6 ms·

*predate known agricultural settlements.

contingencies 8y ago
It seems pretty clear that a rigid binary classification of societies in to settled/agricultural and nomadic/hunter-gatherer is false. For example: What constitutes a settlement anyway? Just how long does it need to be in use before it's a settlement instead of a camp? Does regular seasonal use constitute permanence? In many hunter gatherer societies agriculture is documented. What about if shelter is natural (rock shelter), mobile (yurts or boats) or unnecessary (good weather)? This is all part of a general ancient history rethink that I think it's fair to say is going on. We've figured out that ancient history is far more nuanced than many 20th century Western history scholars gave it credit for, and modern archaeology and genetics in particular are only now showing us the scale of our misconceptions. Example areas of complete rethink: peopling of the Americas, continued diversity (and interbreeding with) non-homo-sapiens, speed and breadth of human diffusion, speed and breadth of technology invention and diffusion in pre-historic peoples.
- ryanmercer 8y ago
  >It seems pretty clear that a rigid binary classification of societies in to settled/agricultural and nomadic/hunter-gatherer is false. Here's the problem, there's an established 'story' and if someone tries to go against that established 'story' about human history, they will find themselves unemployable. They will not be permitted to be a part of digs, they will not be able to find grant money, they will not be able to find a university that will take them in. If someone finds something that even adds doubt it's immediately labeled a misinterpretation, a fake, some natural process that resembles human activity etc. Add to that if you go back to Toba supervolcano 70,000 years ago you wipe out most of the human population at the time with some estimates getting you into a few thousand humans across the entire planet which obviously could have ended societies that did exist at the time and were not nomadic, if they were using largely grass and wood for their construction, a supervolcano erupting could have quickly led to using construction materials for heat source, as a source of food for any animals that were struggling to find food etc. Even small settlements spread out might go undiscovered by archaeologists for centuries. If you look at Kenya’s Olorgesailie Basin there's potentially evidence of tool building 320,000 years ago. That right there kinda takes everything and goes "yeahhhhhhhhhh we're probably wrong" https://www.popularmechanics.com/science/archaeology/a19447825/olorgesailie-kenya-tools-archaeology/ https://www.popularmechanics.com/science/archaeology/a194478... Telling me we had tools 320k years ago but we didn't figure out agriculture until 12-14k years ago? Heh. Ssssssure. I urge anyone to go read about the history of archaeology, it's only until extremely recently (the mid 1900's) that it even started to become a proper science and even then most of the labor was untrained volunteer and many an important site were discovered by people native to the area before properly trained people were notified and brought in. Even recorded history is extremely suspect until very modern times. Some will argue it didn't become reliable until the 11th-12th century but we still see instances of stuff unreliable past that. Some firmly believe Joan of Arc is a fabrication for example, which calls 15th century 'history' into question... when someone questions her existence with logic they are quickly called a 'revisionist' and considered a nutjob though. The fact that 'revisionist' and 'historical revisionism' exist as concepts are troubling because they are often used disparagingly of anyone that questions the 'official story' where in other disciplines it would be considered healthy skepticism.
  - aldoushuxley001 8y ago
    Have any good reads on this? Sounds like granting agencies and science funding in general are favouring a specific story about human history, but would like to read more.
