posted
This is very interesting. I'm interested in all types of civilizations around the world and this civilization doesn't seem to be heard of that much. Vinca is said to be Europe's OLDEST civilization before Greece and Rome.
posted
This civilization is older than Egypt allegedly,it was probably founded by the Anu.
Like many other civilizations in Eurasia,, after the flood, the Kushites introduced writing. The writing of the Vinca culture is descebdant from the Thinite writing.
you can read more about the African roots of this civilization here:
posted
This writing system was created by Black people. It was based on the Thinite script.
The Proto-Magyar were one of the many ethnic groups which formerly lived in the Fertile African Crescent. They offered prayers to *kan, e.g., Magyar kan, konyorog, Manding kani, and Dravidian ka-n. They also worshipped the god Amon, who they called Anya
The name Maa is found in many Proto-Saharan ethnonyms. For example the Manding called themselves Ma-nde (the children of Ma), the Sumerians called themselves Mah-Gar-ri (exalted God's children), and the Magyar of ancient times referred to themselves as Muh-ger-ri , or Ma-ka-r (exalted children).
According to David MacRitchies the most ancient Uralic speakers were called czernii ugris or 'Black Ugris'. The Ugris were also called Hunni. The name Ugrian, is the origin for the word Hungarian. The Hungarians were also called Sabatocospali ,"the Blacks".
The Carpathian blacks arrived in the area in the 4th millennium B.C. The Tripolye culture dates from 3800 to 2100 B.C. The Tripolye culture was established in the Ukraine, Moldavia and Romania along the Siret River in the Ukraine. The Tripolye people may have collected/cultivated barley, millet and wheat. They also had domesticated cattle, sheep-goats and pigs. As in Africa, their principle domesticate at this time was cattle .
During the middle Neolithic copper was being exploited in several mountainous regions of Europe. The center for copper mining in Europe was the Carpathian mountains. Many copper objects have been found on Tripolyean sites .
Many animal and human figurines have been found on Tripolyean sites. The Tripolye rotund ceramic female figurines are analogous to the rotund female figurines found in ancient Nubia.
It appears that for over a millennium the Linear Pottery and Cris farming groups practiced agriculture in the core region of Tripolyean culture. The middle Neolithic Tripolye people on the other hand are associated with cattle herding and mining.
The Vinca people in addition to possessing writing were also engaged in copper metallurgy. They also made clay and stone figurines and fine pottery. As among the contemporary Nubians and Tripolyeans culture the Vinca people made fine human and animal figurines .
In conclusion the archaeological evidence suggest that The Old Europeans may have been Blacks who carried the N1 lineage to Europe that were later replaced by Indo-European speaking populations. There were probably no ancient white foragers of farmers in ancient Europe.
The Tartarian writing was invented in Africa. .
.
It is based on the Thinite writing systems which was used by African people to write their language in ancient times.
In 1983,Vamos-Toth Bator and I deciphered the Tartarian tablets and discovered that it is not relating to an astrological event, it was an amulet worn by a Proto-Magyar dignitary.
Figure2: The Symbols on the Tartaria Tablet
Figure 3: The Tartaria Tablet
This amulet was deciphered by giving the characters of the Tartarian tablet phonetic values consistent with the Proto-Saharan script. Winters and Vamos-Toth found that the interpretation of the Tartarian tablet in Magyar and Manding was quite similar. Reading the Tartarian inscription from left to right in Magyar we have:
Jo taj dogo ko. "Goodness here adheres(to you from) the Deity. Taj-a to bo. Here the source of abundance. To egybe . (The Deity is) the source of Unity. Ko ne. The Deity (is) for me. Mi ont ke Which integrates (me) into one Unity (with the Deity)."
Breakdown of Symbols on Tartarian Tablet This Magyar decipherment corresponds to the Manding reading of the same signs: Yo ta togo Ko "(Make my) Present state of Existence here the Refuge[of] God Ne Ko My God fo to (is a) pleasant Refuge Mi nde Ge to consume indeed Purity."
The use of the term Ko to denote God, by the Proto-Magyar in the Tartarian amulet, supports the Kushite origin of the Magyar people who made this amulet.
The genetic unity of the Magyar and Mande translations show the African origin of the ancient Tartarians.
The Vinca Tordos culture is very interesting because of the evidence of writing found in this culture. The famous Tartaria tablets were produced by the Vinca Tordos culture. The Vinca Tordos culture is associated with western Bulgaria, southwest Romania and Yugoslavia.
In conclusion the archaeological evidence suggest that The Old Europeans may have been Blacks who carried the N1 lineage to Europe that were later replaced by Indo-European speaking populations. There were probably no ancient white foragers of farmers in ancient Europe.
.
-------------------- C. A. Winters Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Son of Ra: This is very interesting. I'm interested in all types of civilizations around the world and this civilization doesn't seem to be heard of that much. Vinca is said to be Europe's OLDEST civilization before Greece and Rome.
The Vinca culture was discussed several times before in this forum. It was a Neolithic culture so of course it's older than Sumer and Egypt which are Bronze Age cultures. Still, the predecessors of Sumer and especially Egypt are much older than Vinca since they date to Epipaleolithic times.
As for Vinca, we know it was a Stone Age complex that used pictographic writing created complex burials and even organized settlements. We don't what language these people spoke only that their society was based on agriculture and hunting.
Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Son of Ra: This is very interesting. I'm interested in all types of civilizations around the world and this civilization doesn't seem to be heard of that much. Vinca is said to be Europe's OLDEST civilization before Greece and Rome.
The Vinca culture was discussed several times before in this forum. It was a Neolithic culture so of course it's older than Sumer and Egypt which are Bronze Age cultures. Still, the predecessors of Sumer and especially Egypt are much older than Vinca since they date to Epipaleolithic times.
As for Vinca, we know it was a Stone Age complex that used pictographic writing created complex burials and even organized settlements. We don't what language these people spoke only that their society was based on agriculture and hunting.
Interesting.
But it seems more than a culture. And some of the research I did on Vinca listed it as a civilization.
Posts: 1135 | From: Top secret | Registered: Jun 2012
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ Since when is a civilization not a culture?? Notice I also called it a complex which is the same thing.
Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I too am very interested in the Vinca civilization. Many scholars like Marija Gimbutas think it may represent the culmination of what she called 'Old Europe' before the rise of Indo-European Bronze Age, though there is no proof the Vinca people did not speak Indo-European languages themselves.
Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: I too am very interested in the Vinca civilization. Many scholars like Marija Gimbutas think it may represent the culmination of what she called 'Old Europe' before the rise of Indo-European Bronze Age, though there is no proof the Vinca people did not speak Indo-European languages themselves.
How advanced was the Vinca civilization? Correct me if I am wrong, but they were the first to use copper and had many settlements. Were the Sumerians influenced by them?
Posts: 1135 | From: Top secret | Registered: Jun 2012
| IP: Logged |
posted
Vinca was a black European civilization.White European started to migrate from the Russian steppes in 1200 bc and flooded in 500 CE.
The black Khoisan after Homosapiens are the oldest people in Europe.The many figurines of the Venus of Willendorf in Europe represent the Khoisan people.The many cave paintings of Europe represent the Khoisan people therefore the Vinca civilization was Khoisan.
I like Marc Washington theory of the CAPSEMO people C for Canaanite, P for Phoenician, SE for Semite and MO for Moors.The Capsemo people a single seafaring people that colonized the Near East and Europe.Their sameness is lost in unrelated labels.The term Canaanite was also applied to the Phoenician it gradualy obtained the meaning of traders.It was the Phoenician who colonized and named the cities and countries of Europe.If the Vinca were not Khoisan then they were Canaanite.
The 5000 BC Vinca civilization wasnt older then the Nile Valley civilization.One of the greatest fraud of Western Academia was to erased 2000 years out of Egyptian civilization for racist reason to make their so call white/semite Mesopotamian civilization(black civilization) look older.Because of that there are two Egyptian Chronology, the false short chronology of Breasted dated the begining of Egyptian civilization to 3400BC. The true long chronology of Egypt of Egyptian priest Manetho, Mc Naughton, John G Jackson, Robin Walker dated Egyptian civilization to 5666 BC and Ta Seti civilization to 5900 BC.The 5000 BC Vinca civilization cant be older then Egypt.The Maa civilization of Proto Saharan Africa was dated to 12,000 BC by Clyde Winters.
posted
The Long Chronology on the begining of Egyptian civilization: Manetho 5717 BC, Champollion Figeac 5867 BC, Petrie 5510 BC, McNaughton 5776 BC, Robin Walker 5660 BC, Pochan 5619 BC. When We Ruled by Robin Walker.
Posts: 5374 | From: sepedat/sirius | Registered: Jul 2012
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Son of Ra: How advanced was the Vinca civilization? Correct me if I am wrong, but they were the first to use copper and had many settlements. Were the Sumerians influenced by them?
There is no evidence that Sumer was influenced by Vinca, in fact Sumer's predecessors preceded the Vinca civilization and so did Egypt's predecessors.
quote:Originally posted by mena7: Vinca was a black European civilization.White European started to migrate from the Russian steppes in 1200 bc and flooded in 500 CE...
You seem to equate the Indo-European migrations with 'whites' yet the two are not one and the same and whites were living in Europe well before IE migrations which there is little evidence of. Also, what evidence do you have that the Vinca people were black??
Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Son of Ra: Some say Egyptian civilization really stated 6000 bc.
That depends on what one means by Egyptian civilization. Most scholars date the beginning of Egyptian civilization with the unification of Egypt which was around 3100 BC with the rise of Mena the first pharaoh or his predecessors Narmer, Aha, etc during predynastic times. However the roots of pharaonic civilization lie to the south among the Nubian Qustul culture 3500 BC as well as number of Sudanese neolithic centers that go back to 4,000 BC the oldest known sedentary culture in the Nile Valley is the Khartoum Mesolithic which dates back at 5,000 BC.
Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: [QUOTE]Originally posted by Son of Ra: [qb] How advanced was the Vinca civilization? Correct me if I am wrong, but they were the first to use copper and had many settlements. Were the Sumerians influenced by them?
There is no evidence that Sumer was influenced by Vinca, in fact Sumer's predecessors preceded the Vinca civilization and so did Egypt's predecessors. [QUOTE]
You must be referring to Ta-Seti, am I correct?
Posts: 1135 | From: Top secret | Registered: Jun 2012
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Son of Ra: Some say Egyptian civilization really stated 6000 bc.
That depends on what one means by Egyptian civilization. Most scholars date the beginning of Egyptian civilization with the unification of Egypt which was around 3100 BC with the rise of Mena the first pharaoh or his predecessors Narmer, Aha, etc during predynastic times. However the roots of pharaonic civilization lie to the south among the Nubian Qustul culture 3500 BC as well as number of Sudanese neolithic centers that go back to 4,000 BC the oldest known sedentary culture in the Nile Valley is the Khartoum Mesolithic which dates back at 5,000 BC.
Narmer was said to be a part of the 'dynasty 0' which was before the unification of Ancient Egypt.
posted
I think Ancient Egypt was actually much older than Ancient Sumer.
Ancient Egypt beginning about 3050 BC -------- Quote: ''Ancient Egypt is considered to have begun about 3050 BC, when the first pharaoh Menes united Lower Egypt (referring to the river delta region of the Nile River), and Upper Egypt (everything south of the delta).'' Source: http://archaeology.about.com/od/ancientegypt/qt/egypt_timeline.htm
Ancient Egypt beginning about 3100 BC -------- Quote: ''The ancient city of Memphis was the Old Kingdom (ca. 3100-2258 BC) capital of Menes, the traditional unifier of Upper and Lower Egypt. The site includes the famous alabaster sphinx (with the face of Amenophis II), and was also a capital of Ramses II.'' Source: http://archaeology.about.com/library/glossary/bldef_memphis.htm
Sumer beginning 3000 BC -------- Quote: ''Sumer was one of two Early Dynastic period (3000-2350 BC) communities in southern Mesopotamia between the Tigris and Euphrates Rivers (the other was Akkad).'' Source: http://archaeology.about.com/od/sterms/g/sumer.htm ''Sumer'' was the oldest established civilization of ''Mesopotamia''. Correct me if I'm wrong...
Posts: 1135 | From: Top secret | Registered: Jun 2012
| IP: Logged |
posted
Neolithic civilization at kerma seems to go back to 5000 b.c. as well or earlier.
A neolithic town was found at kerma at least around 4800 b.c.. It may have gone back to 5000 b.c. from some other info i have read.
If it goes back to 4800 b.c. it will still make the nile valley home of the first civilization on earth.
Posts: 2560 | From: Somewhere | Registered: May 2012
| IP: Logged |
posted
It's possible that this Vinca civilization did not developed towns,just villages,and did not have calendar like nubia at that time and complex burials so it could be not a civilization like nubia at that time but a complex culture like some of the native american cultures.
Posts: 2560 | From: Somewhere | Registered: May 2012
| IP: Logged |
posted
Vince was just a complex culture,not a civilization.
Vinča culture The Vinča culture, also known as Turdaș culture or Turdaș-Vinča culture, is a Neolithic archaeological culture in Southeastern Europe, dated to the period 5500–4500 BCE. Named for its type site, Vinča-Belo Brdo, a large tell settlement discovered by Serbian archaeologist Miloje Vasić in 1908, it represents the material remains of a prehistoric society mainly distinguished by its settlement pattern and ritual behaviour. Farming technology first introduced to the region during the First Temperate Neolithic was developed further by the Vinča culture, fuelling a population boom and producing some of the largest settlements in prehistoric Europe. These settlements maintained a high degree of cultural uniformity through the long-distance exchange of ritual items, but were probably not politically unified. Various styles of zoomorphic and anthropomorphic figurines are hallmarks of the culture, as are the Vinča symbols, which some conjecture to be an early form of proto-writing. Though not conventionally considered part of the Chalcolithic or "Copper Age", the Vinča culture provides the earliest known example of copper metallurgy.
________________
Vinca seems to have settlements the size of towns at least or a city for it' time from what i have read just now but that's still will not make a culture a civilization.
Other elements must come into play at least.
To be called a civilization a culture must have division of labor, agriculture, organized warfare, social stratification,town or city,complex burials,and calendar if there is no writing.
Nubia and sudan had all of this by 5000 b.c. or 4800 b.c. at least.
quote- A stone circle at Nabta Playa in Egypt's(really lower nubia) Western Desert is thought to act as a calendar and was constructed around 7000 BC.
Çatalhöyük was the size of a city but they did not have most of what makes the core elements of a city or civilization,so even if they had the size they were still not a city of what i have learn recently and would not be a civilization. It would just be a large village or a proto-city.
