producing food instead of scavenging it, the development of culture, language, art, science, and magic all started there.
At the start and finish of it all, we live for the gods, and all we do is to honor them.
The entire complex is 15.000 yrs old, what is 9000-1000 yrs old is the structure of the Temple, the most ancient ever discovered, it was built in that way probably for the same reason Stonehenge was built like this, to be a some sort of observatory-calendar, because in ancient times stars were associated to Gods and supernatural beings, so an observatory was also a Temple.
Anyway, what Gobekli Tepe teach us is that mankind was already civilized (as you can see, the walls of the complex were built in stone and decorated with bas-relifs) during the hunting phase, long before the farming phase, that started quite 5000 yrs later.
Obviously, Gobekli Tepe can't be the only site at that time with that level of culture and arts, it is simply the first we discovered (for now).
sometimes the inherent danger makes a task worth it
especially when you're trying to prove to your competition how powerful and resourceful you really are
making this for display purposes isn't that far fetched
What if the light at the centre of the galaxy is an intelligent light plasma and, basically God?
Also, planets were much closer to Earth and ancient humans worshiped them as gods.
>What are its implications /x/? Aside from ancient aliens please,
So you wan the answer but you don't want the answer?
Go back to /pol/, you ignorant degenerate pleb.
10,000 years ago man had agriculture. go read up on the fertile crescent. its approximated at 11k-10 years ago man obtained agriculture and domesticated animals
ergo man stopped being a hunter gatherer. so its no shock it gets little attention. its small not even as impressive as stone henge and was probably used for the same thing
watching the stars and planets through the years. standing in the middle you have markers laying out where things will show up
the fuck would aliumz want to do with that ugly rock shit if they were capable of space travel tho
right but we were in the fkn ocean basins
maybe op can check out it
theres basically 5 tribes of people.
hindu indians were in the indian ocean basin
asians (pacifists) were in the pacific ocean basin
euros were in the atlantic ocean basin (atlantis)
some of the scandanavians may have been in the north sea basin
and africans/sudanese were in the sudanese ocean basin right next to the arab ocean basin (real, look at the map)
that means maybe these sites like gobekli tepe and macchu picchu were way in the mountains hidden from humans past thick niggerdly jungle and huge mountains we couldnt climb. probably an ayyy site.
cheers good luck
Except that humanity likely has done this several times before over the 200,000 years we were homo sapiens. Every so many millenia we'd either succumb to an ice age and lose our technology and science and return to the stone age after a few generations, or wed blow ourselves back into the stone age.
Inside the Neolithic Mind by David Lewis-Williams makes the case that a ritual similar to the ayahuasca rituals of South America occurred in the temples at Gobekli Tepe. Initiates would be led through a series of rooms and experience visions.
You guys are assuming it was difficult for them. We have no idea what their capabilities were. If you've listened to any of Randall Carlson's work, we may be missing a huge part of human history.
A lot was lost, but there are some traces left.
Here is an interesting book:
OP you asked for a deeper metahistory, here we go:
For starters, I am an avocational archaeologist, this means I am not professionally an archaeologist, but it is what I do with my time. I am not degreed, so well just get that out of the way, but this is the primary point of interest in my life, specifically, paleoanthropology.
The problem with Gobekli Tepe, is the same problem we are encountering all over the world, even stuff Ive found in my small digs evidences it and its only tangentially related.
The truth that the evidence is beginning to point out is that the archaeologists and anthropologists of the past are guilty of a serious degree of hubris, bias and non objective work.
The evidence, is suggesting quite heavily, that man has been considerably more developed, for a considerably longer period of time than is traditionally accepted.
The recent discoveries in south africa with Homo Naledi even seem to indicate that religion and spirituality are not uniquely human characteristics. This is a bombshell realization as it is such a fundamental part of what humans have always considered to make us unique.