    - ryanmercer 8y ago
      Here's a brief little crash course on archaeology https://science.howstuffworks.com/environmental/earth/archaeology/archaeology.htm https://science.howstuffworks.com/environmental/earth/archae... Here's a decent timeline of archaeology, see how it only goes back to 1780 https://www.ancient.eu/timeline/Archaeology/ https://www.ancient.eu/timeline/Archaeology/ There are some common historical inaccuracies in this article, like the fact we were taught Columbus discovered America as recently as the early 90's in my case (class of '13) despite them knowing damn well he didn't, Newton and gravity, how slavery is conveniently never mentioned in the North, etc https://www.thisisinsider.com/myths-lies-learned-in-school-wrong-facts-2017-5 https://www.thisisinsider.com/myths-lies-learned-in-school-w... For Columbus in-particular the Oatmeal did a decent, but over the top, write up some years back http://theoatmeal.com/comics/columbus_day http://theoatmeal.com/comics/columbus_day I was literally taught in the early 90's that they believed the earth was flat and that Columbus was brave enough to attempt to sail to India and that everyone thought he was crazy and would fall off the side of the world. This was in a public school, 20 something years ago. Yet we know there were colonies, that were eventually abandoned, and one was found in the 1960's in Newfoundland. Hell look to certain countries in the middle-east and there are millions that flat out think the holocaust never happened, people the world around that think the moon landings were on a sound stage, people trying to currently change history with the 'Mandela Effect' (Berenstein or Berenstain Bears?). The history of paleontology is a good rabbit hole too, start with the wiki https://www.wikiwand.com/en/History_of_paleontology https://www.wikiwand.com/en/History_of_paleontology As far as people being blackballed, that's mostly just people coming forward after they allege it has happened or refusing to be part of something for fear of it although you can go read a lot about Zahi Hawass https://www.wikiwand.com/en/Zahi_Hawass https://www.wikiwand.com/en/Zahi_Hawass and see where he was pretty damn nutty about creating his own narrative of Egyptian history for example "Hawass has been accused of domineering behaviour, forbidding archaeologists to announce their own findings, and courting the media for his own gain after they were denied access to archaeological sites because, according to Hawass, they were too amateurish." Zahi also strongly fought against any western archaeologists that wanted to question the timeline for the great pyramid and the Sphinx, flat out refusing their entry into the country in some instances and like when they drilled through the 'hidden door' in the great pyramid after jumping through all kinds of hoops and finding another door not farther up he flat out refused to let them drill through it. I also recall Zahi having hieroglyphics at one site, that there are black and white photos of, covered in plaster but I can't seem to find what site it was. I distinctly remember seeing side by side photos, the period black and white next to a modern photo showing extensive plasterwork having been added, allegedly to 'protect' the site (bit weird, no other archaeologists seem to do that at ancient sites). There are also anomalies like these https://www.cnn.com/style/article/ancient-roman-coins-japan/index.html https://www.cnn.com/style/article/ancient-roman-coins-japan/... https://www.scmp.com/news/china/society/article/2117117/mystery-over-tonnes-ancient-coins-found-buried-chinese-village https://www.scmp.com/news/china/society/article/2117117/myst... https://www.wikiwand.com/en/Kensington_Runestone https://www.wikiwand.com/en/Kensington_Runestone https://www.wikiwand.com/en/Maine_penny https://www.wikiwand.com/en/Maine_penny https://www.wikiwand.com/en/Beardmore_Relics https://www.wikiwand.com/en/Beardmore_Relics Etc. Out of place artifacts are interesting when not blatantly fakes https://www.wikiwand.com/en/Out-of-place_artifact https://www.wikiwand.com/en/Out-of-place_artifact
- imbokodo 8y ago
  First of all, this finding can be incorrect. It can be misdated, they may have made a mistake about the grain being processed into bread. Even if they are 100% right, it doesn't really upend anything majorly. It just means what it says - hunter-gatherers turned the grains they gathered into bread 5000 years earlier than we thought. Any how, the Natufians and Chinese are thought to be the first two cultures to become agricultural. What you're talking about is 20/20 hindsight. You're living in a world with self-driving cars and Mars space probes and croissants and corn and looking back with that lens. There were innumerable barriers entering into agriculture (and not only barriers, but most hunter-gatherer bands preferred roaming around their territory as opposed to remaining in one place all the time and doing the same thing every day). We did not have corn and wheat and domesticated animals and oxen and crop rotation. Infectious diseases were as much a problem as when the New World's indigenous societies encountered Europeans. Anthropologists say the Neolithic revolution was dramatic because it was dramatic. It was a complete transformation of society - more socially transformative than anything that has happened in the past 30000 years.
