Map reveals ancient urban sprawl, page 1

privacy

Pages:
ATS Members have flagged this thread 9 times

Topic started on 14-8-2007 @ 02:12 PM by DragonsDomain

Just found an extremely interesting report on the BBC website:

Here

Apparently, researchers have found that the ancient temple Angkor Wat, in Cambodia, was the centre of an enormous city covering the same size as Los Angeles.

The team believes it could have covered 3,000 sq km (1,150 sq miles), the largest pre-industrial complex of its kind.

Its nearest rival is Tikal, a Mayan city in Guatemala, which covers between 100 and 150 sq km (40-60 sq miles).

From source

The researchers estimate the city could have supported half a million people, an incredible feat of infrastructure and agriculture at that time.

[edit on 14-8-2007 by DragonsDomain]

[edit on 14-8-2007 by DragonsDomain]

reply posted on 14-8-2007 @ 07:48 PM by D.E.M.

Goddamn.

Thats...amazing. That has to be the largest city of the ancient world now. Would rome even have come close? Babylon? Apparently not. Just another shred of support (although a major one) that civilization emerged from asia instead of the middle east

reply posted on 14-8-2007 @ 07:57 PM by interestedalways

I know it's a stretch, but when I read this it came to my mind how the gov now admits being in Cambodia during the Vietnam outrage.

Funny how they didn't want anyone to know they were there.

It seems interesting that they manage to go where the oldest cities and relics are. At least Cambodia seems to be such and of course Iraq/Mesopotamia have many priceless treasures.

reply posted on 14-8-2007 @ 08:31 PM by donk_316

Excellent find. I knew i should have gone there when i was closer. Such a beautiful area and awe inspiring structures.
---
Dont derail this thread into "all about the Amurikans" please.

[edit on 14-8-2007 by donk_316]

reply posted on 14-8-2007 @ 08:44 PM by mojo4sale

Originally posted by D.E.M.
Just another shred of support (although a major one) that civilization emerged from asia instead of the middle east

Only if civilization started around the 9th century.

There is new evidence to suggest that there are older civilizations than Ur though. That would be about 6000 years before Angkor.

wikipedia

Angkor is a name conventionally applied to the region of Cambodia serving as the seat of the Khmer empire that flourished from approximately the 9th century to the 15th century A.D.

Good post DragonsDomain, i remember seeing a bbc program on this some time ago and the fact that they believed that the massive amounts of irrigation that had been built to sustain the city was the reason for its eventual decline.

reply posted on 15-8-2007 @ 12:04 AM by DragonsDomain

Thanks

I found it really interesting, the city was obviously way ahead of its time. They didn't have the technology to support such a large population, though its wonderous how it ever grew so big in the first place. I'd very much like to visit the area myself one day

reply posted on 15-8-2007 @ 01:57 PM by Silcone Synapse

This is 100% amazing-there is work to be done now,this will be like the incredible discoveries of Frederick Mitchell-hedges (and his daughter).
I really cannot wait to hear more about this-absolutely fascinating.. flagged it.

reply posted on 15-8-2007 @ 10:05 PM by TheStarrunner

Holy. Freaking. Crap.

That is awesome. Very nice find. To put it in a little perspective; according to Wikipedia, that's about twice as large as New York, London, or LA. Bigger than the states of Rhode Island and Delaware.

That is really, really awesome. here's to hoping they find more archaeological evidence to explain exactly how they accomplished this.

reply posted on 15-8-2007 @ 10:08 PM by uberarcanist

I'm not impressed. Angkor Wat was founded in the 1100s. Rome first reached a million in 138 B.C.

www.allempires.com...

reply posted on 16-8-2007 @ 12:05 AM by Kronik98

I remember watching "Journeys to the Ends of the Earth" with David Adams where he went to Cambodia and visited that city. I'm trying to find a link to the episode. It was really impressive and easy to imagine as a bustling metropolis. I think they mentioned it could have supported around 500,000 people or something like that.

reply posted on 16-8-2007 @ 12:56 AM by Gorman91

Awsom find. Lets see, it was built in the 1100's, so it's not so "ancient" as just in the right place at the right time. Still awsome though.

reply posted on 16-8-2007 @ 04:30 PM by DragonsDomain

Thanks for all the positive comments

Imagine the fun you'd have digging around the ruins:

I'm wetting myself thinking about it

Here is some interesting background on the temple:

Conventional theories presume the lands where Angkor stands were chosen as a settlement site because of their strategic military position and agricultural potential. Alternative scholars, however, believe the geographical location of the Angkor complex and the arrangement of its temples was based on a planet-spanning sacred geography from archaic times. Using computer simulations it has been shown that the ground plan of the Angkor complex – the terrestrial placement of its principal temples - mirrors the stars in the constellation of Draco at the time of spring equinox in 10,500 BC.

Source: Sacred Sites

Pages: ^^TOP^^