A Civilization that has towns could function like city,that's why they could be called civilization combined with other elements.
A settlement the size of a town or city like Vinca would not still be called a civilization because that settlement does not function like a town or city because of other elements missing.
Jericho was the size of a town the core elements civilization,so even if they has the size from what i have learn recently they still would not be a civilization.
All those other factors have to come into play like i said above,so these others were just complex cultures.
They still were not like nubia at this time making africa still the home of the first civilization.
Posts: 2560 | From: Somewhere | Registered: May 2012
| IP: Logged |
posted
Has a complex culture nabta playa is still older then vinca,since i consider vinca just a complex culture has well.
Nabta Playa was once a large basin in the Nubian Desert, located approximately 800 kilometers south of modern day Cairo[1] or about 100 kilometers west of Abu Simbel in southern Egypt,[2] 22° 32' north, 30° 42' east. Today the region is characterized by numerous archaeological sites. _________________________
Nabta Playa would be older then vinca if it was a civilization too. It had more of the basic elements to be called civilization more so by 8000 or 7000 b.c. AT LEAST.
The only thing missing is that they still lived in villages and their settlements were not large enough to be called a towns,but if they did it called be called more clearly a civilization by 7000 b.c. to 6000 or around there at least.
This is what it had.
quote- By the 7th millennium BC, exceedingly large and organized settlements were found in the region, relying on deep wells for sources of water. Huts were constructed in straight rows. Sustenance included fruit, legumes, millets, sorghum and tubers.
Also in the late 7th millennium BC, but a little later than the time referred to above, imported goats and sheep, apparently from Southwest Asia , appear. Many large hearths also appear.
High level of organization Archaeological discoveries reveal that these prehistoric peoples led livelihoods seemingly at a higher level of organization than their contemporaries who lived closer to the Nile Valley.
The people of Nabta Playa had: above-ground and below-ground stone construction, villages designed in pre-planned arrangements, and deep wells that held water throughout the year. Findings also indicate that the region was occupied only seasonally, most likely only in the summer period, when the local lake filled with water for grazing cattle.
Religious ties to ancient Egypt By the 6th millennium BC, evidence of a prehistoric religion or cult appears, with a number of sacrificed cattle buried in stone-roofed chambers lined with clay. It has been suggested that the associated cattle cult indicated in Nabta Playa marks an early evolution of Ancient Egypt's Hathor cult. For example, Hathor was worshipped as a nighttime protector in desert regions (see Serabit el-Khadim). To directly quote professors Wendorf and Schild:
... there are many aspects of political and ceremonial life in the Predynastic and Old Kingdom that reflects a strong impact from Saharan cattle pastoralists...
Nevertheless, though the religious practices of the region involving cattle suggest ties to Ancient Egypt, Egyptologist Mark Lehner cautions:
It makes sense, but not in a facile, direct way. You can't go straight from these megaliths to the pyramid of Djoser.
Other subterranean complexes are also found in Nabta Playa, one of which included evidence of perhaps an early Egyptian attempt at sculpture.
One of the world's earliest known examples of archeoastronomy.
Now some say nabta playa should be called a civilization because it had all these other element mentioned,and maybe it should. If you could call it a civilization then the first civilization on earth would have started in lower nubia first.
I have mix feelings and at times i feel it should be called civilization,but it's clear the settlements no matter how complex must be at least the size of a town even if the villages function like a town or city.
Posts: 2560 | From: Somewhere | Registered: May 2012
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Firewall: Vince was just a complex culture,not a civilization.
Vinča culture The Vinča culture, also known as Turdaș culture or Turdaș-Vinča culture, is a Neolithic archaeological culture in Southeastern Europe, dated to the period 5500–4500 BCE. Named for its type site, Vinča-Belo Brdo, a large tell settlement discovered by Serbian archaeologist Miloje Vasić in 1908, it represents the material remains of a prehistoric society mainly distinguished by its settlement pattern and ritual behaviour. Farming technology first introduced to the region during the First Temperate Neolithic was developed further by the Vinča culture, fuelling a population boom and producing some of the largest settlements in prehistoric Europe. These settlements maintained a high degree of cultural uniformity through the long-distance exchange of ritual items, but were probably not politically unified. Various styles of zoomorphic and anthropomorphic figurines are hallmarks of the culture, as are the Vinča symbols, which some conjecture to be an early form of proto-writing. Though not conventionally considered part of the Chalcolithic or "Copper Age", the Vinča culture provides the earliest known example of copper metallurgy.
________________
Vinca seems to have settlements the size of towns at least or a city for it' time from what i have read just now but that's still will not make a culture a civilization.
Other elements must come into play at least.
To be called a civilization a culture must have division of labor, agriculture, organized warfare, social stratification,town or city,complex burials,and calendar if there is no writing.
Nubia and sudan had all of this by 5000 b.c. or 4800 b.c. at least.
quote- A stone circle at Nabta Playa in Egypt's(really lower nubia) Western Desert is thought to act as a calendar and was constructed around 7000 BC.
Çatalhöyük was the size of a city but they did not have most of what makes the core elements of a city or civilization,so even if they had the size they were still not a city of what i have learn recently and would not be a civilization. It would just be a large village or a proto-city.
A Civilization that has towns could function like city,that's why they could be called civilization combined with other elements.
A settlement the size of a town or city like Vinca would not still be called a civilization because that settlement does not function like a town or city because of other elements missing.
Jericho was the size of a town the core elements civilization,so even if they has the size from what i have learn recently they still would not be a civilization.
All those other factors have to come into play like i said above,so these others were just complex cultures.
They still were not like nubia at this time making africa still the home of the first civilization.
This is an interesting thread, but it ignores a number of facts.
1) The Kerma civilization was a Kushite civilization.
2) The Sumerian civilization was founded by Kushites.
3) The Elamite civilization was a Kushite civilization.
4) The Vinca civilization was founded by the Magyar people. The Magyar/Hungarian people trace their origins back to Kush. See:
posted
All those could be called civilization except the vinca. It was complex put not complex enough in my view to be called a civilization,and yes most likely it was created by those of african origin anyway.
It almost reminds of another complex culture has well called Göbekli Tepe in turkey.
It was not a civilization like some believe and it was created by those of african origin living in southwest asia anyway since whites did not exist back then when it's culture was created.
The definition of civilization should not be that strict but should not be to loose either,so we have to be very careful. _____ Oh and a correction-
quote- Other subterranean complexes are also found in Nabta Playa, one of which included evidence of perhaps an early Egyptian attempt at sculpture.
That should be- Other subterranean complexes are also found in Nabta Playa, one of which included evidence of perhaps an early Nubian attempt at sculpture.
Posts: 2560 | From: Somewhere | Registered: May 2012
| IP: Logged |
It almost reminds of another complex culture has well called Göbekli Tepe in turkey.
It was not a civilization like some believe and it was created by those of african origin living in southwest asia anyway since whites did not exist back then when it's culture was created.
posted
For some ancient writers Ancient Egyptian civilization was very old.Simplicus (6 cent CE) writes he had always heard that the Egyptians had kept astronomical observations and records for at least 630,000 years...Diogene Laertius carried back the astronomical calculations of the Egyptians to 48,863 years before Alexander the great.Maritanus Capella corroborates the same by telling posterity that the Egyptians had secretly studied astronomy for over 40,000 years before they imparted their knowledge to the world. J. Lewis.
Herodotus reported that he was informed byEgyptian priests that the sun had twice set where it now rose, and twice risen where it now set.The statement indicates that the Ancient Egyptian counted their history for more than one zodiac cycle of 25,920 years (the great year).
According to Eusibius Manetho ascribed great antiquity to Pharaonic Egypt, With the age of the Ancient Egyptian antiquity of 36,000 years, wich is consistent to the accounts of Herodotus.This is in agreement with the account of Diodorus of Sicily and the Turin Papyrus.The Ancient Egyptian history extended to a complete zodiac cycle of 25,920 years plus a partial zodiac cycle, between 10948 BCE and the end of the age of Aries when Ancient Egypt lost its independence.Ancient Egypt civilisation being 36,000 years old goes again Western and Christian establishments have predetermined that life on earth is about 5000 years old.
I believe Egyptian Priest Manetho aka Omane Anto when he stateddynastic Egypt civilisation started in 5717 BC.Kushite civilization probably started in 6000 BC. I dont believe Western Academia date of 3100 BC for the begining of Dynastic Egypt.
Clyde I believe the Kerma, Sumerian, Elamite and Vinca civilization were Kushite civilizations. The Canaanite/Kana Ani civilization was probably Kushite to.
posted
I was looking back at some of the older threads.
I wanted to post some correct and updated info.
Mesopotamia
quote: Sumerian civilization coalesces in the subsequent Uruk period (4000 to 3100 BC).Named after the Sumerian city of Uruk, this period saw the emergence of urban life in Mesopotamia and, during its later phase, the gradual emergence of the cuneiform script. Proto-writing in the region dates to around 3500 BC, with the earliest texts dating to 3300 BC; early cuneiform writing emerged in 3000 BC. It was also during this period that pottery painting declined as copper started to become popular, along with cylinder seals.Sumerian cities during the Uruk period were probably theocratic and were most likely headed by a priest-king (ensi), assisted by a council of elders, including both men and women. It is quite possible that the later Sumerian pantheon was modeled upon this political structure. Uruk trade networks started to expand to other parts of Mesopotamia and as far as North Caucasus, and strong signs of governmental organization and social stratification began to emerge leading to the Early Dynastic Period (c. 2900 BC). The Jemdet Nasr period, which is generally dated from 3100 to 2900 BC and succeeds the Uruk period, is known as one of the formative stages in the development of the cuneiform script. The oldest clay tablets come from Uruk and date to the late fourth millennium BC, slightly earlier than the Jemdet Nasr Period. By the time of the Jemdet Nasr Period, the script had already undergone a number of significant changes. It originally consisted of pictographs, but by the time of the Jemdet Nasr Period it was already adopting simpler and more abstract designs. It is also during this period that the script acquired its iconic wedge-shaped appearance.At the end of the Jemdet Nasr period there was a major archaeologically attested river flood in Shuruppak and other parts of Mesopotamia. Polychrome pottery from a destruction level below the flood deposit has been dated to immediately before the Early Dynastic Period around 2900 BC.
Ancient Egypt
quote: Egyptian civilization begins during the second phase of the Naqda culture, known as the Gerzeh period, around 3500 BC and coalesces with the unification of Upper and Lower Egypt around 3150 BC. Farming produced the vast majority of food; with increased food supplies, the populace adopted a much more sedentary lifestyle, and the larger settlements grew to cities of about 5,000 residents. It was in this time that the city dwellers started using mud brick to build their cities, and the use of the arch and recessed walls for decorative effect became popular.Copper instead of stone was increasingly used to make tools and weaponry. Symbols on Gerzean pottery also resemble nascent Egyptian hieroglyphs. Early evidence also exists of contact with the Near East, particularly Canaan and the Byblos coast, during this time.Concurrent with these cultural advances, a process of unification of the societies and towns of the upper Nile River, or Upper Egypt, occurred. At the same time the societies of the Nile Delta, or Lower Egypt, also underwent a unification process. During his reign in Upper Egypt, King Narmer defeated his enemies on the Delta and merged both the Kingdom of Upper and Lower Egypt under his single rule.
Ancient India
quote: The Indus Valley Civilisation starts around 3300 BC with what is referred to as the Early Harappan Phase (3300 to 2600 BC). The earliest examples of the Indus Script date to this period, as well as the emergence of citadels representing centralised authority and an increasingly urban quality of life. Trade networks linked this culture with related regional cultures and distant sources of raw materials, including lapis lazuli and other materials for bead-making. By this time, villagers had domesticated numerous crops, including peas, sesame seeds, dates, and cotton, as well as animals, including the water buffalo.
Ancient Andes
quote: The Norte Chico civilization proper is understood to have emerged around 3200 BC, as it is at that point that large-scale human settlement and communal construction across multiple sites becomes clearly apparent. Since the early 21st century, it has been established as the oldest known civilization in the Americas. The civilization flourished at the confluence of three rivers, the Fortaleza, the Pativilca, and the Supe. These river valleys each have large clusters of sites. Further south, there are several associated sites along the Huaura River. Notable settlements include the cities of Caral, the largest and most complex Preceramic site, and Aspero. Norte Chico sites are known for their density of large sites with immense architecture. Haas argues that the density of sites in such a small area is globally unique for a nascent civilization. During the third millennium BC, Norte Chico may have been the most densely populated area of the world (excepting, possibly, northern China). The Supe, Pativilca, Fortaleza, and Huaura River valleys each have several related sites.
Minoan civilization
quote: The Minoan civilization was a Bronze Age Aegean civilization on the island of Crete and other Aegean Islands, flourishing from c. 3000 BC to c. 1450 BC and, after a late period of decline, finally ending around 1100 BC, during the early Greek Dark Ages. It represents the first advanced civilization in Europe, leaving behind massive building complexes, tools, artwork, writing systems, and a massive network of trade. The civilization was rediscovered at the beginning of the 20th century through the work of British archaeologist Sir Arthur Evans. The name "Minoan" derives from the mythical King Minos and was coined by Evans, who identified the site at Knossos with the labyrinth and the Minotaur. The Minoan civilization has been described as the earliest of its kind in Europe, and historian Will Durant called the Minoans "the first link in the European chain".
Ancient China
quote: Chinese civilization begins during the second phase of the Erlitou period (1900 to 1500 BC), with Erlitou considered the first state level society of East Asia. There is considerable debate whether Erlitou sites correlate to the semi-legendary Xia dynasty. The Xia dynasty (2070 to 1600 BC) is the first dynasty to be described in ancient Chinese historical records such as the Bamboo Annals, first published more than a millennium later during the Western Zhou period. Although Xia is an important element in Chinese historiography, there is to date no contemporary written evidence to corroborate the dynasty. Erlitou saw an increase in bronze metallurgy and urbanization and was a rapidly growing regional center with palatial complexes that provide evidence for social stratification.The Erlitou civilization is divided into four phases, each of roughly 50 years. During Phase I, covering 100 hectares (250 acres), Erlitou was a rapidly growing regional center with estimated population of several thousand but not yet an urban civilization or capital. Urbanization began in Phase II, expanding to 300 ha (740 acres) with a population around 11,000. A palace area of 12 ha (30 acres) was demarcated by four roads. It contained the 150x50 m Palace 3, composed of three courtyards along a 150-meter axis, and Palace 5. A bronze foundry was established to the south of the palatial complex that was controlled by the elite who lived in palaces. The city reached its peak in Phase III, and may have had a population of around 24,000. The palatial complex was surrounded by a two-meter-thick rammed-earth wall, and Palaces 1, 7, 8, 9 were built. The earthwork volume of rammed earth for the base of largest Palace 1 is 20,000 m³ at least. Palaces 3 and 5 were abandoned and replaced by 4,200-square-kilometer (4.5×1010 sq ft) Palace 2 and Palace 4. In Phase IV, the population decreased to around 20,000, but building continued. Palace 6 was built as an extension of Palace 2, and Palaces 10 and 11 were built. Phase IV overlaps with the Lower phase of the Erligang culture (1600–1450 BC). Around 1600 to 1560 BC, about 6 km northeast of Erlitou, Eligang cultural walled city was built at Yanshi,which coincides with an increase in production of arrowheads at Erlitou.This situation might indicate that the Yanshi City was competing for power and dominance with Erlitou.Production of bronzes and other elite goods ceased at the end of Phase IV, at the same time as the Erligang city of Zhengzhou was established 85 km (53 mi) to the east. There is no evidence of destruction by fire or war, but, during the Upper Erligang phase (1450–1300 BC), all the palaces were abandoned, and Erlitou was reduced to a village of 30 ha (74 acres).