If the truth is that many developments previously considered "human" are actually pre-human and they are simply inherited genetically from our non-human ancestors, it forces us to re-evaluate a great deal of what we understand of human history.
Gobekli Tepe is a damning example of this, it flies in the face of literally everything we think we know about early humans. Much of what archaeology is discovering (in my opinion) is really only reasonable if modern humans inherited things from earlier ancestor species.
Religion, culture, society, agriculture and more may not even be "human things" we may have inherited them from an ancestor who was much more developed than we would like to admit.
The advent of the ice age or other periods of major global climate change may have made certain advancements or technologies useless for a long period (cont...)
Things like agriculture and even architecture, may have been difficult or impossible to use giving the impression that they were only developed after.
There is a possibility that through these ecological changes, many sites like gobekli tepe were lost. So where we see gobekli tepe as an outlier... a fluke, an oddity. It may have been so only due to its specific time period.
The truth is that there may have been many gobekli tepes and other ancient examples of advanced development, not only pre-ice age, but even pre-human.
Forces may have exerted enough influence on early humans before and during the ice age to have made evidence of their advancement difficult to come across. After a long period of not using these techniques or abilities, it would appear as if they had disappeared entirely.
This is startling to the academic, scientific, and theological world. It not only indicates that we got the facts wrong, it also means that everything we think we know may be based on a fundamentally incorrect premise arrived at through hubris that modern humans are unique and somehow uniquely capable of what we consider to be what defines us.
The ramifications for the theological world are, perhaps even more dire because if human spirituality is not even human in origin, but an evolved and inherited trait, it shakes the very foundation of what it means to be religious.
That is why Gobekli Tepe, and so many other current archaeological and anthropological discoveries are treated so cautiously... It's not a conspiracy, its just more human hubris getting in the way of the truth.
It is easier to ignore, or commit the sin of confirmation bias, in order to maintain ones structure of reality than it is to face up to the truth that ages and ages of history are incorrect and we have missed what may be the truth that humans, are in no way unique, not even on our own planet, and everything we know, has to change.
>why everything you just said is bullshit and quackery.
Can you recommend some books?
As I said, I am avocational, I do not have a degree, and it may indeed be quackery Id love to hear what theyre currently teaching about the subject.
watched the trailer, clever, I wasnt implying that we had culture to THAT degree. There would be more remains I think. I was just indicating that human advancement was more developed, much earlier, than is traditionally established.
When it comes to something that old, it will most likely all have to be speculation. Look at the state of that 10000 year old temple, and then picture the state of a 200,000 year old building. Even rock would succumb to nature by then
>Generally referred to as the first known analog computer, the quality and complexity of the mechanism's manufacture suggests it has undiscovered predecessors made during the Hellenistic period. Its construction relied upon theories of astronomy and mathematics developed by Greek astronomers, and is estimated to have been created around the late second century BC.
yep, op here. if you're heard of Julius Evola, an early 20th century reactionary philosopher and historian, he's written extensively of the notion of human's "involution" - that we were more advanced and intelligent in ancient and even prehistoric times.
in his book "Revolt Against the Modern World", he cites the collective mythology and written history found in ancient cultures through out the world, and their convergences. most interestingly is the converging notion of a "Great Flood" or cataclysm which occurred at some point, prior to which humanity was of a higher order. he cites many examples of an initial "Golden Age", in Hindu culture the "Satya Yuga", or first age, where men were ruled by Gods, in Greek writings of Hesiod, the first of the "Ages of Man" was the Golden Age, where men lived on Olympus among the Gods, the ancient Norse gullaldr, translated as 'golden age', the Abrahamic notion of the Messianic Age, the Old Testament's reference of the Garden of Eden, the list goes on.
also the ocean floor is hardly mapped - and who knows what's just beneath our feet anywhere on land.
Are you retarded? That is literally scientific fact. Mesopotamian civilization developed circa 4,000 BC, and recorded history begins with them developing writing between 3,500 and 3,200 BC. The youngest parts of Gobekli Tepe date back to at least 10,000 BC, and it's entirely possible, even probable, that the nearby civilization is even older.