megaman22 8y ago
It seems pretty obvious that what we know about is the barest sliver of what was actually going on tens of thousands of years ago. If nothing else, look at historical sea levels through the fluctuations caused by the ice ages. Vast areas that are currently at the bottom of the oceans were dry land, most famously the Bering land bridge and Doggerland, but huge, huge areas all over the world. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doggerland https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doggerland https://www.deviantart.com/atlas-v7x/art/Coastlines-of-the-Ice-Age-685023258 https://www.deviantart.com/atlas-v7x/art/Coastlines-of-the-I... Even in recorded history, terrain is much more malleable than you might expect - rivers changing their course, sometimes wildly, is not especially uncommon. For instance, it is well attested that the Yellow River has changed course such that it has reached the sea both north and south of Shandong in various eras. http://factsanddetails.com/media/2/20090526-history-Yellow-River%20Nolls.jpg http://factsanddetails.com/media/2/20090526-history-Yellow-R...
- snapdangle 8y ago
  "It seems pretty obvious that what we know about is the barest sliver of what was actually going on tens of thousands of years ago." It doesn't seem to be obvious to most highly educated people I know. From their perspective, the history of humanity might as well be only 5,000 years old, they rarely open up to any kind of interest in the fact that ancient civilizations from 3K-5K BC considered _their own civilizations_ to be degraded forms of much earlier civilizations. It is also completely off the boards to discuss the potential of rapid techtonic shifts periodically erasing human societies. There are quite a few underwater cities in ruins, and of course myths and legends of even larger ones. But they don't get much play. Importantly, cultures with oral traditions are much more capable of recording accurately details from 10,000+ years ago: https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/australian-stories-capture-10000-year-old-climate-history-180954030/ https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/australian-stories...
  - selestify 8y ago
    > ancient civilizations from 3K-5K BC considered _their own civilizations_ to be degraded forms of much earlier civilizations That is fascinating. Which civilizations were these, and where can I read about them? Did they think that because there were civilizational collapses earlier in human history?

It seems pretty clear that a rigid binary classification of societies in to settled/agricultural and nomadic/hunter-gatherer is false. For example: What constitutes a settlement anyway? Just how long does it need to be in use before it's a settlement instead of a camp? Does regular seasonal use constitute permanence? In many hunter gatherer societies agriculture is documented. What about if shelter is natural (rock shelter), mobile (yurts or boats) or unnecessary (good weather)? This is all part of a general ancient history rethink that I think it's fair to say is going on. We've figured out that ancient history is far more nuanced than many 20th century Western history scholars gave it credit for, and modern archaeology and genetics in particular are only now showing us the scale of our misconceptions. Example areas of complete rethink: peopling of the Americas, continued diversity (and interbreeding with) non-homo-sapiens, speed and breadth of human diffusion, speed and breadth of technology invention and diffusion in pre-historic peoples.

ryanmercer 8y ago
>It seems pretty clear that a rigid binary classification of societies in to settled/agricultural and nomadic/hunter-gatherer is false. Here's the problem, there's an established 'story' and if someone tries to go against that established 'story' about human history, they will find themselves unemployable. They will not be permitted to be a part of digs, they will not be able to find grant money, they will not be able to find a university that will take them in. If someone finds something that even adds doubt it's immediately labeled a misinterpretation, a fake, some natural process that resembles human activity etc. Add to that if you go back to Toba supervolcano 70,000 years ago you wipe out most of the human population at the time with some estimates getting you into a few thousand humans across the entire planet which obviously could have ended societies that did exist at the time and were not nomadic, if they were using largely grass and wood for their construction, a supervolcano erupting could have quickly led to using construction materials for heat source, as a source of food for any animals that were struggling to find food etc. Even small settlements spread out might go undiscovered by archaeologists for centuries. If you look at Kenya’s Olorgesailie Basin there's potentially evidence of tool building 320,000 years ago. That right there kinda takes everything and goes "yeahhhhhhhhhh we're probably wrong" https://www.popularmechanics.com/science/archaeology/a19447825/olorgesailie-kenya-tools-archaeology/ https://www.popularmechanics.com/science/archaeology/a194478... Telling me we had tools 320k years ago but we didn't figure out agriculture until 12-14k years ago? Heh. Ssssssure. I urge anyone to go read about the history of archaeology, it's only until extremely recently (the mid 1900's) that it even started to become a proper science and even then most of the labor was untrained volunteer and many an important site were discovered by people native to the area before properly trained people were notified and brought in. Even recorded history is extremely suspect until very modern times. Some will argue it didn't become reliable until the 11th-12th century but we still see instances of stuff unreliable past that. Some firmly believe Joan of Arc is a fabrication for example, which calls 15th century 'history' into question... when someone questions her existence with logic they are quickly called a 'revisionist' and considered a nutjob though. The fact that 'revisionist' and 'historical revisionism' exist as concepts are troubling because they are often used disparagingly of anyone that questions the 'official story' where in other disciplines it would be considered healthy skepticism.