Cradle of civilization
quote: A cradle of civilization is a location where civilization is understood to have independently emerged. According to current thinking, there was no single "cradle" of civilization; instead, several cradles of civilization developed independently. Mesopotamia, Ancient Egypt, Ancient India and Ancient China are believed to be the earliest in the Old World.The extent to which there was significant influence between the early civilizations of the Near East and India with the Chinese civilization of East Asia (Far East) is disputed. Scholars accept that the civilizations of Mesoamerica, that mainly existed in modern-day Mexico, and the civilization in Norte Chico, a region in the north-central coastal region of Peru which rivals in age the civilizations of the Old World, emerged independently. Scholars have defined civilization by using various criteria such as the use of writing, cities, a class-based society, agriculture, animal husbandry, public buildings, metallurgy, and monumental architecture.The term cradle of civilization has frequently been applied to a variety of cultures and areas, in particular the Ancient Near Eastern Chalcolithic (Ubaid period) and Fertile Crescent, Ancient India and Ancient China. It has also been applied to ancient Anatolia, the Levant and Iranian plateau, and used to refer to culture predecessors—such as Ancient Greece as the predecessor of Western civilization.
Rise of civilization
quote: The earliest signs of a process leading to sedentary culture can be seen in the Levant to as early as 12,000 BC, when the Natufian culture became sedentary; it evolved into an agricultural society by 10,000 BC. The importance of water to safeguard an abundant and stable food supply, due to favourable conditions for hunting, fishing and gathering resources including cereals, provided an initial wide spectrum economy that triggered the creation of permanent villages. The earliest proto-urban settlements with several thousand inhabitants emerged in the Neolithic. The first cities to house several tens of thousands were Memphis and Uruk, by the 31st century BC (see Historical urban community sizes). Historic times are marked apart from prehistoric times when "records of the past begin to be kept for the benefit of future generations"—in written or oral form. If the rise of civilization is taken to coincide with the development of writing out of proto-writing, the Near Eastern Chalcolithic, the transitional period between the Neolithic and the Bronze Age during the 4th millennium BC, and the development of proto-writing in Harappa in the Indus Valley of South Asia around 3300 BC are the earliest incidences, followed by Chinese proto-writing evolving into the oracle bone script, and again by the emergence of Mesoamerican writing systems from about 900 BC. In the absence of written documents, most aspects of the rise of early civilizations are contained in archaeological assessments that document the development of formal institutions and the material culture. A "civilized" way of life is ultimately linked to conditions coming almost exclusively from intensive agriculture. Gordon Childe defined the development of civilization as the result of two successive revolutions: the Neolithic Revolution, triggering the development of settled communities, and the Urban Revolution, which enhanced tendencies towards dense settlements, specialized occupational groups, social classes, exploitation of surpluses, monumental public buildings and writing. Few of those conditions, however, are unchallenged by the records: dense cities were not attested in Egypt's Old Kingdom and cities had a dispersed population in the Maya area; the Incas lacked writing although they could keep records with Quipus which might also have had literary uses; and often monumental architecture preceded any indication of village settlement. For instance, in present-day Louisiana, researchers have determined that cultures that were primarily nomadic organized over generations to build earthwork mounds at seasonal settlements as early as 3400 BC. Rather than a succession of events and preconditions, the rise of civilization could equally be hypothesized as an accelerated process that started with incipient agriculture and culminated in the Oriental Bronze Age.
Single or multiple cradles
quote: A traditional theory of the spread of civilization is that it began in the Fertile Crescent and spread out from there by influence. Scholars more generally now believe that civilizations arose independently at several locations in both hemispheres. They have observed that sociocultural developments occurred along different timeframes. "Sedentary" and "nomadic" communities continued to interact considerably; they were not strictly divided among widely different cultural groups. The concept of a cradle of civilization has a focus where the inhabitants came to build cities, to create writing systems, to experiment in techniques for making pottery and using metals, to domesticate animals, and to develop complex social structures involving class systems. Current scholarship generally identifies six sites where civilization emerged independently: Fertile Crescent Tigris–Euphrates river system Nile Valley Indo-Gangetic Plain North China Plain Andean Coast Mesoamerican Gulf Coast
Timeline The following timeline shows a timeline of cultures, with the approximate dates of the emergence of civilization (as discussed in the article) in the featured areas, the primary cultures associated with these early civilizations. It is important to note that the timeline is not indicative of the beginning of human habitation, the start of a specific ethnic group, or the development of Neolithic cultures in the area – any of which often occurred significantly earlier than the emergence of civilization proper. In the case of the Indus Valley Civilizatiin, this was followed by a period od of de-urbanization and regionalisation, and the co-existence of indigenous local agricultural cultures and the pastoral Indo-Aryans, who came from Central Asia.
Proto-city
quote: A proto-city, or a proto-town, is a large village or town of the Neolithic such as Jericho and Çatalhöyük, and also any prehistoric settlement which has both rural and urban features. A proto-city is distinguished from a true city in that it lacks planning and centralized rule. For example, Jericho evidently had a class system, but no roads, while Çatalhöyük apparently lacked social stratification. This is what distinguishes them from the first city-states of the early Mesopotamian cities in the 4th millennium B.C. Prehistoric Egypt and the Ubaid period of Sumer featured what some call proto-cities. The break from these later mentioned settlements and urban settlements is the emergence of Eridu, the first Sumerian city, in the Uruk period around 4000 BC. A European example of this would be the Cucuteni-Trypillian culture of eastern Europe and north of the Black Sea, and which dates back to the fourth millennium BC.
Nubia (/ˈnjuːbiə/) is a region along the Nile river encompassing the area between the first cataract of the Nile (just south of Aswan in southern Egypt) and the confluence of the Blue and White Niles (south of Khartoum in central Sudan), or more strictly, Al Dabbah. It was the seat of one of the earliest civilizations of ancient Africa, the Kerma culture, which lasted from around 2500 BC until its conquest by the New Kingdom of Egypt under Pharaoh Thutmose I around 1500 BC, whose heirs ruled most of Nubia for the next 400 years. Nubia was home to several empires, most prominently the kingdom of Kush, which conquered Egypt in eighth-century BC during the reign of Piye and ruled the country as its 25th Dynasty (to be replaced a century later by the native Egyptian 26th Dynasty).
History
quote: Prehistory (6000–3500 BC) In prehistoric times, North Africa was mostly occupied by nomadic cattle herders. The Khartoum Mesolithic was a highly advanced culture in southern Nubia (near modern Khartoum). They created sophisticated pottery that is "perhaps the oldest known in the world".
By 5000 BC, the people who inhabited what is now called Nubia participated in the Neolithic revolution. The Sahara became drier and people began to domesticate sheep, goats, and cattle. Saharan rock reliefs depict scenes that have been thought to suggest the presence of a cattle cult, typical of those seen throughout parts of Eastern Africa and the Nile Valley even to this day. Nubian rock art depicts hunters using bows and arrows in the neolithic period, which is a precursor to Nubian archer culture in later times.
Megaliths discovered at Nabta Playa are early examples of what seems to be one of the world's first astronomical devices, predating Stonehenge by almost 2,000 years. This complexity as expressed by different levels of authority within the society there likely formed the basis for the structure of both the Neolithic society at Nabta and the Old Kingdom of Egypt.
Pre-Kerma; A-Group (3500-3000 BC)
quote:
Upper Nubia The poorly known "pre-Kerma" culture existed in Upper (Southern) Nubia on a stretch of fertile farmland just south of the Third Cataract.
Lower Nubia
Nubia has one of the oldest civilizations in the world. This history is often intertwined with Egypt to the north. Around 3500 BC, the second "Nubian" culture, termed the Early A-Group, arose in Lower (Northern) Nubia. They were sedentary agriculturalists,traded with the Egyptians, and exported gold. This trade is supported archaeologically by large amounts of Egyptian commodities deposited in the A-Group graves. The imports consisted of gold objects, copper tools, faience amulets and beads, seals, slate palettes, stone vessels, and a variety of pots. During this time, the Nubians began creating distinctive black topped, red pottery.
Around 3100 BC the A-group transitioned from the Early to Classical phases. "Arguably royal burials are known only at Qustul and possibly Sayala. During this period, the wealth of A-group kings rivaled Egyptian kings. Royal A-group graves contained gold and richly decorated pottery. Some scholars believe Nubian A-Group rulers and early Egyptian pharaohs used related royal symbols; similarities in A-Group Nubia and Upper Egypt rock art support this position. Scholars from the University of Chicago Oriental Institute excavated at Qustul (near Abu Simbel – Modern Sudan), in 1960–64, and found artifacts which incorporated images associated with Egyptian pharaohs. Archeologist Bruce Williams studied the artifacts and concluded that "Egypt and Nubia A-Group culture shared the same official culture", "participated in the most complex dynastic developments", and "Nubia and Egypt were both part of the great East African substratum". Williams also wrote that Qustul "could well have been the seat of Egypt's founding dynasty". David O'Connor wrote that the Qustul incense burner provides evidence that the A-group Nubian culture in Qustul marked the "pivotal change" from predynastic to dynastic "Egyptian monumental art". However, "most scholars do not agree with this hypothesis", as more recent finds in Egypt indicate that this iconography originated in Egypt instead of Nubia, and that the Qustul rulers adopted or emulated the symbols of Egyptian pharaohs.
Kingdom of Kush
quote:
The Kingdom of Kush (/kʊʃ, kʌʃ/; Egyptian: 𓎡𓄿𓈙𓈉 kꜣš, Assyrian: Rassam cylinder Ku-u-si.jpg Ku-u-si, in LXX Ancient Greek: Κυς and Κυσι; Coptic: ⲉϭⲱϣ; Hebrew: כּוּשׁ, Oromiffa: Kush) was an ancient kingdom in Nubia, centered along the Nile Valley in what is now northern Sudan and southern Egypt.
The region of Nubia was an early cradle of civilization, producing several complex societies that engaged in trade and industry. The city-state of Kerma emerged as the dominant political force between 2450 and 1450 BC, controlling the Nile Valley between the first and fourth cataracts, an area as large as Egypt. The Egyptians were the first to identify Kerma as “Kush" and over the next several centuries the two civilizations engaged in intermittent warfare, trade, and cultural exchange.
Kerma culture
quote: The Kerma culture or Kerma kingdom was an early civilization centered in Kerma, Sudan. It flourished from around 2500 BCE to 1500 BCE in ancient Nubia. The Kerma culture was based in the southern part of Nubia, or "Upper Nubia" (in parts of present-day northern and central Sudan), and later extended its reach northward into Lower Nubia and the border of Egypt. The polity seems to have been one of a number of Nile Valley states during the Middle Kingdom of Egypt. In the Kingdom of Kerma's latest phase, lasting from about 1700–1500 BCE, it absorbed the Sudanese kingdom of Sai and became a sizable, populous empire rivaling Egypt. Around 1500 BCE, it was absorbed into the New Kingdom of Egypt, but rebellions continued for centuries. By the eleventh century BCE, the more-Egyptianized Kingdom of Kush emerged, possibly from Kerma, and regained the region's independence from Egypt.
Nabta Playa
quote: Nabta Playa was once a large internally drained basin in the Nubian Desert, located approximately 800 kilometers south of modern-day Cairo or about 100 kilometers west of Abu Simbel in southern Egypt, 22.51° north, 30.73° east.Today the region is characterized by numerous archaeological sites. The Nabta Playa archaeological site, one of the earliest of the Egyptian Neolithic Period, is dated to circa 7500 BC.
quote:
Organisation Archaeological discoveries reveal that these prehistoric peoples led livelihoods seemingly at a higher level of organization than their contemporaries who lived closer to the Nile Valley. The people of Nabta Playa had above-ground and below-ground stone construction, villages designed in pre-planned arrangements, and deep wells that held water throughout the year.
Findings also indicate that the region was occupied only seasonally, most likely only in the summer period, when the local lake filled with water for grazing cattle. Comparative research indicated that the indigenous inhabitants may have a significantly more advanced knowledge of astronomy and mathematics than previously thought possible.
Note- nubian civilization started around 2500 b.c. at kerma. There was no pre-kerma civilization in nubia but pre-kerma was a town that had a highly advanced culture.
Posts: 2560 | From: Somewhere | Registered: May 2012
| IP: Logged |
The earliest known hieroglyphs date back to the second half of the 4th millennium BC, such as the clay labels of a Predynastic ruler called "Scorpion I" (Naqada IIIA period, c. 32nd century BC) recovered at Abydos (modern Umm el-Qa'ab) in 1998 or the Narmer Palette, dating to c. 3100 BC, and several recent discoveries that may be slightly older, though these glyphs were based on a much older artistic rather than written tradition. The hieroglyphic script was logographic with phonetic adjuncts that included an effective alphabet. The world's oldest deciphered sentence was found on a seal impression found in the tomb of Seth-Peribsen at Umm el-Qa'ab, which dates from the Second Dynasty (28th or 27th century BC). There are around 800 hieroglyphs dating back to the Old Kingdom, Middle Kingdom and New Kingdom Eras. By the Greco-Roman period, there are more than 5,000.
Writing was very important in maintaining the Egyptian empire, and literacy was concentrated among an educated elite of scribes. Only people from certain backgrounds were allowed to train to become scribes, in the service of temple, pharaonic, and military authorities, resulting in only 1 percent of the population that could write. The hieroglyph system was always difficult to learn, but in later centuries was purposely made even more so, as this preserved the scribes' status.