This doesn't demonstrate the length of the civilization(s) which utilized it, is the problem. That Gobekli Tepe is older than anything we attribute to the Sumerians is a fact, that anyone lived longer, or that their culture lasted longer, is not.
Gotcha. Look at your wording for that. Literally it would read that you are saying the people themselves were more long lived. That seems extremely unlikely, so I suspect many are interpreting it to mean that you're saying that the civilization lasted twice as long as the Sumerian civilization. It would be very difficult to discern that you just meant the ruins were twice as old. But now that you've clarified, it's easier!
Imagine the epic encirclement hunts anon. Yuh.
How do you know there isn't another version of you saying the same exact thing in a parallel universe, but about the fact that they witness it as unbroken and remaining as such?
>let's ask for a reality with contradictory premises despite not being able to differentiate ourselves in the space between contradictions!
the current consensus is that modern homo sapiens descended from a small population of 10,000 peoples at an evolutionary bottleneck event during the end of the last ice age. markers of civilization such as settlements and agriculture supposedly came afterwards.
I think there is evidence to suggest there was civilization before the ice age was over, or even began.
Ancient masonry in Russia dates similarly to other baffling sites such as Machu Picchu and Puma Punku in South America.
astoundingly well-cut stones, theorized to even be molded into shape or poured into a cast. done with unknown tools, with keen accuracy.
tightly-fit megalithic bricks, with absolutely no mortar. people for scale.
The Greek spoke of people who lived beyond the edge of the north, who rode elephants through snow and mountains.
You, sir, are absolutely right. Well, about me being wrong, I mean, the fucking retard part might be going a bit far, but I was definitely wrong here.
To you, sir, I apologize. I misread your statement and falsely accused you of a crime you did not commit!
Actually, it's the cowards and idiots who try to hide themselves behind the title Anonymous who are the plebs here. Who can care about the opinions of someone with no identity or value? No one, that's who.
The implications of a higher consciousness do involve interaction with higher order beings, manipulation of the physical world and other traits indicated by whatever you want to think is presented in this thread.
Food for thought.
Whats the reasoning behind the assumption that hunter-gatherers can go from early agriculture technology to advanced masonry technology + the advanced management and construction skills necessary to organize that kind of labor effort?
It seems like there is an inconsistency in the current archeological paradigm, where we're just to assume that these people underwent significant and rapid technological improvement with little to no data suggesting *how* this would happen.
An argument I heard was that there are no 'intermediate' structures. These people supposedly went from primitive farmers to advanced stone-carving builders with sophisticated mathematics and astronomy in the blink of an eye. Every "less sophisticated" pyramid/structure is actually *younger* than the most complex and giant structures, suggesting that the less sophisticated structures were knock-offs or tributes to the remnants of even earlier civilizations.
What do you think about the emerging theory that a high civilization existed around 12,000 years ago and was wiped out at the beginning of the Younger Dryas? We can see similar cultural motifs in the design of deities across the world, along with similar background mythologies of these gods as being 'civilizing' characters who came from far away, bringing the knowledge of agricultural, construction, and society with them.
Is it possible that individuals from within this theorized high civilization dispersed after its collapse, and spread their knowledge to other peoples around the world? This would explain how these ancient but unusually advanced structures came to be.
You're right about nature flourishing after an ice age, but the first part of your post is pants-on-head retarded.
>how could they into masonry if they were barely into agriculture?
>That's like saying:
>how can you like sex if you don't like anal?
No, it's much more rational than that. It's like saying, "how could they have interplanetary colonies if they could barely understand simple electric circuits?"
The fact of the matter is that they couldn't. No society has ever progressed so rapidly from an early agricultural state to a more sophisticated state with advanced mathematics, architecture, and managerial skills.
