It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Dawn of civilisations. How right do you think I am?

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 11 2008 @ 10:27 AM
link   
I thought I might state my understanding of our development over the millennia and invite you guys to help me analyse it. This thread will deal mainly in anthropology.

At the risk of being confrontational, I'll say that I am in the evolution camp because I have eyes to see and ears to hear. To accept creationism is to say wind doesn't exist and the trees move by themselves.

The typical human populace will start out as a hunter-gatherer community, hunting big game, while foraging for for fruit, nuts, berries etc. Even at the very early stages, language would be present as it is synonymous with the presence of society which is why many types of other animals have rudimentary language.

At some stage, the community will move from being hunter-gatherers to an agriculture community with the domestication of the plants and animals.

Watching various documentaries I learnt that this change happened simultaneously in north Africa and Greenland due to significant climate change. The Egyptian civilisation is said to have been brought down by the same thing that started it, the drying up of the Sahara from forest to desert. As the forest receded, the hunter-gather peoples within receded too. They settled around the Nile river where vegetation still thrived. Shortly after the people generated agriculture. Annually, the rains in the Niger area flooded the Nile bringing the 'black earth' which kept the soil fertile. The end came when the rains failed to come and the black earth did not replenish the food supply to support the large society. Without the food, everything was thrown into turmoil, yet someone still managed to record in hieroglyphs that cannibalism had infested the land.

At around the same time as the forests receded, the people living in Europe experienced the beginning of the Little Ice Age. During the hard times, people converted from hunters to farmers to stay alive.

The common denominator for these two cases is that great ocean conveyor failed to transport heat around the globe as it usually does, resulting in the heating Africa and the cooling of Europe (Before this happened, Greenland would have actually been green rather than iced over as it is now).


The role of agriculture, IMHO, acts as a catalyst for the advancement of a society. When the most important thing in your life, food, is coming from the ground, and the types of food consumed and the quality of that food is dependant on the season, then the passing of the seasons will become very important to the farmer. I believe this in turn inspires the advent of astrology and in turn, religion. The heavenly bodies would have been seen as central to the food supply and thus the health and life of the people. I believe this inspires people to believe that the sun and the earth are purposefully contributing to the lives of the people which brings about the worship of the Sun, moon, earth etc.

I think that the fundamental importance of the earth is the reason for their worship and as time goes on, the things that are worshipped gain an anthropomorphic façade - the gods, angels and the rest of the beings replete through metaphysics.

As a side note, my own ponderings, have brought me to believe that the common maternal nature attributed to the Earth, "Mother Earth/Nature" is because all food and hence life comes direct from it, similar to how the new born comes direct form the woman's womb. And I also think that the paternal nature attributed to the sun is because it contributes to life but from a distance, similar to the father "bringing home the bacon".

How right am I? Am I over simplifying things? What do you agree/disagree with?


Mod Edit: BB Code.



Edit: On the subject of language.

I neglected to add my thoughts on the developments of language, so I'll just stick 'em on the end here.

During the early days of man, language would have been based around hunter and gathering, obviously, but with the advent of astrology, in the intense drive to understand the weather and the seasons, language had to diversify.

One consequence of agriculture is that new concepts are introduced to young humanity. Namely; territory, property, organising and most important of all, inter-human competition. These things brought a lot, not only to language, to human nature- men were fighting over land for the first time.

Suddenly, men were talking about things contextually, things that don't apply to now. This is something that no other species has emulated to the best of human understanding.

As astrology became more complete, there was the need to store the information. Apart from cave-art, the first written language would appear around now. With written language, the stage is set for this fledgling civ to start advancing rapidly out of ignorance.

[edit on 9/11/2008 by Good Wolf]

[edit on 9/11/2008 by Good Wolf]




posted on Sep, 11 2008 @ 10:42 AM
link   
Quite accurate indeed, very good stuff.

I can't see anything that I particularly disagree with.



posted on Sep, 11 2008 @ 10:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by C.C.Benjamin
Quite accurate indeed, very good stuff.

I can't see anything that I particularly disagree with.


Thanks man.
Although I'm not sure I couldn't have out it a bit more succinctly than that, although it is a thought narrative.

[edit on 9/11/2008 by Good Wolf]



posted on Sep, 11 2008 @ 11:40 AM
link   
Dude that was tight I am glad i sat and read the whole thing youve basicly just comfirmed alot of my own theorys
Thanks



posted on Sep, 11 2008 @ 12:01 PM
link   
I'd just like to add that agriculture also allowed humans to finally produce a surplus of food, thus freeing up some of the population to perform other jobs on a professional level. This allowed much to get done that otherwise wouldn't have.



posted on Sep, 11 2008 @ 12:27 PM
link   
Yea. Wikipedia talks about how in some cases, a surplus of food would be used as a gift. To other tribes i'm guessing.



posted on Sep, 11 2008 @ 12:42 PM
link   
You have made some interesting insights.

Maybe you would be interested in a couple of my threads. They are similar to yours but with differences.

www.abovetopsecret.com...
www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on Sep, 11 2008 @ 01:01 PM
link   
Ah yes, the ancient astronauts. A tantalising possibility.

In the world of science, the idea of extraterrestrial intelligence is unanimously accepted as reality because it is a statistical certainty. What isn't accepted quite so readily is that we have been visited.

I personally think we have and are but very sparingly being visited. But I'm inclined to think that most UFO (that aren't birds and Venus) are man made, govt. vehicles.

I've heard it said before that the govt. wants people to believe in aliens because it makes people not assume secret aircraft made by man.

Course that is an opinion.



posted on Sep, 11 2008 @ 01:05 PM
link   
Yeah, so what's the point?



posted on Sep, 11 2008 @ 04:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by Good Wolf
Yea. Wikipedia talks about how in some cases, a surplus of food would be used as a gift. To other tribes i'm guessing.


Well, I suppose so, but the main point being people could concentrate on something other than agriculture - art, science, religion, technology, etc.

And, of course, brewing beer. As far as I'm concerned, the only reason to come out of the caves and start toiling the land.



posted on Sep, 11 2008 @ 09:13 PM
link   
No no, I understand what you are saying. And I agree completely. I was just saying that occasionally it was used as gifts.

The trouble with stored food, is that when things get hard, since people don't grow their own food and are reliant on farmed excess food, they starve.

That's one of the drawbacks of civilisation.



posted on Sep, 12 2008 @ 09:01 AM
link   
reply to post by Good Wolf
 


I'd say that switching from hunter/gatherers to farmers caused some pretty dramatic changes in human society. Every step in improving the efficiency of farming meant another person didn't have to farm to survive. Just as walking on two legs freed up our hands to use tools, freeing people from directly providing for themselves created a growing surplus of minds, bodies, and time to learn more about our world. Couple that with our impressive language skills, and you have the first real progressive cultures that can cause more change in 10 years than previous cultures could in 100. And then came the industrial revolution, which accelerated learning and technology very rapidly, causing even more progress.

I find the story of human development absolutely fascinating. We really are animals, just with a couple of different traits that superficially set us apart from the other beasts. Great post, Mr. Wolf!



posted on Sep, 12 2008 @ 09:28 AM
link   
Thank you Dave420. I only became interested in this recently when I started to learn German. The similarities and differences in the language to our own produced an interest in the evolution of language.

I started studying linguistics and since it is coupled so closely to culture, my interest expanded into history and anthropology.

This thread is the product of a couple of months of lite research.



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join