The world's oldest known alphabet appears to have been developed by Canaanite turquoise miners in the Sinai desert around the mid-19th century BC. Around 30 crude inscriptions have been found at a mountainous Egyptian mining site known as Serabit el-Khadem. This site was also home to a temple of Hathor, the "Mistress of turquoise". A later, two line inscription has also been found at Wadi el-Hol in Central Egypt. Based on hieroglyphic prototypes, but also including entirely new symbols, each sign apparently stood for a consonant rather than a word: the basis of an alphabetic system. It was not until the 12th to 9th centuries, however, that the alphabet took hold and became widely used.
Mesopotamia
quote: While neolithic writing is a current research topic, conventional history assumes that the writing process first evolved from economic necessity in the ancient Near East. Writing most likely began as a consequence of political expansion in ancient cultures, which needed reliable means for transmitting information, maintaining financial accounts, keeping historical records, and similar activities. Around the 4th millennium BC, the complexity of trade and administration outgrew the power of memory, and writing became a more dependable method of recording and presenting transactions in a permanent form.
The invention of the first writing systems is roughly contemporary with the beginning of the Bronze Age of the late 4th millennium BC. The Sumerian archaic cuneiform script and the Egyptian hieroglyphs are generally considered the earliest writing systems, both emerging out of their ancestral proto-literate symbol systems from 3400 to 3200 BC with earliest coherent texts from about 2600 BC. It is generally agreed that Sumerian writing was an independent invention; however, it is debated whether Egyptian writing was developed completely independently of Sumerian, or was a case of cultural diffusion.
Archaeologist Denise Schmandt-Besserat determined the link between previously uncategorized clay "tokens", the oldest of which have been found in the Zagros region of Iran, and the first known writing, Mesopotamian cuneiform. In approximately 8000 BC, the Mesopotamians began using clay tokens to count their agricultural and manufactured goods. Later they began placing these tokens inside large, hollow clay containers (bulla, or globular envelopes) which were then sealed. The quantity of tokens in each container came to be expressed by impressing, on the container's surface, one picture for each instance of the token inside. They next dispensed with the tokens, relying solely on symbols for the tokens, drawn on clay surfaces. To avoid making a picture for each instance of the same object (for example: 100 pictures of a hat to represent 100 hats), they 'counted' the objects by using various small marks. In this way the Sumerians added "a system for enumerating objects to their incipient system of symbols".
The original Mesopotamian writing system was derived around 3200 BC from this method of keeping accounts. By the end of the 4th millennium BC, the Mesopotamians were using a triangular-shaped stylus pressed into soft clay to record numbers. This system was gradually augmented with using a sharp stylus to indicate what was being counted by means of pictographs. Round-stylus and sharp-stylus writing was gradually replaced by writing using a wedge-shaped stylus (hence the term cuneiform), at first only for logograms, but by the 29th century BC also for phonetic elements. Around 2700 BC, cuneiform began to represent syllables of spoken Sumerian. About that time, Mesopotamian cuneiform became a general purpose writing system for logograms, syllables, and numbers. This script was adapted to another Mesopotamian language, the East Semitic Akkadian (Assyrian and Babylonian) around 2600 BC, and then to others such as Elamite, Hattian, Hurrian and Hittite. Scripts similar in appearance to this writing system include those for Ugaritic and Old Persian. With the adoption of Aramaic as the 'lingua franca' of the Neo-Assyrian Empire (911–609 BC), Old Aramaic was also adapted to Mesopotamian cuneiform. The last cuneiform scripts in Akkadian discovered thus far date from the 1st century AD.
quote:Originally posted by Firewall: I was looking back at some of the older threads.
I wanted to post some correct and updated info.
... SNIP .....
Single or multiple cradles
quote: A traditional theory of the spread of civilization is that it began in the Fertile Crescent and spread out from there by influence. Scholars more generally now believe that civilizations arose independently at several locations in both hemispheres. They have observed that sociocultural developments occurred along different timeframes. "Sedentary" and "nomadic" communities continued to interact considerably; they were not strictly divided among widely different cultural groups. The concept of a cradle of civilization has a focus where the inhabitants came to build cities, to create writing systems, to experiment in techniques for making pottery and using metals, to domesticate animals, and to develop complex social structures involving class systems. Current scholarship generally identifies six sites where civilization emerged independently: Fertile Crescent Tigris–Euphrates river system Indo-Gangetic Plain North China Plain Andean Coast Mesoamerican Gulf Coast
Timeline The following timeline shows a timeline of cultures, with the approximate dates of the emergence of civilization (as discussed in the article) in the featured areas, the primary cultures associated with these early civilizations. It is important to note that the timeline is not indicative of the beginning of human habitation, the start of a specific ethnic group, or the development of Neolithic cultures in the area – any of which often occurred significantly earlier than the emergence of civilization proper. In the case of the Indus Valley Civilizatiin, this was followed by a period od of de-urbanization and regionalisation, and the co-existence of indigenous local agricultural cultures and the pastoral Indo-Aryans, who came from Central Asia.
.....
Nubia Note- nubian civilization started around 2500 b.c. at kerma. There was no pre-kerma civilization in nubia but pre-kerma was a town that had a advanced culture.
The problem with this wikipedia article is that it ties the Nile Valley and Euphrates valley as part of the "fertile crescent". But they are separate and distinct river valleys with separate historical processes related to their respective ancient cultures and civilizations. And much of the desire to connect the two goes back to Petrie who came up with the naming system for the Nile Valley predynastic periods with Gerzeh being the first one on this timeline. Of course the issue here is that Gerzeh is part of the so-called "Naqada" phase situated in Upper Egypt but that wasn't the first phase as there were other cultures that preceded it. Yet because of their desire to connect the culture of the Nile valley to the Tigris you get Gerzeh as the start because of all the artifacts from the Tigris and Euphrates they claimed to have found in this time from the Nile Valley. Also, Gerzeh is in the North while the actual location of most predynastic sites and the town Naqada itself are in the South. So there is something fishy here in that they are trying to find some way to downplay the importance of the South in the evolution of Nile Valley culture by trying to insinuate "Northern influence" from the Levant as the basis of that evolution, which there is no evidence for. One key example of the difference between the two river systems and ancient cultures is that most of the ancient neolithic in the Tigris and Euphrates was without pottery and thus called the "Pre Pottery Neolithic" whereas the Nile Valley has had pottery, again originating in the South going back over 10,000 years. And pottery is a fundamental part of the evolution of cultures in the Nile Valley.
And that also relates to this concept of "Nubia" as the prehistory of the Nile is mostly in the South in the same areas called "Nubia". But this goes back 20,000 years and obviously no "Nubia" or "Egypt" existed at that time (besides the fact that there never was a nation state called Nubia on the Nile Valley). So because of this concept of "Nubia" the timeline of Nile Valley history is flawed as the precursors for the Nile and in some ways the Levant are found along the Nile in these earlier time periods to the South due to the semi nomadic nature of the populations in these areas.
So obviously given the continuous history of the Nile Valley going back 20,000 years we see many of these timelines of the development of Nile Valley civilization are somewhat arbitrary and based on a desire to tie it in with the Tigris and Euphrates as the "mother" culture of both which is just obviously false. And to go with tying it into the Tigris and Euphrates you got a separation from Africa as seen in the artificial split between Nubia/Egypt as mentioned previously. Because basically what it boils down to is if there are over 10,000 years of evidence along the Nile of social and cultural evolution and survival strategies leading up to the Neolithic then that would form the basis of later cultural evolution. And seeing that the early culture of the predynastic also started in the South, it would only make sense that this is a continuation of those earlier phases. But because of the "dynastic race" theory that Petrie put forward for invaders hitting the shores of the Upper Egyptian Red sea, that all got twisted into a convoluted mess. Because the whole point of having these timelines based on River Valleys and so forth is to show them as a continuous historical process over time. Yet here, we are seeing arbitrary splits serving to make false distinctions not based on evidence and relationships but agendas and beliefs.
quote: Like previous temporal frameworks, this revised time frame retains the division of the Predynastic into discrete phases. Petrie’s original partitioning of the archaeological evidence was predicated on the identification of invading cultures(the Amratian, Gerzean, and Semainean, named after cemeteries in Upper Egypt).These theories have long been abandoned as the indigenous character of Egyptian social change was recognized and as more nuanced understandings of Egypt’s relationships with the outside world developed (Gatto2014; van den Brink andLevy2002; Wengrow2006,2010). Within this continuum, however, what warrants the demarcation of five distinct horizons is not only fundamental transformations inmaterial culture but also distinctive shifts in social practices and geographies of power, developments that are more syncopated and complex than those presented in general accounts of state formation.
quote: Archaeological evidence shows that the Mandé were early producers of stone settlement civilizations. These were initially built on the rocky promontories of Tichitt-Walata and Dhar Néma in the Tagant cliffs of Southern Mauritania beginning between around 2,000 BC and 1,500 BC by ancient Mande, likely early Soninke, peoples. Hundreds of stone masonry settlements, with clear street layouts, have been found in this area. Some settlements had massive defensive walls, while others were less fortified.
posted
Getting back to this and reading the info more carefully. Pre-kerma
Here is some info saying that civilization in the nubian region goes back to 3500 b.c. reading this again.
Kerma
quote: Kerma was the capital city of the Kerma culture, which was located in present-day Sudan at least 5500 years ago. Kerma is one of the largest archaeological sites in ancient Nubia. It has produced decades of extensive excavations and research, including thousands of graves and tombs and the residential quarters of the main city surrounding the Western/Lower Deffufa.
Around 3000 BC, a cultural tradition began around Kerma. It was a large urban center that was built around a large adobe temple known as the Western Deffufa.
As a capital city and location of royal burials, it sheds light on the complex social structure present in this society.
quote: Upper Nubia The poorly known "pre-Kerma" culture existed in Upper (Southern) Nubia on a stretch of fertile farmland just south of the Third Cataract.
Lower Nubia Nubia has one of the oldest civilizations in the world. This history is often intertwined with Egypt to the north. Around 3500 BC, the second "Nubian" culture, termed the Early A-Group, arose in Lower (Northern) Nubia. They were sedentary agriculturalists, traded with the Egyptians, and exported gold. This trade is supported archaeologically by large amounts of Egyptian commodities deposited in the A-Group graves. The imports consisted of gold objects, copper tools, faience amulets and beads, seals, slate palettes, stone vessels, and a variety of pots. During this time, the Nubians began creating distinctive black topped, red pottery.
So you could say civilization in nubia in upper and lower nubia came around the same time as civilization in ancient egypt but more earlier in the same year and it's the first in africa but not in the world.
Posts: 2560 | From: Somewhere | Registered: May 2012
| IP: Logged |
quote: Site 8-B-11 at Sai Island in northern Sudan is a stratified site containing late Middle and early Upper Pleistocene occupation levels in excellent conditions of preservation. In Middle Pleistocene times, the banks of a small gully were repeatedly occupied by human groups leaving Acheulean and Sangoan material cultures in an interstratified pattern. Optical age determinations on aeolian intercalations within the gully sediments range between 220 and 150 ka. This sequence is truncated by Nile floodplain silts in which three occupation levels with Lupemban-related Nubian Complex assemblages (Van Peer, 1998) are stratified. The long archaeological sequence at 8-B-11 is a rare African case to document the Early to Middle Stone Age transition by means of primary context situations in direct stratigraphic super-position (Clark, 2001; Tryon & McBrearty, 2002). In contrast to the Acheulean, the early MSA Sangoan levels show sophisticated behaviours involving considerable technological and symbolic investment. Quartzite cobbles were used in the grinding of vegetal materials. Yellow and red ochre were exploited and ground to pigments using shaped mortars and selected chert nodules. We conclude that 8-B-11 is a key site with regard to the initial emergence of modern human behaviour outside subsaharan Africa (McBrearty Brooks, 2000).
quote: One of the most important, yet contentious, topics in lithic technology studies in African Archaeology, is the beginnings, transition, change and pathway of the spread of early hominine populations dispersing through north east Africa. The Nile and the desert played a role in this debate as significant as the geographical and technological variability in large cutting tools of early Paleolithic in the Sudan. While the geographical and geological data indicate that the Sudan is the main corridor of early human transition out of south/east to north/east Africa, the archaeological evidence is still unclear. In spite of discoveries in northern Sudan revealing a complex development of Middle Paleolithic, the lower Paleolithic was until this research little known. Many questions arise about the roots of these cultures and the transition to the northern Sudan. However, there are limited early Paleolithic discoveries in central Sudan, as well as taxonomic items which led to the classification and comparison methods becoming large and complex. There are resulting gaps in early cutting tools development, beside the regional diversity. This paper reviews following retrospective discussion of large cutting tools in Sudan from the revisiting of Khor Abu Anga collections and the archaeological survey discoveries of five Paleolithic sites in the lower Atbara River, and the result of classification assemblages from the site of Jebel Elgrain to shed a light on the main characteristics of large cutting tools in the Sudan.
posted
Yes,nubia is not the start of culture in the nile valley and the same with egypt if egypt was the first civilization in africa. The first civilization(not culture) reading the info i posted above did start in nubia. For example sumer is not the start of culture in asia but it's the first civilization in asia. Sumer is not the start of culture in the world but it is the first civilization in the world.
Posts: 2560 | From: Somewhere | Registered: May 2012
| IP: Logged |
posted
This is more recent info for civilization in the americas.
Norte Chico civilization
quote: The Caral Civilization (also Norte Chico civilization or Caral-Supe civilization)was a complex pre-Columbian-era society that included as many as thirty major population centers in what is now the Norte Chico region of north-central coastal Peru. The civilization flourished between the fourth and second millennia BC, with the formation of the first city generally dated to around 3500 BC, at Huaricanga, in the Fortaleza area. It is from 3100 BC onward that large-scale human settlement and communal construction become clearly apparent, which lasted until a period of decline around 1800 BC. Since the early 21st century, it has been established as the oldest-known civilization in the Americas.
This civilization flourished along three rivers, the Fortaleza, the Pativilca, and the Supe. These river valleys each have large clusters of sites. Further south, there are several associated sites along the Huaura River.The alternative name, Caral-Supe, is derived from the city of Caral in the Supe Valley, a large and well-studied Norte Chico site. Complex society in Norte Chico arose a millennium after Sumer in Mesopotamia, was contemporaneous with the Egyptian pyramids, and predated the Mesoamerican Olmec by nearly two millennia.
Huaricanga
quote: Huaricanga is the earliest city of the Norte Chico civilization, called Caral or Caral-Supe in Peru and Spanish language sources. "It existed around 3500 BC and was the oldest city in the Americas and one of the earliest cities in the world." This Late Archaic site is located in the arid Fortaleza Valley on Peru’s north central coast. It is 14 mi (23 km) inland from the Pacific Ocean. The site covers a total area of 100 hectares, and is the largest Late Archaic construction in the Norte Chico region.