- aldoushuxley001 8y ago
  Have any good reads on this? Sounds like granting agencies and science funding in general are favouring a specific story about human history, but would like to read more.
  - ryanmercer 8y ago
    Here's a brief little crash course on archaeology https://science.howstuffworks.com/environmental/earth/archaeology/archaeology.htm https://science.howstuffworks.com/environmental/earth/archae... Here's a decent timeline of archaeology, see how it only goes back to 1780 https://www.ancient.eu/timeline/Archaeology/ https://www.ancient.eu/timeline/Archaeology/ There are some common historical inaccuracies in this article, like the fact we were taught Columbus discovered America as recently as the early 90's in my case (class of '13) despite them knowing damn well he didn't, Newton and gravity, how slavery is conveniently never mentioned in the North, etc https://www.thisisinsider.com/myths-lies-learned-in-school-wrong-facts-2017-5 https://www.thisisinsider.com/myths-lies-learned-in-school-w... For Columbus in-particular the Oatmeal did a decent, but over the top, write up some years back http://theoatmeal.com/comics/columbus_day http://theoatmeal.com/comics/columbus_day I was literally taught in the early 90's that they believed the earth was flat and that Columbus was brave enough to attempt to sail to India and that everyone thought he was crazy and would fall off the side of the world. This was in a public school, 20 something years ago. Yet we know there were colonies, that were eventually abandoned, and one was found in the 1960's in Newfoundland. Hell look to certain countries in the middle-east and there are millions that flat out think the holocaust never happened, people the world around that think the moon landings were on a sound stage, people trying to currently change history with the 'Mandela Effect' (Berenstein or Berenstain Bears?). The history of paleontology is a good rabbit hole too, start with the wiki https://www.wikiwand.com/en/History_of_paleontology https://www.wikiwand.com/en/History_of_paleontology As far as people being blackballed, that's mostly just people coming forward after they allege it has happened or refusing to be part of something for fear of it although you can go read a lot about Zahi Hawass https://www.wikiwand.com/en/Zahi_Hawass https://www.wikiwand.com/en/Zahi_Hawass and see where he was pretty damn nutty about creating his own narrative of Egyptian history for example "Hawass has been accused of domineering behaviour, forbidding archaeologists to announce their own findings, and courting the media for his own gain after they were denied access to archaeological sites because, according to Hawass, they were too amateurish." Zahi also strongly fought against any western archaeologists that wanted to question the timeline for the great pyramid and the Sphinx, flat out refusing their entry into the country in some instances and like when they drilled through the 'hidden door' in the great pyramid after jumping through all kinds of hoops and finding another door not farther up he flat out refused to let them drill through it. I also recall Zahi having hieroglyphics at one site, that there are black and white photos of, covered in plaster but I can't seem to find what site it was. I distinctly remember seeing side by side photos, the period black and white next to a modern photo showing extensive plasterwork having been added, allegedly to 'protect' the site (bit weird, no other archaeologists seem to do that at ancient sites). There are also anomalies like these https://www.cnn.com/style/article/ancient-roman-coins-japan/index.html https://www.cnn.com/style/article/ancient-roman-coins-japan/... https://www.scmp.com/news/china/society/article/2117117/mystery-over-tonnes-ancient-coins-found-buried-chinese-village https://www.scmp.com/news/china/society/article/2117117/myst... https://www.wikiwand.com/en/Kensington_Runestone https://www.wikiwand.com/en/Kensington_Runestone https://www.wikiwand.com/en/Maine_penny https://www.wikiwand.com/en/Maine_penny https://www.wikiwand.com/en/Beardmore_Relics https://www.wikiwand.com/en/Beardmore_Relics Etc. Out of place artifacts are interesting when not blatantly fakes https://www.wikiwand.com/en/Out-of-place_artifact https://www.wikiwand.com/en/Out-of-place_artifact
