Unveiling the past of humanity: an open debate thread!

I have often wondered on what, where and when did civilization really started. I mean is it not weird that it suddenly appeared in certain points of the globe with such complex development apparently out of nowhere?

Take the flood myth which most westerners such as me have known mostly from the bible, it is spread throughout many cultures that give little to no credit to the bible. And since the 1980's to the present decade submarine ruins have been found in coastal areas which some have credited as being as old as 10000 years! Such is the case of the submerged Yonaguni ruins in Japan.

Of course every time any such claim is made a scholar appears () who redily says its bs.

One of the doubts I have is related to cultural interchange between the old civilizations, in the East there are plenty sources that suggest/prove that the early chinese and indian valley cultures had contact with other unknown and known cultures.

I am asking anyone who wishes to participate in this thread to contribute with their thoughts and to pin the thread to make it a permanent thread so that it becomes a regularly frequented and updated place for discussion of the matter at hand.

Due to my time availability I cannot be here as regularly as some of you might but I promise to share a little every day I can.

I hope I can attract some people with good historical knowledge to futher the quality of this debate though this doesn't mean anyone less knowleadgeble is not welcome.
I am aware that my intro is a little weak and boring but I promise that all subsequent posts will be more subject oriented.

PS: I think Ron E. Howards "Conan" series contains a lot of related content to this discussion although it is a fictional fantasy series. And if you really know about this subject I think you will agree.

An experiment gone wrong perhaps? That may or may not be corrected in short time?

Why? Nobody knows.

U tink, I could indeed edit the thread's intro, but I will maintain it as it is. I will try to post some interesting material which I hope to make a spark for this thred though it won't be today, it is a little late in the night here.

Last Edited by Montblanc on 04/01/2014 08:00 PM

Precisely, that is what makes this subject so intense and fun, besides it is not like there is a complete void though I will have to resort to esoteric works and other sources which scholars call dubious in the reputation.

What I really desire is to get people from eastern nations to give feedback on this thread. Because in the East i am certain history is thaught differently so their POV on the subject may provide some interesting points for discussion.

the classical beginnings of civilization were at particular settlements in Sumeria and Egypt. they had no contact or influence with each other.

we would call those the "classical" beginnings of civilization because they lead to classical civilizations which we all study. there are a few points to be made.

they did not appear fully formed as you suggest. the Sumerians began like any other, living in huts and eating fish from the ocean. however they advanced along classical lines, unlike other cultures, making use of mathematics, business accounting, developing astronomy, and later inventing the written word.

there are numerous examples of nonclassical civilizations that, like the Sumerians, grew from hunter-gatherers into civilizations in their own right, but unlike the Sumerians either remained Neolithic for the longest time, like the Japanese, American Indians, Dravidian Indians, Meso-Americans, and South American Indians, or countless unknown others which disappeared entirely like the settlement at Cuatal Huyuk, one of the few that left a trace.

the Egyptians did appear slightly advanced. they were not indigenous to the area but were invaders, part of the "Sea Peoples" who displaced settlements along North Africa, the Levant and the Mediterranean at the murky depths of the dawn of history 7500 years ago. nobody knows who they were or where they came from. we can say they were "slightly advanced" because they could build better huts than the indigenous Egyptians they overtook.

the past of humanity is almost completely unknown but it's no secret. it consists of hunter-gatherers all around the world who settled down to raise crops and live in huts.

p.s. you are all damned stupid and ignorant.

AC 56336675 thank you for your perfect definition of civilizational dawn.

Those seafaring settlers you mention are they related to the phoenicians maybe?

I have read somewhere (wikipedia I think) that sumerians also settled in shores of the Tigris and Euphrates rivers but that they came originally from the north, modern Turkey likely.

There is also a lot we don't know about the aryan people, who, according to many respectable sources are responsible for the oldest civilization built on the shores of the Ganges river, they were also settlers who came from the north.

There appears to exist a pattern of migrants from a vast area comprising parts of modern Turkey, Iraq, Iran and regions along the shores of the black sea who already possessed developed elements of civilized character and it seems that those people settled at a time several distant regions (fertile lands around great rivers from at least modern India to the mediterranean coast).

Another interesting point in my perspective is the fact that the more you go back in time the less languages you find. All european languages can be ultimately traced to a single source (Tower of Babel story) which means that there might have been an age we don't know of, prior to the oldest known civilizations, where a more vast civilization could have flourished. This would explain similarities between civilizations from different time periods and separated by vast distances (long lasting cultural inheritance?).

Consider also the possibility of such civilizations having developed between the last ice ages and the flood myths spread throughout many cultures. Is it not possible then that a polar cap melting raised the ocean levels enough to flood prosperous cultures flourishing near the sea thus erasing their vestiges? It could also be an explanation for all the oldest known civilizations to have appeared near rivers but not particularly close to the sea (consequence of a traumatic collective experience from a cataclysmic event?).

You are right there is a lot we don't know, but, I doubt that holding completely rigid views or dogmas about the unknown pastis the proper way to understand the missing pieces.

PS: I am well aware my first posts steemed of ignorance and I know I suck at making threads as well, even so, you shouldn't be so quick to judge others that way for you might end up looking like the fool.