The three earthwork mounds on the large site are believed to be remains of pyramidal-shaped structures. Two standing stones, known as huancas, also survive. Excavation in 2007 revealed a structure believed to be a temple, of a design similar to, but predating, the Mito architectural tradition seen in the Peruvian highlands.
In addition, later research in the Fortaleza and Pativilca valleys has found evidence of maize cultivation, as well as fourteen other domesticated species of fruits and vegetables. This suggests that agriculture may have been more important to the development of Caral-Supe civilization than previously thought, as it was for other independent civilizations of the world, such as Mesopotamia, Egypt, China, and India.
Caral Civilization Map of Norte Chico sites showing their locations in Peru
Posts: 2560 | From: Somewhere | Registered: May 2012
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Firewall: Yes,nubia is not the start of culture in the nile valley and the same with egypt if egypt was the first civilization in africa. The first civilization(not culture) reading the info i posted above did start in nubia. For example sumer is not the start of culture in asia but it's the first civilization in asia. Sumer is not the start of culture in the world but it is the first civilization in the world.
I personally don't use Nubia because it is all part of a single Nile Valley cultural complex and as such it is simply an evolution and continuation of African cultural traditions. The point going back to the wiki page you posted earlier where they lumped the Nile Valley into the Fertile Crescent when the evolution of culture on the Nile did not come from the Tigris and Euphrates. So Sumer was the result of the evolution of behaviors in the Tigris and Euphrates river valley and when people talk of the origins of civilization, they talk of river valleys as the source of cultural evolution. This is standard in most history books even in grade school. So Nile Valley history goes back tens of thousands of years, before a Kemet or a "Nubia" and that, along with the Sahara was the basis of all these cultures. So if we want to say it started in the Nile Valley or just Africa but specifically the upper Nile Valley.
Posts: 8889 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
I use ancient nubia,ancient egypt etc.. because folks got know what and where you talking about.
You could say egypt got influences from both nubia,other parts of africa and the Fertile Crescent(sumer and other areas southwest asia).
It became a civilization because of nubia and other parts of africa(more so nubia)and the Fertile Crescent(but nubia more so) but it became a fully developed civilization because of the south west asia more so. Nubia was a civilization before egypt but it was not fully developed. The first civilization was sumer and the first fully developed civilization was sumer for example.
Egypt was the second fully developed civilization in the world because of sumer and the first fully developed civilization in africa but not the first civilization in africa. The Nubian region had a fully developed civilization later in ancient times.
Fertile Crescent
quote: The Fertile Crescent is a crescent-shaped region in the Middle East, spanning modern-day Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Palestine, Israel, Jordan, and Egypt, together with the southeastern region of Turkey and the western fringes of Iran. Some authors also include Cyprus.
The region is one of the cradles of civilization because it is one location where settled farming first emerged as people started the process of clearance and modification of natural vegetation in order to grow newly domesticated plants as crops. Early human civilizations such as Sumer in Mesopotamia flourished as a result. Technological advances in the region include the development of agriculture and the use of irrigation, of writing, the wheel, and glass, most emerging first in Mesopotamia.
Terminology
quote: In current usage, the Fertile Crescent includes Israel, Palestine, Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Egypt, and Jordan, as well as the surrounding portions of Turkey and Iran. In addition to the Tigris and Euphrates, riverwater sources include the Jordan River. The inner boundary is delimited by the dry climate of the Syrian Desert to the south. Around the outer boundary are the Anatolian and Armenian highlands to the north, the Sahara Desert to the west, Sudan to the south, and the Iranian Plateau to the east.
Biodiversity and climate
quote: As crucial as rivers and marshlands were to the rise of civilization in the Fertile Crescent, they were not the only factor. The area is geographically important as the "bridge" between North Africa and Eurasia, which has allowed it to retain a greater amount of biodiversity than either Europe or North Africa, where climate changes during the Ice Age led to repeated extinction events when ecosystems became squeezed against the waters of the Mediterranean Sea. The Saharan pump theory posits that this Middle Eastern land bridge was extremely important to the modern distribution of Old World flora and fauna, including the spread of humanity.
The area has borne the brunt of the tectonic divergence between the African and Arabian plates and the converging Arabian and Eurasian plates, which has made the region a very diverse zone of high snow-covered mountains.
The Fertile Crescent had many diverse climates, and major climatic changes encouraged the evolution of many "r" type annual plants, which produce more edible seeds than "K" type perennial plants. The region's dramatic variety in elevation gave rise to many species of edible plants for early experiments in cultivation. Most importantly, the Fertile Crescent was home to the eight Neolithic founder crops important in early agriculture (i.e., wild progenitors to emmer wheat, einkorn, barley, flax, chick pea, pea, lentil, bitter vetch), and four of the five most important species of domesticated animals—cows, goats, sheep, and pigs; the fifth species, the horse, lived nearby. The Fertile Crescent flora comprises a high percentage of plants that can self-pollinate, but may also be cross-pollinated. These plants, called "selfers", were one of the geographical advantages of the area because they did not depend on other plants for reproduction.
Egypt–Mesopotamia relations
quote: Egypt–Mesopotamia relations were the relations between the civilisations of ancient Egypt and Mesopotamia, in the Middle East. They seem to have developed from the 4th millennium BCE, starting in the Uruk period for Mesopotamia (circa 4000-3100 BCE) and the half a millennium younger Gerzean culture of Prehistoric Egypt (circa 3500–3200 BCE). Influences can be seen in the visual arts of Egypt, in imported products, and also in the possible transfer of writing from Mesopotamia to Egypt and generated "deep-seated" parallels in the early stages of both cultures.
Designs and objects
quote:
Distinctly foreign objects and art forms entered Egypt during this period, indicating contacts with several parts of Western Asia. The designs that were emulated by Egyptian artists are numerous: the Uruk "priest-king" with his tunic and brimmed hat in the posture of the Master of animals, the serpopards , winged griffins, snakes around rosettes, boats with high prows, all characteristic of Mesopotamian art of the Late Uruk (Uruk IV, c. 3350–3200 BCE) period. The same "Priest-King" is visible in several Mesopotamian works of art of the end of the Uruk period, such as the Blau Monuments, cylinder seals and statues. Objects such as the Gebel el-Arak knife handle, which has patently Mesopotamian relief carvings on it, have been found in Egypt, and the silver which appears in this period can only have been obtained from Asia Minor.
Cylinder seals
quote: It is generally thought that cylinder seals were introduced from Mesopotamia to Egypt during the Naqada II period. Cylinder seals, some coming from Mesopotamia and also Elam in Ancient Iran, and some made locally in Egypt following Mesopotamian designs in a stylized manner, have been discovered in the tombs of Upper Egypt dating to Naqada II and III, particularly in Hierakonpolis. Mesopotamian cylinder seals have been found in the Gerzean context of Naqada II, in Naqada and Hiw, attesting to the expansion of the Mesopotamian Jemdet Nasr culture as far as Egypt at the end of the 4th millennium BCE.
Temples and pyramids
quote: Egyptian architecture also was influenced, as it adopted various elements of earlier Mesopotamian Temple and civic architecture.
Transmission
quote: The route of this trade is difficult to determine, but direct Egyptian contact with Canaan does not predate the early dynastic era, so it is usually assumed to have been by sea trade. During the time when the Dynastic Race Theory was still popular, it was theorized that Mesopotamian sailors circumnavigated Arabia, but a Mediterranean route, probably by middlemen through the Canaanite port of Byblos, is more likely, as evidenced by the presence of Canaanite Byblian objects in Egypt. Glyptic art also seems to have played a key role, through the circulation of decorated cylinder seals across the Levant, a common hinterland of both empires, particularly Mesopotamia.
The intensity of the exchanges suggest however that the contacts between Egypt and Mesopotamia were often direct, rather than merely through middlemen or through trade. Uruk had known colonial outposts of as far as Habuba Kabira, in modern Syria, insuring their presence in the Levant. Numerous Uruk cylinder seals have also been uncovered there. There have been suggestions that Uruk may have had an outpost and a form of Colonial presence in northern Egypt. The site of Buto in particular was suggested, but it has been rejected as a possible candidate.
The fact that so many Gerzean sites are at the mouths of wadis which lead to the Red Sea may indicate some amount of trade via the Red Sea (though Byblian trade potentially could have crossed the Sinai and then be taken to the Red Sea). Also, it is considered unlikely that something as complicated as recessed panel architecture could have worked its way into Egypt by proxy, and at least a small contingent of Mesopotamian migrants is often suspected.
These early contacts probably acted as a sort of catalyst for the development of Egyptian culture, particularly in respect to the inception of writing, and the codification of royal and vernacular imagery.
Importance of local Egyptian developments
quote:
While there is clear evidence the Naqada II culture borrowed abundantly from Mesopotamia, the most commonly held view today is that many of the achievements of the later First Dynasty were the result of a long period of indigenous cultural and political development. Such developments are much older than the Naqada II period, the Naqada II period had a large degree of continuity with the Naqada I period, and the changes which did happen during the Naqada periods happened over significant amounts of time.
Although there are many examples of Mesopotamian influence in Egypt in the 4th millennium BCE, the reverse is not true, and there are no traces of Egyptian influence in Mesopotamia at any time.Only very few Egyptian Naqada period object have been found beyond Egypt, and generally in its vicinity, such as a rare Naqada III Egyptian Cosmetic palette in the shape of a fish, of the end of 4th millennium BCE, found in Ashkelon or Gaza.
Development of writing (3500–3200 BCE)
quote: It is generally thought that Egyptian hieroglyphs "came into existence a little after Sumerian script, and, probably [were], invented under the influence of the latter", and that it is "probable that the general idea of expressing words of a language in writing was brought to Egypt from Sumerian Mesopotamia".The two writing systems are in fact quite similar in their initial stages, relying heavily on pictographic forms and then evolving a parallel system for the expression of phonetic sounds.
Standard reconstructions of the development of writing generally place the development of the Sumerian proto-cuneiform script before the development of Egyptian hieroglyphs, with the suggestion the former influenced the latter.
There is however a lack of direct evidence, and "no definitive determination has been made as to the origin of hieroglyphics in ancient Egypt". Instead, it is pointed out and held that "the evidence for such direct influence remains flimsy” and that “a very credible argument can also be made for the independent development of writing in Egypt..." Since the 1990s, the discovery of glyphs on clay tags at Abydos, dated to between 3400 and 3200 BCE, may challenge the classical notion according to which the Mesopotamian symbol system predates the Egyptian one, although perhaps tellingly, Egyptian writing does make a sudden apparition at that time, while on the contrary Mesopotamia already had a long evolutionary history of sign usage in tokens dating back to circa 8000 BCE. Also, the Abydos clay tags are virtually identical to both earlier and contemporary clay tags from Uruk, Mesopotamia.
Standard reconstruction of the development of writing, with position of cuneiform.There is a possibility that the Egyptian script was invented independently from the Mesopotamian script.
Egyptian influence on Mesopotamian art
quote: After this early period of exchange, and the direct introduction of Mesopotamia components in Egyptian culture, Egypt soon started to assert its own style from the Early Dynastic Period (3150–2686 BCE), the Narmer palette being seen as a turning point.
Development and diffusion In Africa
quote:On the African continent, three areas have been identified as independently developing agriculture: the Ethiopian highlands, the Sahel and West Africa. By contrast, Agriculture in the Nile River Valley is thought to have developed from the original Neolithic Revolution in the Fertile Crescent. Many grinding stones are found with the early Egyptian Sebilian and Mechian cultures and evidence has been found of a neolithic domesticated crop-based economy dating around 7,000 BP. Unlike the Middle East, this evidence appears as a "false dawn" to agriculture, as the sites were later abandoned, and permanent farming then was delayed until 6,500 BP with the Tasian culture and Badarian culture and the arrival of crops and animals from the Near East.
Map of the world showing approximate centers of origin of agriculture and its spread in prehistory: the Fertile Crescent (11,000 BP), the Yangtze and Yellow River basins (9,000 BP) and the Papua New Guinea Highlands (9,000–6,000 BP), Central Mexico (5,000–4,000 BP), Northern South America (5,000–4,000 BP), sub-Saharan Africa (5,000–4,000 BP, exact location unknown), eastern North America (4,000–3,000 BP).
Posts: 2560 | From: Somewhere | Registered: May 2012
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Firewall: Edited above.
I use ancient nubia,ancient egypt etc.. because folks got know what and where you talking about.
You could say egypt got influences from both nubia,other parts of africa and the Fertile Crescent(sumer and other areas southwest asia).
It became a civilization because of nubia and other parts of africa(more so nubia)and the Fertile Crescent(but nubia more so) but it became a fully developed civilization because of the south west asia more so. Nubia was a civilization before egypt but it was not fully developed. The first civilization was sumer and the first fully developed civilization was sumer for example.
Egypt was the second fully developed civilization in the world because of sumer and the first fully developed civilization in africa but not the first civilization in africa. The Nubian region had a fully developed civilization later in ancient times.
I would argue that the Nile Valley is the first civilization. But that is me and that is because the history of Nile Valley culture and evolution is over 20,0000 years old. There is nothing similar in the Tigris and Euphrates. Africa is the birth place of humans and modern human behavior, so how does that evolution come from somewhere else? It is a ridiculous narrative is my point. So if you say Africa and Nile Valley that automatically includes all that history going back thousands of years. Splitting it up into "Egypt" or "Nubia"(there has never been such a nation state called "nubia") you can play games with the timelines. That is what I was pointing out earlier. These people are deliberately playing games with the timelines using arbitrary "markers" to define different stages of Nile Valley predynastic culture and when one phase started and so forth. Also, some of the most important sites found in the Nile Valley were found in the 1960s before the flooding of Lake Nasser. I also don't see that as a coincidence.