imbokodo 8y ago
First of all, this finding can be incorrect. It can be misdated, they may have made a mistake about the grain being processed into bread. Even if they are 100% right, it doesn't really upend anything majorly. It just means what it says - hunter-gatherers turned the grains they gathered into bread 5000 years earlier than we thought. Any how, the Natufians and Chinese are thought to be the first two cultures to become agricultural. What you're talking about is 20/20 hindsight. You're living in a world with self-driving cars and Mars space probes and croissants and corn and looking back with that lens. There were innumerable barriers entering into agriculture (and not only barriers, but most hunter-gatherer bands preferred roaming around their territory as opposed to remaining in one place all the time and doing the same thing every day). We did not have corn and wheat and domesticated animals and oxen and crop rotation. Infectious diseases were as much a problem as when the New World's indigenous societies encountered Europeans. Anthropologists say the Neolithic revolution was dramatic because it was dramatic. It was a complete transformation of society - more socially transformative than anything that has happened in the past 30000 years.

megaman22 8y ago

It seems pretty obvious that what we know about is the barest sliver of what was actually going on tens of thousands of years ago. If nothing else, look at historical sea levels through the fluctuations caused by the ice ages. Vast areas that are currently at the bottom of the oceans were dry land, most famously the Bering land bridge and Doggerland, but huge, huge areas all over the world. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doggerland https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doggerland https://www.deviantart.com/atlas-v7x/art/Coastlines-of-the-Ice-Age-685023258 https://www.deviantart.com/atlas-v7x/art/Coastlines-of-the-I... Even in recorded history, terrain is much more malleable than you might expect - rivers changing their course, sometimes wildly, is not especially uncommon. For instance, it is well attested that the Yellow River has changed course such that it has reached the sea both north and south of Shandong in various eras. http://factsanddetails.com/media/2/20090526-history-Yellow-River%20Nolls.jpg http://factsanddetails.com/media/2/20090526-history-Yellow-R...

snapdangle 8y ago
"It seems pretty obvious that what we know about is the barest sliver of what was actually going on tens of thousands of years ago." It doesn't seem to be obvious to most highly educated people I know. From their perspective, the history of humanity might as well be only 5,000 years old, they rarely open up to any kind of interest in the fact that ancient civilizations from 3K-5K BC considered _their own civilizations_ to be degraded forms of much earlier civilizations. It is also completely off the boards to discuss the potential of rapid techtonic shifts periodically erasing human societies. There are quite a few underwater cities in ruins, and of course myths and legends of even larger ones. But they don't get much play. Importantly, cultures with oral traditions are much more capable of recording accurately details from 10,000+ years ago: https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/australian-stories-capture-10000-year-old-climate-history-180954030/ https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/australian-stories...
- selestify 8y ago
  > ancient civilizations from 3K-5K BC considered _their own civilizations_ to be degraded forms of much earlier civilizations That is fascinating. Which civilizations were these, and where can I read about them? Did they think that because there were civilizational collapses earlier in human history?