These things don't just appear out of nowhere, which is the explanation were given for the Pyramids in Egypt.
>They were primitive hunter-gatherers
>Then within a generation, they...
>...learned to sustain, feed, train, and manage a titanic workforce
>...learned to cut and fit massive stone blocks better than we can today with modern tech
>...learned how to build massive structures with near-perfect astronomical alignment
When you actually think about it, it's spectacularly unrealistic.
>Every "less sophisticated" pyramid/structure is actually *younger* than the most complex and giant structures
>what is the Step Pyramid of Djoser
>what is the shitty ass Buried Pyramid at Saqqara
>what is the Layer Pyrmid
>what is the Meidum Pyramid
>what is the Bent Pyramid
All predate the Great Pyramid of Giza, none predate Djoser, and all show a perfect chronological progression of fuckups with the design and steps to correct those fuckups.
Especially the Bent Pyramid (most recent of mentioned, pic related), which was built halfway at a bad angle and then built the rest of the way properly.
You what? Once they can grow some of their food and store it in granaries they have more free time to do other shit beyond hunting, fishing and gathering wild edibles. It's a gradual change from one to the other. These methods coexist for a long time and in some places like the North American continent, due to abundance of wild game the switch from one to the other as primary means of food never fully happens.
You don't need civilization to move big stones, just patience, intelligence and presumably food for your workers. This was old old news even in the (19)20s when Leedskalnin built Coral Castle with similar techniques.
(video from 2006)
As a complete aside, Çatalhöyük (pictured) is more interesting as a neolithic site since it was a large multilayer city built over 9000 years ago and we know almost nothing about those people.
No it isn't. I'm married to tenured archaeologist with 19 years of fieldwork in Turkey. Real archaeologists are hesitant to say anything conclusive that isn't backed up by data and hard evidence. It's the Discover channel hucksters and Ancient Alien attention seekers who make wild claims based on flimsy evidence. What you lack, that well-trained archaeologists don't, is a wealth of comparanda to help them make educated guesses. Ancient architecture falls into certain classes, particularly within certain time frames. Sometimes, lack of (expected) evidence becomes evidence. In this case, it may have led to some claims that will ultiamtely be proven incorrect
Göbekli Tepe is an exciting site, no doubt about it. It got a ton of attention because Klaus Schmidt, the former director, made some bold claims about it rewriting the anthropological paradigm. Schmidt died in 2014. Excavation reports under the new director, who isn't quite so gung ho on the paradigm shift theory, indicate that there may have been settlements there after all.
Source: the annual symposium where all directors of digs within Turkey must report their finding.
I don't believe it's art, but considering it may have taken centuries to build it it isn't impossible. Also hunter gatherer lifestyle isn't that bad despite what people believe, most hunter gatherers were relatively healthy compared to the farmers
>civilization before ice age
Why do people force this? Theres absolutely no evidence for it. Göpekli tepe didnt popped out of nowhere. and its not singular either, although its the oldest there are lots of known neolithic sites between 10000 and 7000 bc and after. And of course the neolithic didn't magically appear either buit was preceded by the Mesolithic and so on. There was a slow but steady development of human manufacturing processes as observed in tools and settlements. There are some oddities, unexpected discovered every now and then, but nothing points at a civilization before the 4th milennia BC.
>What do you think about the emerging theory that a high civilization existed around 12,000 years ago and was wiped out at the beginning of the Younger Dryas?
There are also those interesting maps of Antarctica.
Yes I'm not disputing what is needed, only that it couldn't have happened so quickly.
Technological advancement accelerates; to have such a rapid hiccup of advancement (that produced stone-cutting/moving techniques that rival ours today) in an otherwise unadvanced time period would be highly unlikely.