I already posted how the "Gerzeh" period goes back to Petrie and others who wanted to show that the Nile Valley was the result of another "race" entering the region. It is the "Gerzeh" period that supposedly has all these artifacts showing "Mesopotamian" influence..... But actually it could go both ways and ancient Africans influence Sumer.
quote: The Gerzeh culture, also called Naqada II, refers to the archaeological stage at Gerzeh (also Girza or Jirzah), a prehistoric Egyptian cemetery located along the west bank of the Nile. The necropolis is named after el-Girzeh, the nearby contemporary town in Egypt.[2] Gerzeh is situated only several miles due east of the oasis of Faiyum.[3]
The Gerzeh culture is a material culture identified by archaeologists. It is the second of three phases of the prehistoric Nagada cultures and so is also known as Naqada II. The Gerzeh culture was preceded by the Amratian culture ("Naqada I") and followed by the Naqada III ("protodynastic" or "Semainian culture")
I don't know what you know about the predynastic, but all the ancient sites of advancements in pottery, and other advancements are in the South. Naqada is named after a place called "Nubt" in ancient times in the South. So why are they starting with "Naqada II" (Gerzeh) in a NORTHERN location? How are they claiming that decorated pottery first came from the North when these symbols were fist found in the South. All of this is a deliberate effort to create a narrative of Northern migrations from a Levantine/non African source....
quote: Werner Kaiser
William Flinders Petrie
The Naqada period was first divided by the British Egyptologist William Flinders Petrie, who explored the site in 1894, into three sub-periods:
Naqada I: Amratian (after the cemetery near El-Amrah, Egypt) Naqada II: Gerzean (after the cemetery near Gerzeh) Naqada III: Semainean (after the cemetery near Es-Semaina)
Petrie's chronology was superseded by that of Werner Kaiser in 1957. Kaiser's chronology began c. 4000 BC, but the modern version has been adjusted slightly, as follows:[2]
Naqada I (about 3900–3650 BC) black-topped and painted pottery trade with Nubia, Western Desert oases, and Eastern Mediterranean[3] obsidian from Ethiopia[4] Naqada II (about 3650–3300 BC) represented throughout Egypt first marl pottery, and metalworking Naqada III (about 3300–2900 BC) more elaborate grave goods, first Pharaohs cylindrical jars writing
quote: The Egyptian state was formed prior to the existence of verifiable historical records. Conventional dates for its formation are based on the relative ordering of artefacts. This approach is no longer considered sufficient for cogent historical analysis. Here, we produce an absolute chronology for Early Egypt by combining radiocarbon and archaeological evidence within a Bayesian paradigm. Our data cover the full trajectory of Egyptian state formation and indicate that the process occurred more rapidly than previously thought. We provide a timeline for the First Dynasty of Egypt of generational-scale resolution that concurs with prevailing archaeological analysis and produce a chronometric date for the foundation of Egypt that distinguishes between historical estimates.
The antiquity of Egyptian civilization has been a source of speculation for many centuries [1,2]. Flinders Petrie [3] published a relative chronology for Early Egypt based on the stylistic evolution of ceramics found in human burials. His system of Sequence Dates is regarded as the origin of the technique now known as seriation. However, it has become apparent that this relative scheme is no longer sufficient for detailed socio-political analysis. Problems include the subjectivity of object classification, variations in assemblages from site to site and the inherent challenges of interpreting broader social and economic change on the basis of funerary evidence alone [4–6].
This is all about keeping the evolution of culture in the Nile Valley artificially younger than Sumer . It is nonsense.
Posts: 8889 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Firewall: Edited above.
I use ancient nubia,ancient egypt etc.. because folks got know what and where you talking about.
You could say egypt got influences from both nubia,other parts of africa and the Fertile Crescent(sumer and other areas southwest asia).
It became a civilization because of nubia and other parts of africa(more so nubia)and the Fertile Crescent(but nubia more so) but it became a fully developed civilization because of the south west asia more so. Nubia was a civilization before egypt but it was not fully developed. The first civilization was sumer and the first fully developed civilization was sumer for example.
Egypt was the second fully developed civilization in the world because of sumer and the first fully developed civilization in africa but not the first civilization in africa. The Nubian region had a fully developed civilization later in ancient times.
I would argue that the Nile Valley is the first civilization. But that is me and that is because the history of Nile Valley culture and evolution is over 20,0000 years old. There is nothing similar in the Tigris and Euphrates. Africa is the birth place of humans and modern human behavior, so how does that evolution come from somewhere else? It is a ridiculous narrative is my point. So if you say Africa and Nile Valley that automatically includes all that history going back thousands of years. Splitting it up into "Egypt" or "Nubia"(there has never been such a nation state called "nubia") you can play games with the timelines. That is what I was pointing out earlier. These people are deliberately playing games with the timelines using arbitrary "markers" to define different stages of Nile Valley predynastic culture and when one phase started and so forth. Also, some of the most important sites found in the Nile Valley were found in the 1960s before the flooding of Lake Nasser. I also don't see that as a coincidence.
I already posted how the "Gerzeh" period goes back to Petrie and others who wanted to show that the Nile Valley was the result of another "race" entering the region. It is the "Gerzeh" period that supposedly has all these artifacts showing "Mesopotamian" influence..... But actually it could go both ways and ancient Africans influence Sumer.
quote: The Gerzeh culture, also called Naqada II, refers to the archaeological stage at Gerzeh (also Girza or Jirzah), a prehistoric Egyptian cemetery located along the west bank of the Nile. The necropolis is named after el-Girzeh, the nearby contemporary town in Egypt.[2] Gerzeh is situated only several miles due east of the oasis of Faiyum.[3]
The Gerzeh culture is a material culture identified by archaeologists. It is the second of three phases of the prehistoric Nagada cultures and so is also known as Naqada II. The Gerzeh culture was preceded by the Amratian culture ("Naqada I") and followed by the Naqada III ("protodynastic" or "Semainian culture")
I don't know what you know about the predynastic, but all the ancient sites of advancements in pottery, and other advancements are in the South. Naqada is named after a place called "Nubt" in ancient times in the South. So why are they starting with "Naqada II" (Gerzeh) in a NORTHERN location? How are they claiming that decorated pottery first came from the North when these symbols were fist found in the South. All of this is a deliberate effort to create a narrative of Northern migrations from a Levantine/non African source....
quote: Werner Kaiser
William Flinders Petrie
The Naqada period was first divided by the British Egyptologist William Flinders Petrie, who explored the site in 1894, into three sub-periods:
Naqada I: Amratian (after the cemetery near El-Amrah, Egypt) Naqada II: Gerzean (after the cemetery near Gerzeh) Naqada III: Semainean (after the cemetery near Es-Semaina)
Petrie's chronology was superseded by that of Werner Kaiser in 1957. Kaiser's chronology began c. 4000 BC, but the modern version has been adjusted slightly, as follows:[2]
Naqada I (about 3900–3650 BC) black-topped and painted pottery trade with Nubia, Western Desert oases, and Eastern Mediterranean[3] obsidian from Ethiopia[4] Naqada II (about 3650–3300 BC) represented throughout Egypt first marl pottery, and metalworking Naqada III (about 3300–2900 BC) more elaborate grave goods, first Pharaohs cylindrical jars writing
quote: The Egyptian state was formed prior to the existence of verifiable historical records. Conventional dates for its formation are based on the relative ordering of artefacts. This approach is no longer considered sufficient for cogent historical analysis. Here, we produce an absolute chronology for Early Egypt by combining radiocarbon and archaeological evidence within a Bayesian paradigm. Our data cover the full trajectory of Egyptian state formation and indicate that the process occurred more rapidly than previously thought. We provide a timeline for the First Dynasty of Egypt of generational-scale resolution that concurs with prevailing archaeological analysis and produce a chronometric date for the foundation of Egypt that distinguishes between historical estimates.
The antiquity of Egyptian civilization has been a source of speculation for many centuries [1,2]. Flinders Petrie [3] published a relative chronology for Early Egypt based on the stylistic evolution of ceramics found in human burials. His system of Sequence Dates is regarded as the origin of the technique now known as seriation. However, it has become apparent that this relative scheme is no longer sufficient for detailed socio-political analysis. Problems include the subjectivity of object classification, variations in assemblages from site to site and the inherent challenges of interpreting broader social and economic change on the basis of funerary evidence alone [4–6].
This is all about keeping the evolution of culture in the Nile Valley artificially younger than Sumer . It is nonsense.
I'd go as far to say that it's brutally and manipulatively oxymoronic to even put forth the notion that the Nile Valley civilizations isn't the first in human history. Not withstanding, whatever was created before or after the deserting of the Sahara and it's surrounding locations. Talk about dismissing OOA one minute, but then acknowledging it in another, if it suits the person or group in question, that refuses to understand that the birthplace of a species can't be influenced from the outside in. It would be from inside-out. Unless people can pull from their rear ends, how humanity that emerged from Africa somehow were more advanced than well established groups with functioning social hubs and means of trade or production.
Frankly, it's borderline ridiculous for any researcher with a brain to uphold the notion that predynastic civilizations are younger than Sumer, it's beyond brainless to suggest that there was nothing of worth before Gerzah. It didn't spawn out of thin air, nor did they learn or gain knowledge from nothingness. There were pillars of civilization before Gerzah, devoid of direct influence from Sumer or it's people. Even the earliest cultures of the Nile Valley, let alone Sudan, are older than anything in that part of Arabia. Far as we know and understand it, what people believe to be similarities would be because Sumer is an offshoot of early settlers from Africa, that were known to have lived in those areas and left tools that mark their presence. Matter a fact, isn't to this day that people that research that civilization aren't even sure of their origin? so how in the hell would they even confer with any confidence that the Sumerians are older than predynastic anything in Africa (relative to its own prescribed existence) without it being an artificial conclusion.
That can't be logically deduced without further evidence to announce such a "fact" to the world like it's the truth. When, as you point out, the flooding of the Nasser (what a legacy for that pos) destroyed and washed away so much, as things were being discovered that pointed to origins in the valley being even more ancient than what was presumed.
-------------------- "Nothing hurts a racist more than the absolute truth and a punch to the face" Posts: 101 | From: United States | Registered: Aug 2020
| IP: Logged |
posted
Getting back to this and i will make short or try to.
What is civilization?
quote: A civilization (or civilisation) is a complex society that is characterized by urban development, social stratification, a form of government, and symbolic systems of communication (such as writing).
quote: Civilization, as its etymology (see below) suggests, is a concept originally associated with towns and cities. The earliest emergence of civilizations is generally connected with the final stages of the Neolithic Revolution, culminating in the relatively rapid process of urban revolution and state-formation, a political development associated with the appearance of a governing elite.
quote: Scholars have defined civilization by using various criteria such as the use of writing, cities, a class-based society, agriculture, animal husbandry, public buildings, metallurgy, and monumental architecture.
Complex systems
quote:
Another group of theorists, making use of systems theory, looks at a civilization as a complex system, i.e., a framework by which a group of objects can be analysed that work in concert to produce some result. Civilizations can be seen as networks of cities that emerge from pre-urban cultures and are defined by the economic, political, military, diplomatic, social and cultural interactions among them. Any organization is a complex social system and a civilization is a large organization. Systems theory helps guard against superficial and misleading analogies in the study and description of civilizations.
To be called civilization you must have a city. There were no egyptian cities and no cities in the nubian region in 4000 b.c. Cities pop up in the nile valley in 3500 b.c.(egypt and the nubian region).
There is proof that first city was in sumer,so the first civilization in the world was in sumer. Civilizations came later in the nubian region and egypt in 3500 b.c. Yes the nubian region and egypt was ahead of sumer for awhile but that change overtime(this is explained above and elsewhere) and sumer just happen to create civilization before the nile valley.
Anyway i posted these facts and other facts above.
Note- Even if civilization could start with a town there were no towns in egypt and the nubian region anyway in 4000 b.c. Only villages. Sumer had a city by 4000 b.c. and a town before 4000 b.c.
Posts: 2560 | From: Somewhere | Registered: May 2012
| IP: Logged |
posted
By the way all Naqada periods or cultures were in upper egypt. None in lower egypt.
Naqadan Culture
quote:
The Naqadan culture took over from the Badarian around 4500 BC and became arguably the most important prehistoric culture in Upper Egypt. It is named after the city of Naqada where much of the archaeological evidence for the period was found.
Naqada II
The Naqada II (also known as Gerzean due to finds near the village of that name) phase began around 3500 BC. This culture mastered the art of agriculture and the use of artificial irrigation, and no longer needed to hunt for their food. The people built towns, not just villages, creating areas of higher population density than ever before.
Ancient Egypt The Naqada II Period (Gerzean Period)
quote: In the later pre-Dynastic period in Egypt, the most important culture during the four centuries before the country became united under a single king was the second stage of the civilisation which originated at Naqada in Upper Egypt.
This is known by the name Naqada II (3600-3200 BC), or alternatively as the Gerzean period, and it was a period of rapidly accelerating development.
1. The following cultural phases have been described through their archaeological remains:
Badarian ca 4500-4000 contemporary with Fayum A of the North
Amratian (Naqada I): ca 4000-3500 contemporary with the northern Merimde
Gerzean (Naqada II): ca 3500-3300 contemporary with the northern Ma’adi.
Naqada III: ca 3300-3100 in both north and south.
2. During this period the southern tradition (Upper Egyptian) emerged and developed during the Badarian and Amratian/Naqada I cultural phases, then consolidated during the Gerzean/Naqada II and Naqada III phases into a dominant socio/political order, then subsequently became the foundation for 3000 years of Egyptian Civilization.
3. The southern predynastic can be basically described in two segments with Badarian/Amratian (Naqada I), marking a continuum of Neolithic development and Gerzean/Naqada II-Naqada III marking a period of rapid growth and transformation toward complex society that set up the subsequent unification of Egypt.
Summary of Upper Egyptian Neolithic (Predynastic Period)
1. A cultural/social tradition, distinct from that of the north, emerged in Upper Egypt, with more complete dependence on domestication, greater emphasis from the outset on rank and stratification, and the technology required to produce the specialized symbols of this system.
2. This system slowly evolved during the 4th millennium, developing the religious, (burial ritual), economic (exploitation of the Sinai, Eastern Desert and Red Sea Hills raw resources), and political (emergence of important individuals buried with their symbols of rank) foundations of the Upper Egyptian tradition.
3. In a last centuries of the 4th millennium this Neolithic base expanded rapidly in scope to create the beginnings of a complex, proto urban society with walled towns, probably centered on temples, inter-settlement competition, accomplished architecture, an elaborate elite funerary cult, and well-established social ranking, and writing.
4. This development occurred at a time of diffusion of ideas from Mesopotamia in the context of expanding trade networks and the Uruk Expansion, bringing influences to Egypt that possibly including the idea of writing, even though it was put to a different use and used totally different forms than in Sumer. The Sumerian contact may well have helped stimulate the rapid emergence of an urban society during the Gerzean (Naqada II) period and prepared the way for the subsequent establishment of Pharaonic Egypt.
