4 ms·

What I think you might be missing is that Venus could be a pet project of a single person, done in their free time over some period. The statues, especially in

by maratc 3y ago

What I think you might be missing is that Venus could be a pet project of a single person, done in their free time over some period. The statues, especially in the context of the greater site, could not be made by one person — many people should be working there for quite a long period of time, while physically staying in the place. Since they were working on the temple complex, (a) they could not be themselves participating in hunter-gathering activities (and we think human societies were engaged with that at the time); and (b) someone else should be providing them with the food, clothes, tools, and everything they need — implying there was some sort of a social structure (aka civilization). This is what I think GP meant when saying "not supposed to be possible 12,000 years ago".

vanderZwan 3y ago
I fully agree with what you're saying, but I just want add something to your comment in case people might misinterpret this sentence: > What I think you might be missing is that Venus could be a pet project of a single person, done in their free time over some period. Yes, a single Venus figure is likely made by a single person. But the Venus of Willendorf is not unique. There are 200 over known "Venus figurines" from a period of 300,000 BC to 11,00 BC. So they were a wide-spread phenomenon indicating some form of shared socio-cultural connection among the early humans despite how far we were spread out and how much lower the population density was compared to now. This is of course tangential to the point you were making. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Venus_figurine https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Venus_figurine
p-e-w 3y ago
> The statues, especially in the context of the greater site, could not be made by one person Why not? Sculptors sometimes make dozens of sculptures per year, by themselves. > they could not be themselves participating in hunter-gathering activities Why not? Hunting and gathering doesn't occupy all of a person's time. I see no reason whatsoever to assume that those sculptures weren't created by part-time artists. > implying there was some sort of a social structure (aka civilization) Social structure exists even in apes, and is not at all synonymous with what the term "civilization" is usually taken to mean. As a sibling commenter has explained, there is nothing substantially new in this archeological find, and it fits well into our existing model of how people lived back then. Claims of an incoming paradigm shift triggered by this find lack any substance.
- maratc 3y ago
  > Why not? Sculptors sometimes make dozens of sculptures per year, by themselves. Sculptors today are stationary and they depend on money (a mark of a civilization) and tools (same) and supermarkets (same) and demand for their work (economic surplus; same). Leonardo da Vinci, if he was a part of hunter-gatherer society (which is mobile), would neither be able to paint nor invent, for he would be busy with gathering (or growing, or hunting) his own food most of his time; he would also not have access to paper or canvas or colors or brushes. > I see no reason whatsoever to assume that those sculptures weren't created by part-time artists. As mentioned, hunter-gatherers are mobile at least part-time, because they go from where some food grows today, to where some other food roams tomorrow, to where yet other food swims the day after. > Social structure exists even in apes And bees, and ants; but not the kind that allows a big part of a society (capable adults) to engage in activities that are not directly related to gathering food, growing children, or fighting, but creating temples and art. A group of hunter-gatherers can provide for themselves, their children, and maybe their elders or sick (as long as these are mobile). They can even accommodate a leader or a shaman here and there; but not an apparently big group of able adults that do not hunt and do not gather and do not fight and do not move but rather sit in one place and build a temple and statues. > there is nothing substantially new in this archeological find Gobekli Tepe have completely changed our view of the development of the human societies, as we have previously believed the first civilization (Sumerians) to be as recent as 5,000-4,000 BCE (or 6-7 kya). This hints at a civilization twice as old as previously believed.
  - Retric 3y ago
    Hunter gatherer’s had a lot of free time. Based on studies of the last hunter gather groups, in reasonably fertile area they can spend ~15 hours per week on food and ~15-20 hours per week on domestic chores. That seems similar to us except we exclude tasks like commuting, grocery shopping, cooking, working out, cleaning dishes etc from what we consider ‘work’. Thus resulting in a lot more time for hobbies and socializing. They move around, but would return to the same locations regularly thus potentially spending years in one location over their lifetime. Plenty of time to make dozens of life sized statues.
thelittleone 3y ago
The artist had a vision to build a human like figurine and that one day, future beings would debate its origin on some magic communication system.

by maratc 3y ago

vanderZwan 3y ago

I fully agree with what you're saying, but I just want add something to your comment in case people might misinterpret this sentence: > What I think you might be missing is that Venus could be a pet project of a single person, done in their free time over some period. Yes, a single Venus figure is likely made by a single person. But the Venus of Willendorf is not unique. There are 200 over known "Venus figurines" from a period of 300,000 BC to 11,00 BC. So they were a wide-spread phenomenon indicating some form of shared socio-cultural connection among the early humans despite how far we were spread out and how much lower the population density was compared to now. This is of course tangential to the point you were making. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Venus_figurine https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Venus_figurine

p-e-w 3y ago

> The statues, especially in the context of the greater site, could not be made by one person Why not? Sculptors sometimes make dozens of sculptures per year, by themselves. > they could not be themselves participating in hunter-gathering activities Why not? Hunting and gathering doesn't occupy all of a person's time. I see no reason whatsoever to assume that those sculptures weren't created by part-time artists. > implying there was some sort of a social structure (aka civilization) Social structure exists even in apes, and is not at all synonymous with what the term "civilization" is usually taken to mean. As a sibling commenter has explained, there is nothing substantially new in this archeological find, and it fits well into our existing model of how people lived back then. Claims of an incoming paradigm shift triggered by this find lack any substance.

maratc 3y ago
> Why not? Sculptors sometimes make dozens of sculptures per year, by themselves. Sculptors today are stationary and they depend on money (a mark of a civilization) and tools (same) and supermarkets (same) and demand for their work (economic surplus; same). Leonardo da Vinci, if he was a part of hunter-gatherer society (which is mobile), would neither be able to paint nor invent, for he would be busy with gathering (or growing, or hunting) his own food most of his time; he would also not have access to paper or canvas or colors or brushes. > I see no reason whatsoever to assume that those sculptures weren't created by part-time artists. As mentioned, hunter-gatherers are mobile at least part-time, because they go from where some food grows today, to where some other food roams tomorrow, to where yet other food swims the day after. > Social structure exists even in apes And bees, and ants; but not the kind that allows a big part of a society (capable adults) to engage in activities that are not directly related to gathering food, growing children, or fighting, but creating temples and art. A group of hunter-gatherers can provide for themselves, their children, and maybe their elders or sick (as long as these are mobile). They can even accommodate a leader or a shaman here and there; but not an apparently big group of able adults that do not hunt and do not gather and do not fight and do not move but rather sit in one place and build a temple and statues. > there is nothing substantially new in this archeological find Gobekli Tepe have completely changed our view of the development of the human societies, as we have previously believed the first civilization (Sumerians) to be as recent as 5,000-4,000 BCE (or 6-7 kya). This hints at a civilization twice as old as previously believed.
- Retric 3y ago
  Hunter gatherer’s had a lot of free time. Based on studies of the last hunter gather groups, in reasonably fertile area they can spend ~15 hours per week on food and ~15-20 hours per week on domestic chores. That seems similar to us except we exclude tasks like commuting, grocery shopping, cooking, working out, cleaning dishes etc from what we consider ‘work’. Thus resulting in a lot more time for hobbies and socializing. They move around, but would return to the same locations regularly thus potentially spending years in one location over their lifetime. Plenty of time to make dozens of life sized statues.

thelittleone 3y ago

The artist had a vision to build a human like figurine and that one day, future beings would debate its origin on some magic communication system.