Hunter gatherers living in especially abundant environments even in recent history have been known to create fairly complex societies at a chiefdom-level. The Haida and other natives of the Pacific Northwest are some of the clearest examples of this; the Haida had large chiefdoms and high social inequality, including slavery. They produced complex art and wooden architecture. They launched large military expeditions against other tribes in search of loot and slaves. Their diet was almost completely based on hunting, gathering, and fishing.
Complex hunter-gatherer societies only emerge in very rare conditions when an environment is so abundant in resources that people can actually settle down in one place and store their surplus food, resulting in population growth not possible among nomads. This is exactly the kind of society that existed in the Levant and southern Anatolia when Gobekli Tepe was built; a sedentary culture called the Natufians emerged after the end of the Ice Age exploiting the abundance of wild grains which flourished as temperatures improved and stabilized. These settled communities eventually gave rise to agriculture. Like the Haida, some of them produced complex art and architecture, which is what we see at Gobekli Tepe and related sites.
There is nothing special about it. The society that created it was not a civilization but a group of settled tribes, possibly a chiefdom. It's an incredible site, but not extraordinary. Despite what some hyped-up new articles might say, it has not changed our understanding of how civilization emerged. Some articles have been saying that up until now archaeologists thought religion didn't exist until after cities and states emerged, which is utter bullshit considering the fact that Hinduism emerged among pastoral tribes and that pretty much all societies have some form of religion whether they're 'civilized' or not.
This post will be ignored.
A.) Blombos Cave is actually the world's oldest human(ish) settlement, and although a natural cave, it had been heavily modified, and complex tools had been found.
B.) Animals are symbols of life and survival. Stories based on them were also related to early star-worship cults, that marked natural cycles in weather, crops, procreation, floods, etc.
C.) There have been no remains found there as of yet, although there have been charcoal findings, which is presumably how it was dated.
D.) I think it probably had a hatched roof [as I believe Stonehenge did too] and it was probably a meeting place similar to a town hall, except it had larger religious implications as well.
Possibly where tribal leaders were chosen, where weddings and baptisms/rituals were performed. Dying people may have also been laid there; or perhaps it was an area for healing/medicine men.
You didn't even read that article, did you?
>It may be fun to think that the old, lovelorn Latvian who spent his life making the Coral Castle did it with arcane knowledge, lost technology, or superhuman powers, but it's reassuring to know that he did it just like you or I would have: through patience, determination, and hard work.
I'll admit I don't know what this picture is from, though it looks to be a frame from a video. Youtube, from the file name. What's it supposed to be?
These are natural rock formations from Gornaya Shoria in the south of Siberia. Apparently you've never seen jointed stone before, there are quite a few different processes that can result in living stone that looks like that.
Very well cut, yes, but hardly impossibly so. As far as I know they're accepted to be cut, not cast, even by fringe theorists.
These are from the Plain of Jars, which is in northern Laos. They're chiseled from sandstone, and remains inside suggest they were used as burials for cremations. Literally giant urns, not "industrial pots". From the Southeast Asian Iron Age, and fits quite well into the cultural continuum of the time.
There was a similar discussion in /his/, and another anon brought the Haida up, too. They seem to be the paragon of hunter-gatherer civilization, eh?
My two cents, since I like these kinds of probable history: Gobekli Tepe, Catalhoyuk and their kind of 'impossible' sites were anything but. It is possible for an 'advanced' civilization (compared to the average at the time) to exist so early in human prehistory, only for some catastrophe to wipe them out quickly. It might also be that in actuality large settlements like that was common, but due to the materials they were built with did not survive the passages of time, they went ignored. Just look at prehistoric East and Southeast Asia, for a long time people thought there were only primitive people who didn't use much stone tools - but they could have used bamboo, which while plentiful, left no remains.
So, lack of evidence doesn't mean the theory is automatically invalid, it just slid into 'probable' territory until new evidence gets discovered that either proves or disproves it.
what if like, civilization was advanced and then some dude was really coked out and was like i'm an artists check this modern art out, and then proceeded to carve crude animals into it just for shits n giggles.