Like previous temporal frameworks, this revised timeframe retains the division of the Predynastic into discrete phases. Petrie’s original partitioning of the archaeological evidence was predicated on the identification of invading cultures (the Amratian, Gerzean, and Semainean, named after cemeteries in Upper Egypt). These theories have long been abandoned as the indigenous character of Egyptian social change was recognized and as more nuanced understandings of Egypt’s relationships with the outside world developed (Gatto 2014; van den Brink and Levy 2002; Wengrow 2006, 2010). Within this continuum, however, what warrants the demarcation of five distinct horizons is not only fundamental transformations in material culture but also distinctive shifts in social practices and geographies of power, developments that are more syncopated and complex than those presented in general accounts of state formation.
posted
Origin of the Egyptians and Predynastic Egypt Study of Antiquity and the Middle Ages In this episode by the History of the World Podcast we are taken back long before the pyramids and before the thought of "Egyptianness" itself into the heart of the Neolithic in ancient Africa and what would become the Egypt that dominates the hearts of history lovers around the world. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Snz6uETaCgcPosts: 2560 | From: Somewhere | Registered: May 2012
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Firewall: Getting back to this and i will make short or try to.
What is civilization?
quote: A civilization (or civilisation) is a complex society that is characterized by urban development, social stratification, a form of government, and symbolic systems of communication (such as writing).
quote: Civilization, as its etymology (see below) suggests, is a concept originally associated with towns and cities. The earliest emergence of civilizations is generally connected with the final stages of the Neolithic Revolution, culminating in the relatively rapid process of urban revolution and state-formation, a political development associated with the appearance of a governing elite.
quote: Scholars have defined civilization by using various criteria such as the use of writing, cities, a class-based society, agriculture, animal husbandry, public buildings, metallurgy, and monumental architecture.
Complex systems
quote:
Another group of theorists, making use of systems theory, looks at a civilization as a complex system, i.e., a framework by which a group of objects can be analysed that work in concert to produce some result. Civilizations can be seen as networks of cities that emerge from pre-urban cultures and are defined by the economic, political, military, diplomatic, social and cultural interactions among them. Any organization is a complex social system and a civilization is a large organization. Systems theory helps guard against superficial and misleading analogies in the study and description of civilizations.
To be called civilization you must have a city. There were no egyptian cities and no cities in the nubian region in 4000 b.c. Cities pop up in nile valley in 3500 b.c.(egypt and the nubian region).
There is proof that first city was in sumer,so the first civilization in the world was in sumer. Civilizations came later in the nubian region and egypt in 3500 b.c. Yes the nubian region and egypt was ahead of sumer for awhile but that change overtime(this is explained above and elsewhere) and sumer just happen to create civilization before the nile valley.
Anyway i posted these facts and other facts above.
Note- Even if civilization could start with a town there were no towns in egypt and the nubian region anyway in 4000 b.c. Only villages. Sumer had a city by 4000 b.c. and a town before 4000 b.c.
Saying that civilization starts with urbanization is an arbitrary metric and in the Nile Valley most archaeologists never used this as a measure for dating the phases of the development of the civilization. So right from the start, the phases of Nile Valley culture were defined by pottery and burial artifacts not by evidence of "urbanization".
Petrie was the one who came up with this system and the point is all the evidence for pottery and the styles of pottery originated in the south. What I am talking about is how the artifacts from the Nile are arbitrarily lumped together in order to break up the history of the Nile and impose an ordering that suits an agenda. So if you look at the sites and locations of these "phases" they are all backwards chronologically because of the agenda at work in the case of Petrie and others. Meaning even though the earliest black topped pottery and pottery in general starts in the South, Petrie somehow starts with Gerzeh as the first assemblage of black topped pottery in the Nile Valley according to the system of dating phases and evolution along the Nile, which is backwards. This is the point I am making and urbanization is irrelevant to this system of dating phases. All of the key developments in Nile Valley culture from pottery to megaliths and rock art or anything related to human activity on the Nile starts in the South. So there can be no chronology that starts in the North UNLESS those creating it are trying to tie the culture of the Nile Valley with populations from somewhere else.
quote: The Gerzeh culture, also called Naqada II, refers to the archaeological stage at Gerzeh (also Girza or Jirzah), a prehistoric Egyptian cemetery located along the west bank of the Nile. The necropolis is named after el-Girzeh, the nearby contemporary town in Egypt.[2] Gerzeh is situated only several miles due east of the oasis of Faiyum.[3]
The Gerzeh culture is a material culture identified by archaeologists. It is the second of three phases of the prehistoric Nagada cultures and so is also known as Naqada II. The Gerzeh culture was preceded by the Amratian culture ("Naqada I") and followed by the Naqada III ("protodynastic" or "Semainian culture"). Historical context
Sources differ on dating, some saying use of the culture distinguishes itself from the Amratian and begins circa 3500 BC lasting through circa 3200 BC.[4] Accordingly, some authorities place the onset of the Gerzeh coincident with the Amratian or Badari cultures, i.e. c.3800 BC to 3650 BC even though some Badarian artifacts, in fact, may date earlier. Nevertheless, because the Naqada sites were first divided by the British Egyptologist Flinders Petrie in 1894, into Amratian (after the cemetery near el-Amrah) and "Gerzean" (after the cemetery near Gerzeh) sub-periods, the original convention is used in this text.
The Gerzeh culture lasted through a period of time when the desertification of the Sahara had nearly reached its state seen during the late twentieth century.
quote: Petrie was the first to produce a chronology for the Naqada Period. Using pottery he developed the sequence dates. Eventually he divided the Naqada period into three main periods:
Amratian (named after the cemetery near El-Amrah) sequence dates 31-37 Gerzean (after the cemetery near Gerzeh) sequence dates 38-62 Semainian (after the cemetery near Es-Semaina) sequence dates 63-76
Later Kaiser (Kaiser 1957) refined the sequence dates and divided the Naqada period into several Stufen ('steps' = phases).
Kaiser's system remains in use with some slight modifications (see the most recent discussion: Hendrickx 1996):
Kaiser also introduced for his Stufen several subdivisions:
Naqada I a-b-c (about 4000 - 3500 BC) Naqada II a-b-c (about 3500 - 3200 BC) Naqada III a-b-c (about 3200 - 3000 BC)
Note that "Naqada" is the name of a town in Upper Egypt that was called "nubt" in ancient times because of it being a gold trading center. That is why the town became prosperous and there was a large influx of populations from the South and to the West as a result of the drying up of the Sahara and between the 1st and 2nd cataract region. But you wouldn't understand this from this narrative created by Petrie and others that randomly and arbitrarily goes all over the map making up new names for the same culture which all started to the South in the first place. Again, this has nothing to do with Sumer at this point and only the actual data from the Nile Valley itself and urbanization has nothing to do with it.
quote: For the first time in 32 years work has resumed at the important site of Nubt (Naqada), discovered by Petrie 134 years ago. The EES/University of Winchester Regional Archaeological Survey started a pilot season in August 2018 to assess the condition and research potential of the site. A small team has examined various parts of this large site, with surface artefacts indicating dates ranging from the Middle Palaeolithic (ca. 100,000) through Naqada I (ca. 3,900 BC) to the Late Antique (AD 500). One of the aims of this project is to raise awareness of the importance of this site amongst the local people and the wider public, as well as protecting it for future generations. As such, future seasons will concentrate on various aspects of site management and conservation issues, before full-scale excavations start. The team are also surveying the wider region to place the site of Nubt within its regional setting and undertaking geoarchaeological work to understand the past environment.
History of Research in the Naqada Region
The site of Nubt was first excavated by Flinders Petrie in 1894, along with James Quibell, although the latter was primarily based at Ballas just north of Nubt and opposite the modern town of Zawaydeh. At the time Petrie was unaware that he was excavating one of the most important Predynastic sites in Upper Egypt, regarding the strange material he was excavating as belonging to invaders who had come into Egypt during the First Intermediate Period. Work by Jacques de Morgan in the Naqada Region however, indicated an earlier date and Petrie subsequently revised his findings and worked out a relative dating system that is still at the core of our chronology for early Egypt. His Sequence Dating method ordered the various stages of development during the Fourth Millennium BC and into the Third Millennium BC.
Note that Petries book titled "Naqada and Ballas" includes a lot of overtly racial concepts related to the "dynastic race" having come into the Upper Nile and replaced the local African population.
quote: The presence of a body of invaders in Upper Egypt, which was as yet unknown, required us to coin some phrase to distinguish them in brief use, until their position and connection may be established, so that they may be really named descriptively. As the favourite German phrase of nescience, x, is rather confusing if too generally applied, when every imaginable thing gets x'ed, we have used as a tentative denomination, the "New Race." When they acquire a fixed standing, and may have a specific title, this temporary phrase may fall away. Meanwhile "New Race," or N. R. remains, mean those which belong exclusively to certain invaders of Egypt of the type here described, which is entirely different to any known among native Egyptians.
Many other scholars have written on this uniquely Nile Valley evolutionary phenomena which basically says that the evolution on the Nile was a long and slow process unique to itself. For example, Robert J. Wenke wrote an article discussing this very thing. So the point is where does the dating start?
Here is another better example from the 1960s, when the phrase "Egypt was a civilization without Cities" was coined by John Wilson.
quote: As a biological organism, Egypt was primitive. The arable land was packed tight with living protoplasm: hundreds of agricultural and commercial villages within sight of one another. Yet the total organism did not develop a central nervous system which we should consider adequate. It had no fixed heart, no fixed brain. At a certain time the chromatin gathered together to form a temporary nucleus at one point; at another time the nucleus appeared elsewhere. Suc-cessively the capital shifted from Memphis to Herakleopolis, to Thebes, to Lisht, to Avaris, to Thebes, to Ramses. There was no eternal city, no Rome, which could exhibit such strong polarity that it became the inevitable center of government, religion, commerce, art, and science. The temporary capitals seem never to have gained any remarkable size. Memphis-Sakkarah, Abydos, and Thebes had extensive temples and cemeteries, but there is no evidence that any of them was and continued to be a large and active metropolis of commercial and intellectual life. Ancient Egypt carried on her life through dozens of moderate-sized towns and myriads of agricultural villages. It is legitimate to say that for nearly three thousand years, until the founding of Alexandria, ancient Egypt was a major civili-zation without a single major city.
In a famous article in 1960, John Wilson, Professor of Egyptology in the Oriental Institute at Chicago University, described ancient Egypt as a ‘civilisation without cities’. Even at the time he wrote these words they were not literally true: the monuments of Thebes were clearly part of a significant urban centre, Amarna had been the subject of many decades of archaeological excavation that had uncovered everything a city could need and Memphis showed the fragmentary remains of perhaps the most long-lasting metropolis in the world. In known ancient texts, too, the greatness of ancient Egyptian cities was celebrated, including a city that (in 1960) was not yet known: Pr-Ramesses, founded by Ramesses II as a new royal city in the Eastern Delta.
So what did Wilson mean? He was, essentially, overstating what he thought to be a fundamental aspect of human settlement in ancient Egypt, which was that, unlike Mesopotamia with its individual city states, where the typical pattern was a single major urban centre and a relatively limited agricultural hinterland, Bronze Age Egypt (the largest country of its time) basically consisted of vast tracts of agricultural land, inhabited by a low-density population that had no need for major urban centres. This view was predicated on Egypt having an economy that was fundamentally agricultural.
In fact, at a basic level, this seems to be true. Although it is difficult to be precise about population in the ancient world, whether using percentages or absolute numbers, it is accurate to say that the vast majority of the population of dynastic Egypt worked on the land. Compared with other wealth-producing activities, agriculture was overwhelmingly dominant – much more so than in Mesopotamia where the production and trade in finished goods was of greater significance as an economic activity and as an occupation of the population at large.
Egypt as a Non-urban State
With such an economic basis, it is tempting to think that in Egypt major centres of population were not necessary, since the requirements of an agrarian population could be catered for locally, with relatively few concentrations of non-agricultural activity (i.e. towns and cities) that housed a relatively tiny elite who would, essentially, be both landowners and members of the royal court and government. This picture does, to some degree, seem to characterize Old Kingdom Egypt. At that time, the only real ‘city’ seems to have been Memphis, which was the centre of government, the residence city of king and elite, and the location of elite burials, including that of the king himself. The elite tombs seem to represent the most obvious way in which national resources (both men and goods) were brought together for the benefit of king, court and capital. However, although this urban picture may hold good in broad terms, in detail there may be additional complexities. First, the natural advantages presented by the Nile meant that Egypt, in most periods of its history, was an agriculturally superabundant state, with relatively little effort on the part of its inhabitants. Per capita yields for agricultural workers are likely to have been enormous compared with those in Mesopotamia, where the less reliable natural irrigation necessitated much more labour-intensive farming methods. Egypt’s agricultural superabundance meant that it could ‘grow’ a large population owing to the high carrying capacity of the super-fertile Nile floodplain. It is possible to imagine a situation where the rural population of Egypt was significantly larger than the numbers of active farmworkers required to produce its food. It may well be the case that the Egyptian countryside was far from underpopulated. Indeed one could argue that what the centre (i.e. the king and court, based in Memphis) required from the rural areas was, in addition to the remittance of rents, taxes and other revenues, the provision of human labour on a very significant scale for the building projects of Old Kingdom Egypt.
But to be clear, no scholar I know of has ever defined the emergence of the civilization on the Nile as based on urbanization.
Here is a paper from the 1970s that called the Nile Valley civilization an "Hydraulic" civilization:
quote: The purpose of this study is to examine the emergence of a floodplain civilization in the Egyptian Nile Valley, viewed as a test case of man-land relationships. The emergence of the first high civilizations at the threshold of history has long been a focus of great interest, but it has proved to be an elusive theme. Much like the parallel problem of urban origins, with which it is sometimes (incorrectly) equated, the slender informational base has been manipulated in many ways to conform with a variety of sociological and political paradigms. Intensive floodplain subsistence is first and foremost an ecological phenomenon, yet any ecological assessments have been casual, primitive, and often deterministic. In my view, the Egyptian evidence has unusual potential for a more discriminating evaluation of the fundamental interrelationships. The geographical framework can be delineated with some confidence, and the temporal variability of environmental parameters is amenable to systematic study.The gradual development of irrigation agriculture can be inferred from various lines of investigation. Settlement patterns within the floodplain can be resolved to the extent that demographic gradients and temporal trends are discernible.
And all of this is not to mention all the other evidence along the Nile of this evolutionary behavior extending back over 20,000 years in the South of the Nile between Upper Egypt and Lower Sudan. So again, how do we get dates that are younger than Sumeria unless there is an agenda at work?
quote: The Gerzeh culture ("Naqada II"), named after the site of el-Gerzeh, was the next stage in cultural development, and it was during this time that the foundation for ancient Egypt was laid. The Gerzeh culture was largely an unbroken development out of the Amratian, starting in the Nile Delta and moving south through Upper Egypt; however, it failed to dislodge the Amratian in Nubia.
