PDA

View Full Version : Archeological dig reshaping human history



Sol Invictus
03-04-2010, 09:29 AM
NewsWeek | March 1st 2010

They call it potbelly hill, after the soft, round contour of this final lookout in southeastern Turkey. To the north are forested mountains. East of the hill lies the biblical plain of Harran, and to the south is the Syrian border, visible 20 miles away, pointing toward the ancient lands of Mesopotamia and the Fertile Crescent, the region that gave rise to human civilization. And under our feet, according to archeologist Klaus Schmidt, are the stones that mark the spot—the exact spot—where humans began that ascent.

Standing on the hill at dawn, overseeing a team of 40 Kurdish diggers, the German-born archeologist waves a hand over his discovery here, a revolution in the story of human origins. Schmidt has uncovered a vast and beautiful temple complex, a structure so ancient that it may be the very first thing human beings ever built. The site isn't just old, it redefines old: the temple was built 11,500 years ago—a staggering 7,000 years before the Great Pyramid, and more than 6,000 years before Stonehenge first took shape. The ruins are so early that they predate villages, pottery, domesticated animals, and even agriculture—the first embers of civilization. In fact, Schmidt thinks the temple itself, built after the end of the last Ice Age by hunter-gatherers, became that ember—the spark that launched mankind toward farming, urban life, and all that followed.

Göbekli Tepe—the name in Turkish for "potbelly hill"—lays art and religion squarely at the start of that journey. After a dozen years of patient work, Schmidt has uncovered what he thinks is definitive proof that a huge ceremonial site flourished here, a "Rome of the Ice Age," as he puts it, where hunter-gatherers met to build a complex religious community. Across the hill, he has found carved and polished circles of stone, with terrazzo flooring and double benches. All the circles feature massive T-shaped pillars that evoke the monoliths of Easter Island.

Though not as large as Stonehenge—the biggest circle is 30 yards across, the tallest pillars 17 feet high—the ruins are astonishing in number. Last year Schmidt found his third and fourth examples of the temples. Ground-penetrating radar indicates that another 15 to 20 such monumental ruins lie under the surface. Schmidt's German-Turkish team has also uncovered some 50 of the huge pillars, including two found in his most recent dig season that are not just the biggest yet, but, according to carbon dating, are the oldest monumental artworks in the world.

The new discoveries are finally beginning to reshape the slow-moving consensus of archeology. Göbekli Tepe is "unbelievably big and amazing, at a ridiculously early date," according to Ian Hodder, director of Stanford's archeology program. Enthusing over the "huge great stones and fantastic, highly refined art" at Göbekli, Hodder—who has spent decades on rival Neolithic sites—says: "Many people think that it changes everything…It overturns the whole apple cart. All our theories were wrong."

Schmidt's thesis is simple and bold: it was the urge to worship that brought mankind together in the very first urban conglomerations. The need to build and maintain this temple, he says, drove the builders to seek stable food sources, like grains and animals that could be domesticated, and then to settle down to guard their new way of life. The temple begat the city.

http://www.newsweek.com/id/233844

SwordoftheVistula
03-06-2010, 06:07 AM
Seems to me that this doesn't guarantee that the temple predates agriculture and cities. If they previously thought such temple didn't exist until later until they found this evidence, perhaps agriculture and settlements existed earlier but evidence of them has not been found?

Agrippa
03-06-2010, 10:37 AM
Seems to me that this doesn't guarantee that the temple predates agriculture and cities. If they previously thought such temple didn't exist until later until they found this evidence, perhaps agriculture and settlements existed earlier but evidence of them has not been found?

The idea is not new and might work that way:

People knew how they could breed crops and animals already, but they had no interest in investing work force into something they got for free. Thats why humans usually preferred to stay hunter gatherers, its a healthier and easier way of life.

The problem might come from very favourable areas, in which hunter and gatherers had such an easy time, that they didnt used enough birth control or more and more people came into the region, until they reached the point for the carrying capacity for the whole population under a hunter & gatherer economy.

When this point was reached, they HAD TO adopt their economy to survive, by investing labour force into food PRODUCTION.

Now if the temples were build in such an area, it would just mark such an "hot spot" of population growth - obviously, the more people and groups coming together, the more knowledge and gifted people should be among them, making the next steps easier that way too.

It could have been a holy place which kept the people in the area too - like suggested in the article. But I think it was a combination. Probably the settlers even built such temples for the gods, "for giving them more food" - for making the shrinking herds of wild animals more numerous again - which they hunted down themselves.

So it might some sort of desperate appeal to the gods, in my opinion - which didnt work out of course, so they had to adapt, they had to use new means, and they had to work for getting food in a much more unpleasant way than before.

Lenny
03-06-2010, 04:21 PM
I have two problems with this:

1.) It keeps on vaguely talking about the "Ice Age" -- even though the ice did not come near SE-Turkey.

The Ice-ages were of course very significant for human development: The harshness of conditions selected for intelligence and other positive traits pretty efficiently.

I would posit that the people who built this structure (something from nothing) were people from the north who came south - bringing intelligence, initiative, and so on with them.
2.) Flirting with Lysenko's Ghost


Schmidt's thesis is simple and bold: it was the urge to worship that brought mankind together in the very first urban conglomerations. The need to build and maintain this temple, he says, drove the builders to seek stable food sources, like grains and animals that could be domesticated, and then to settle down to guard their new way of life. The temple begat the city.
If I read this correctly, the guy is saying that creating this structure somehow inspired Mankind to all it has done, lo these past 11 millennia. In other words, a building came first, then mankind improved itself, "because the situation warranted it" --> "because they wanted to".

This sounds a lot like the wrong theories of the communist quack Lysenko from the old days : That genetics means nothing and people can change their characteristics and pass on their traits to their children.

In fact, a group of people with enough maturity, work-ethic, intelligence, initiative, honor, etc. etc. to have created civilization(s) from nothing could not have done so just because they desired to. They have to have had natural-selection work its magic first.

Geronimo3000
04-13-2010, 09:36 PM
My personal gut feel i that the builders of this complex "T-henge"---i.e. T-shaped stones in astronomical (seasonal) configurations....were linked to the Taula builders (who also used T-shaped stones) in Menorca, Malta etc...
and were probably NATUFIANS.
It seems likely there were dozens of similar momuments in Anatolia at this ancient epoch; but most have vanished.....i.e it was a widespread Anatolia-based and Levantine civilication of which we know almost nothing.

Cato
04-13-2010, 09:49 PM
Old news.