Anyway there those who say the Gerzeh culture started in nile delta and others say it started in upper egypt.
Here is another point.
quote:
The first tombs in classic Egyptian style were also built, modeled after ordinary houses and sometimes composed of multiple rooms. Although further excavations in the Delta are needed, this style is generally believed to originate there and not in Upper Egypt.
Although the Gerzean Culture is now clearly identified as being the continuation of the Amratian period, significant Mesopotamian influence worked its way into Egypt during the Gerzean, interpreted in previous years as evidence of a Mesopotamian ruling class, the so-called Dynastic Race, coming to power over Upper Egypt. This idea no longer attracts academic support.
quote:
Despite this evidence of foreign influence, Egyptologists generally agree that the Gerzean Culture is still predominantly indigenous to Egypt.
Anyway even if egyptian civilization started in lower egypt it was created by black african egyptians.
Egypt had influences from africa and more so the region of nubia and mesopotamia.
Posts: 2560 | From: Somewhere | Registered: May 2012
| IP: Logged |
quote: A civilization (or civilisation) is a complex society that is characterized by urban development, social stratification, a form of government, and symbolic systems of communication (such as writing).
Egypt,the nubian and mesopotamia regions did not have writing when civilizations started in those regions and we know there were civilizations that had no writing in the past but they had urban development before writing.
quote: Writing, developed first by people in Sumer, is considered a hallmark of civilization and "appears to accompany the rise of complex administrative bureaucracies or the conquest state". Traders and bureaucrats relied on writing to keep accurate records. Like money, the writing was necessitated by the size of the population of a city and the complexity of its commerce among people who are not all personally acquainted with each other.
However, writing is not always necessary for civilization, as shown by the Inca civilization of the Andes, which did not use writing at all but except for a complex recording system consisting of cords and nodes: the "Quipus", and still functioned as a civilized society.
quote: Civilizations have distinctly different settlement patterns from other societies. The word "civilization" is sometimes simply defined as "'living in cities'". Non-farmers tend to gather in cities to work and to trade.
Mesopotamia(sumer)had urban development before egypt and the nubian region.
Civilization started in mesopotamia(asia)not africa.
Posts: 2560 | From: Somewhere | Registered: May 2012
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Firewall: I was going to post this as well.
quote: The Gerzeh culture ("Naqada II"), named after the site of el-Gerzeh, was the next stage in cultural development, and it was during this time that the foundation for ancient Egypt was laid. The Gerzeh culture was largely an unbroken development out of the Amratian, starting in the Nile Delta and moving south through Upper Egypt; however, it failed to dislodge the Amratian in Nubia.
Anyway there those who say the Gerzeh culture started in nile delta and others say it started in upper egypt.
Here is another point.
quote:
The first tombs in classic Egyptian style were also built, modeled after ordinary houses and sometimes composed of multiple rooms. Although further excavations in the Delta are needed, this style is generally believed to originate there and not in Upper Egypt.
Although the Gerzean Culture is now clearly identified as being the continuation of the Amratian period, significant Mesopotamian influence worked its way into Egypt during the Gerzean, interpreted in previous years as evidence of a Mesopotamian ruling class, the so-called Dynastic Race, coming to power over Upper Egypt. This idea no longer attracts academic support.
quote:
Despite this evidence of foreign influence, Egyptologists generally agree that the Gerzean Culture is still predominantly indigenous to Egypt.
Anyway even if egyptian civilization started in lower egypt it was created by black african egyptians.
Egypt had influences from africa and more so the region of nubia and mesopotamia.
Yes that is what you said and as I noted all of this is based on Petrie and others who were determined to "prove" that a new race of people invaded the Nile Valley and introduced culture there. Again, the oldest pottery is in the South and therefore it is impossible that pottery styles in Gerzeh are separate from those further south as all of those motifs were already present in the South. You can repeat it as many times as you like, but I have already provided the reasons why it is bogus just like most of the narratives about the Nile Valley are bogus. And this has nothing to do with "urbanization" in Sumer.
quote: The dig Flinders Petrie, an established Egyptologist, excavated three prehistoric sites in Egypt for the Egypt Exploration Fund during the 1890s: Naqada and Ballos (or Abadiya) in 1894-1895 and Diospolis Parva (or Hu) in 1898-1899. All three contributed to Petrie’s revolutionary breakthrough in prehistoric dating, but the most important was Naqada, which has given its name to the chronology for the Predynastic period in Egyptian archaeology.
Naqada turned out to be a prehistoric cemetery of about 2,000 graves. The graves were furnished with grave-goods, including ceramics, stone tools, and personal ornaments. It was the artefacts that gave the site its particular importance rather than its location (on the west bank of the Nile in Upper Egypt) or the human remains. Petrie made a special study of pottery from 900 selected graves at Naqada, Ballos, and Diospolis Parva – a quarter of the total assemblage – and used it to create a new dating method and a chronology for Neolithic Egypt.
The discoveries Petrie records in his autobiography, Seventy Years in Archaeology (1931), his youthful horror at the way in which a Roman villa was uncovered on the Isle of Wight by early excavators: ‘I protested that the earth ought to be pared away inch by inch to see all that was in it, and how it lay.’ A methodical and meticulous approach to excavation, recording, and analysis – ‘to see all that was in it’ – was to be a hallmark of Petrie’s pioneering work over 40 years in Egypt. What he accomplished with the Naqada material is a supreme example.
And as I provided earlier many scholars admit that Petries dating system is problematic but they continue to use it anyway.....
quote: INTRODUCTION
In this paper I report preliminary results from my efforts to develop a radiocarbon-based chronologyof some predynastic ceramics. The study uses materials collected in 1902–1903 from the predynas-tic Egyptian cemetery, N7000, at Naga-ed-Dêr, Upper Egypt (Lythgoe 1905; Lythgoe and Dunham1965). The materials were recovered as part of the Hearst Expedition to Egypt, and are curated at the Hearst Museum. Cemetery N7000 contained 635 graves and about 900 burials. NSF funding has been secured to collect, date, and evaluate 100 samples from the cemetery. The samples are currently being run at the at the NSF-Arizona AMS Facility. This paper reports results from 30 samples in the current batch and 12 samples from an earlier set of submissions. Since the analysis is just beginning,not all the dates are available yet. I am writing this paper from the field, so these results should be considered as preliminary. However, when complete, this dating program will be, by far, the largest ever conducted on Predynastic Egyptian materials. It promises to make important contributions toour understanding of this critical period in the development of the Egyptian state and its connections throughout the ancient Near East. Moreover, the results should help resolve a number of long-term problems that exist in dating the Predynastic. The dates are critical to developing a more accurate interpretation of complex spatial patterns seen in the cemetery itself, which have been interpreted asburial grounds of separate descent groups at Naga-ed-Dêr.
BACKGROUND TO THE RESEARCH
Much of the prehistory of the ancient Near East is dependent on synchronisms with the chronology of Egypt. In particular, synchronizing the Bronze Age in the Levant and Syria depends on the chronology of the Egyptian Predynastic Period, and on the critical date for the unification of Upper and Lower Egypt and accession of the 1st Dynasty. The later Predynastic, for example, is frequently dated externally by reference to ledge-handled jars imported from Canaan, but the Early Bronze Iand II periods in Canaan are just as frequently dated by the appearance of pre- and protodynastic pottery (Albright 1965; Kantor 1992; Stager 1992). As a result of the critical connections betweenEgypt and the rest of the Middle East, and the dependence of the region as a whole on the chronology of Egypt, considerable attention has been devoted to controlling time in predynastic and dynastic Egyptian archaeology. Methods based on ceramic or spatial seriation, textual analysis (including astronomical observations), and 14C dates have been used. Petrie (1901) invented ceramic seriation to date predynastic graves he had excavated; later Kaiser (1957) developed different techniques based on grave placement in the predynastic cemetery at Armant and re-evaluated Petrie’s results.Recently Kemp (1982) used multivariate statistical methods (essentially a form of correspondence analysis) to develop a ceramics-based chronology.
Textual analysis leads Egyptologists to place the founding of the 1st Dynasty between 3100 and2900 BC (Hoffman 1982; Trigger 1983). For example, Hayes (1970) estimated the beginning of the1st Dynasty from the Turin “Royal Canon,” the document that contains Manetho’s king list that established the traditional division of the historical period in Egypt into dynasties. Manetho said thatthe time from the founding of the 1st to the end of the 8th Dynasty was 955 years. Based on these clues, and working backward from known dates in the later periods, Hayes calculated the date for the beginning of the 1st Dynasty to be either 3119 or 3089 BC. Among other astronomical events,the helical rising of the star So this (Sirus), which heralded the beginning of the inundation, was care-fully observed and recorded in Egypt. These records provide a date of about 2000 BC for the beginning of the 12th Dynasty and the Middle Kingdom, and a later recorded observation places the beginning of the 18th Dynasty at about 1580 BC. However, working back from these dates presents problems because of the uncertain length of individual reigns in some cases, and of the First Inter-mediate Period in general (Kantor 1992). Breasted stated that working backwards from the known dates was no better than “dead reckoning” (1964:17).
DATING THE PREDYNASTIC PERIOD
Much of our understanding of the Predynastic cultural sequence is based on relative ceramic chronologies. Three different methods have been developed and will be discussed below: 1) Petrie’s(1901) Sequence Dating; 2) Kaiser’s (1957) Stufe dating system, and 3) Kemp’s (1982) Multidimensional Scaling (MDS) method (also see Hendrickx 1993, 1996; Mortenson 1991: 11–18 for a discus-sion of these methods).
Petrie’s Sequence Dating Method
By 1895 Petrie had excavated over 3000 Predynastic graves in the Upper Egyptian cemeteries atNagada and Ballas. He recorded over 700 forms of pottery from these cemeteries based on a rather inconsistent typology of form, paste, and decoration (Petrie and Quibell 1896). In 1898–99 heworked through the cemeteries at Abadiyeh and Hu. By 1901 he had worked out a method of seriation or “Sequence Dating” for the graves from the various cemeteries. Petrie lumped his over 700 pottery forms into nine “ware” classes, based partly on paste, decoration, and on what he thought were chronological factors. These ware types included B-Ware, (Black-topped Red), P-Ware (Pol-ished Red), F-Ware (Fancy forms), C-Ware (White Cross-lined), N-Ware (“Nubian” Incised Black),W-Ware (Wavy-handled), D-Ware (Decorated), R-Ware (Rough-faced), and L-Ware (Late forms)(Petrie 1901). Then, using 900 graves with five pots or more in each, Petrie made strips of paper for each grave, with the number of pots of each type in separate columns. With 900 strips of paper there would be a huge number of possible orderings, so Petrie employed two “shortcuts” to make the task easier. First, he had noted that the class of wavy-handled jars (W-Ware) proceeded from a relatively globular form with pronounced handles (based on the “Ledge-handled Jars” from Canaan) to an upright cylinder with only a wavy painted line representing the handle. He had found the later, cylindrical varieties in early Dynastic period graves, so he used this assumed development as a “key” to order the later part of his sequence. Second, he used his C-Ware to order the graves where no W-Ware was found.
Petrie’s goal was to arrange the columns so that the largest frequencies of the different forms concentrated along the diagonal of his matrix of 900 graves and 9 types. Kendall (1971) called this technique “the Petrie Concentration Principle.” The result was a series which progressed across the strips from earliest to latest, anchored at the late end by W-Ware. Having obtained what he felt was the best ordering of the graves based on his knowledge of C-Ware and W-Ware, Petrie divided the900 graves into “Sequence Dates” (S.D.) each containing 18 graves. To these he assigned the num-bers 30 through 80. Wisely, Petrie left sequence dates unassigned at the beginning in case an earlier culture should be discovered, which it subsequently was at Badari by Brunton and Caton-Thompson(1928).
Later Petrie divided the whole range into three groups, which he termed Amratian, Gerzean, andSemainean—names derived from “type” sites where particular ceramic forms had first been identi-fied. The first two terms were widely adopted by other scholars and continue in use by some (e.g.Friedman 1994; Kantor 1992), though his Semainean period was not, owing to its rather ambiguous definition at the type site of Semaineh and the inability of others to discern such a period at other places (see Kantor 1944). Some researchers (e.g. Mace 1909; Hoffman 1982) have used the term “Protodynastic” to refer to the period between the end of the Gerzean and the beginning of the Dynastic Age.
[b]It was not long before other scholars began noticing problems with Petrie’s shortcuts. For example,Scharff (1926:73) noticed that the large, globular, wavy-handled jars (Petrie’s form W1) co-occurred with one of the supposedly more degenerate forms (Petrie’s form 24) at Abusir El Meleq in Lower Egypt. The globular forms were found in numerous other contexts much later than those assigned to them by Petrie. As Friedman notes, though, “nevertheless, owing to the geographical distance between Abusir El Meleq in Lower Egypt and the Upper Egyptian Nagada culture, Scharff was unwilling to reject the S.D. system as a whole, but simply stated that Petrie's system did not work well in the cemeteries of the north” (Friedman 1981:2). Later Baumgartel re-examined the material that Petrie used to create his system and concluded that the wavy-handled jars were not well dated.The earliest, Petrie's W1 form, had been purchased rather than excavated. Baumgartel believed thatall of the wavy-handled forms were contemporary except for the First Dynasty cylindrical shapes(1955:42; also c.f. Kantor 1947:77), and graves from Cemetery N7000 contain all the shapes exceptthe “earliest” and “latest” (Lythgoe and Dunham 1965). Kaiser also found the chronological differ-ences between the globular and upright forms to be extremely small, though Petrie never implied that each of his fifty sequence dates was of equal length. In fact, Friedman points out that since there are more ceramics in later Predynastic graves (see Castillos 1982, 1983), the later sequence datesprobably represent shorter time spans, while the earlier Sequence Dates, dominated by B and C-Wares, probably represent longer periods (Friedman 1981:6-7). Essentially, then, Petrie’s systemworks in its broad outline (Amratian, Gerzean, and Semainan or Protodynastic) but is not very reli-able in its details.
And again the problem with all of this is that all of this pottery is part of THE SAME culture in the Nile Valley and you don't see such artificial separations elsewhere such as in the bell beaker culture of Europe. All of this pottery is part of the same Nile valley cultural complex and shares characteristics across all of them and it is impossible to try and claim that these "northern" cultures are separate and different from the Southern ones when they all share the same characteristics and the oldest examples of all these motifs start in the South.....
Match various carvings of Nile Boats supposedly found deep in Sudan from the Khartoum Mesolithic period, from which the earliest pottery on the Nile is also found.
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic