Pre-Sumerian Civilizations of Ancient Ukraine (20,000 BCE)

a reply to: UnderKingsPeak
Ukraine is also regarded as the bread basket of Europe. During the Soviet times Ukraine produced 25% of all agricultural output in the former Soviet Union. The place is known for it's very fertile land.
cia.gov

There could be several reasons why the place is a hot spot.

a reply to: Harte
I have to agree wholeheartedly that describing the scratch-marks as "proto-Sumerian" is spurious at best. They are far too indistinct, though I suppose this is ideal for subjective interpretation.

Barry Fell would indeed be happy!

originally posted by: SargonThrall
a reply to: Harte
I have to agree wholeheartedly that describing the scratch-marks as "proto-Sumerian" is spurious at best. They are far too indistinct, though I suppose this is ideal for subjective interpretation.

Barry Fell would indeed be happy!

I was being sarcastic (like you,) in case anyone wondered. I'm not one to use a lot of emoticons. Besides, the ones here are so weird.

Fell once translated a bit of Ogham (turned out to be bear scratches) over the phone.

Harte

I have to agree wholeheartedly that describing the scratch-marks as "proto-Sumerian" is spurious at best. They are far too indistinct, though I suppose this is ideal for subjective interpretation.

Also no argument here, what is obviously missing from what looked like bear claw marks were the triangle like notches at the end of each line like in the examples of Cunieform writing that Harte linked.

This could be an inept analogy but I'll present it anyway, your thoughts will be much appreciated.

If an English speaking person was asked today and presented part of Beowulf's manuscripts, will that person recognize that it was Old English? How about manuscripts of The Canterbury Tales of Geoffrey Chaucer or a specimen of Shakespeare's handwritting?

Pre-Cuneiform was said to be from 3400–3100 BC with the earliest coherent texts from about 2600 BC and nothing much was mentioned if something was found that could be older or much older. Should we be stuck in 3400–3100 BC time-frame and not investigate further?

I think that we can all agree that it is a contentious topic but can't we at least agree that there might be some artifacts out there that could be older than what is presently generally accepted? If not from the Ukraine, maybe in Iran, Turkey or even China?

originally posted by: MaxTamesSiva

I have to agree wholeheartedly that describing the scratch-marks as "proto-Sumerian" is spurious at best. They are far too indistinct, though I suppose this is ideal for subjective interpretation.

Also no argument here, what is obviously missing from what looked like bear claw marks were the triangle like notches at the end of each line like in the examples of Cunieform writing that Harte linked.

This could be an inept analogy but I'll present it anyway, your thoughts will be much appreciated.

If an English speaking person was asked today and presented part of Beowulf's manuscripts, will that person recognize that it was Old English? How about manuscripts of The Canterbury Tales of Geoffrey Chaucer or a specimen of Shakespeare's handwritting?

We're not talking about being able to read the script here. Many people would not be able to understand Middle English.
But anyone that bothers to look will recognize the Latin Alphabet used in each of your examples.


Harte

it wouldnt surprise me if they are looking for the Palladium created by the tears of athena

a wooden carving and said to be the seat of power of the Trojans
and then the greeks when it was stolen and Troy was sacked and finally the Romans when they conquered greece and brought it to the capital of Rome where it was kept until Constantine

Said to have been removed from Rome by Constantine and moved to Constantinople

is said to be hidden somewhere in eastern Europe

en.wikipedia.org...(classical_antiquity)

a reply to: Harte

We're not talking about being able to read the script here. Many people would not be able to understand Middle English. But anyone that bothers to look will recognize the Latin Alphabet used in each of your examples.

I see your point, it's a bad analogy. Latin is hardly comparable to what suspiciously looked like bear claw marks. Could it be a case of pareidolia?

I made the analogy on the assumption that none of us can read or make sense of Cuneiform and what more of Pre-Cuneiform writing. If Kifishin who was said to be a Sumerian scholar can decipher Innana or Enlil in these bear claw marks and read a sentence that makes sense to him, at least I have to accept it on it's face value. It will really be cool though if this can be examined by other Sumerologist.

a reply to: sapien82
That's intriguing.

Metals and mining in Ukraine

originally posted by: iWontGiveUP
Location location location
What's under the water?

To the unaware there is a theory that the flood myths came from a sudden break in the Bosporus between Greece and Turkey and what is now the Black Sea was once mostly dry land sometime during our early prehistory. The Great Flood as it were was the result of the Mediterranean sea rushing in.

originally posted by: MaxTamesSiva
a reply to: Harte

We're not talking about being able to read the script here. Many people would not be able to understand Middle English. But anyone that bothers to look will recognize the Latin Alphabet used in each of your examples.

I see your point, it's a bad analogy. Latin is hardly comparable to what suspiciously looked like bear claw marks. Could it be a case of pareidolia?

I made the analogy on the assumption that none of us can read or make sense of Cuneiform and what more of Pre-Cuneiform writing. If Kifishin who was said to be a Sumerian scholar can decipher Innana or Enlil in these bear claw marks and read a sentence that makes sense to him, at least I have to accept it on it's face value. It will really be cool though if this can be examined by other Sumerologist.

Same guy says the petroglyphs at Catalhoyuk are also protosumerian.

His claim on both case is controversial and not generally accepted.
To me it looks like he sees cuneiform wherever he looks. That's why I mentioned Barry Fell earlier in the thread.
If Kifishin has Sumeritis, Fell had Oghamitis.

Harte

a reply to: Asktheanimals
Thank you for bringing up iWontGiveUP's post that was followed up by iasenko's post with a video clip earlier in this thread.

South of the Ukraine in Bulgaria particularly in Varna is another fascinating site. Hristo Smolenov a PhD in logic and heuristics and researcher of The Lost Aurolithic Varna Civilization also have intriguing claims that it was even older than Sumerian and Egyptian civilizations and even bold enough to suggest Atlantian.

Here's the complete documentary about Varna:

And here's the complete ducumentary where iasenko's video clip was taken:

There seems to be (for lack of a better term) a pissing archeological contest between Ukraine and Bulgaria. Could there be a shade of nationalist agenda behind it?

a reply to: Harte

Same guy says the petroglyphs at Catalhoyuk are also protosumerian.

His claim on both case is controversial and not generally accepted. To me it looks like he sees cuneiform wherever he looks. That's why I mentioned Barry Fell earlier in the thread. If Kifishin has Sumeritis, Fell had Oghamitis.

Sumeritis must be contagious, apparently Yuri Shilov, Volodymyr Krasnoholovets, Tim and Heatherlee Hooker acquired it. Is the book just a scam to sell it to the English speaking readers and promote Ukraine's nationalist agenda?

It still begs the question did the Americans and other experts in the field from Western Europe visited and examined the sites besides Tim & Heatherlee Hooker? Shouldn't we trust the Ukrainian and Bulgarian experts' findings and hypotheses that it needs the Americans and Western Europeans stamp of approval? Is the Eastern Europeans standard of research much lower than their Western and American counterparts? Should archeology move on beyond Sumer and Egypt and examine what could be much older vestiges of civilization?

originally posted by: MaxTamesSiva
a reply to: Harte

Same guy says the petroglyphs at Catalhoyuk are also protosumerian.

His claim on both case is controversial and not generally accepted. To me it looks like he sees cuneiform wherever he looks. That's why I mentioned Barry Fell earlier in the thread. If Kifishin has Sumeritis, Fell had Oghamitis.

Sumeritis must be contagious, apparently Yuri Shilov, Volodymyr Krasnoholovets, Tim and Heatherlee Hooker acquired it. Is the book just a scam to sell it to the English speaking readers and promote Ukraine's nationalist agenda?

It still begs the question did the Americans and other experts in the field from Western Europe visited and examined the sites besides Tim & Heatherlee Hooker? Shouldn't we trust the Ukrainian and Bulgarian experts' findings and hypotheses that it needs the Americans and Western Europeans stamp of approval? Is the Eastern Europeans standard of research much lower than their Western and American counterparts? Should archeology move on beyond Sumer and Egypt and examine what could be much older vestiges of civilization?

Didn't say it was a scam. I said it's controversial and not generally accepted. Many experts from Russia and the Ukraine dispute Kifishin's claim - without input from the West.

Straw man much?

Harte

a reply to: Harte

Didn't say it was a scam. I said it's controversial and not generally accepted. Many experts from Russia and the Ukraine dispute Kifishin's claim - without input from the West.

Straw man much?

My apologies, I didn't mean to put words in your mouth. I'm just asking questions. Remember this book you linked Selective Remembrances? I only read the page where Kifishin's name was highlighted. I'll read the whole part about Ukraine to maybe understand Kifishin's critics better.

The book was published by the University of Chicago Press, the head editor Philip L. Kohl is a professor of Anthropology at Wellesley College, New Zealand.

a reply to: MaxTamesSiva

This must explain why Ukrainian women are so unbelievably hot?

originally posted by: MaxTamesSiva
a reply to: Asktheanimals
Thank you for bringing up iWontGiveUP's post that was followed up by iasenko's post with a video clip earlier in this thread.

South of the Ukraine in Bulgaria particularly in Varna is another fascinating site. Hristo Smolenov a PhD in logic and heuristics and researcher of The Lost Aurolithic Varna Civilization also have intriguing claims that it was even older than Sumerian and Egyptian civilizations and even bold enough to suggest Atlantian.
....
There seems to be (for lack of a better term) a pissing archeological contest between Ukraine and Bulgaria. Could there be a shade of nationalist agenda behind it?

The videos are very misleading - these are cultures and NOT civilizations. They did not build cities and they did not have large agricultural areas that supported them.

definition of civilization
A complex society characterized by urban development, multiple social classes, organized symbols/written language, farming and control over the natural environment (building dams and channels to water crops, planting fields, domesticating animals)

According to M. Gimbutas (1991), "The discontinuity of the Varna, Karanovo, Vinča and Lengyel cultures in their main territories and the large scale population shifts to the north and northwest are indirect evidence of a catastrophe of such proportions that cannot be explained by possible climatic change, land exhaustion, or epidemics (for which there is no evidence in the second half of the 5th millennium B.C.). Direct evidence of the incursion of horse-riding warriors is found, not only in single burials of males under barrows, but in the emergence of a whole complex of Kurgan cultural traits."

Why is this important? Well, if you're arguing dates then we can find cultures that are far older than Varna. The Cardium Pottery culture is older and Egypt's Badari culture is also quite old.

Hanslune wrote a thread here about Jerf el Ahmar - a culture that dates to around 8,000 BC and is much older than Varna, etc.

So... arguing about which area had the oldest "civilization" is something of national pride but the truth is that neither of these areas had an actual civilization older than India, Sumeria, and Egypt.

a reply to: Byrd
I truly appreciate it for pointing out the difference between a culture and a civilization. There could be no point in discussing the topic of this thread much further if we adopt the definition of civilization you cited and if our benchmark will be India, Sumeria and Egypt, the list will probably be quite short... not that I'm complaining, I'm all for higher standards.

I took the title of this thread "Pre-Sumerian Civilizations of Ancient Ukraine..." from Tim & Heatherlee Hooker's video lecture, on Shilov's defense, the title of his book is "Ancient History of Aratta-Ukraine : 20,000 BCE - 1,000 CE."

On googling the definition of civilization there are more than 29 million results, depending on the context, whether historical, anthropological, sociological etc. A random sampling will usually enumerate a list of features, key elements, characteristics or even a shorter list of characteristics and a lecture. We can't even use Oxford Dictionary's definition here in our discussion. One source had a lax definition, to quote:

In a wide sense, civilization often means nearly the same thing as culture or even regional traditions including one or more separate states.

But let us adopt the definition you cited, my only beef with it as well as the random examples above is language, both spoken and written should be on top of the lists. Without language, I find it hard to imagine everything on the lists to thrive.

So let's apply it to Arrata-Ukraine, please note that it is Shilov's position that Arrata is in the Ukraine, Kantzveldt already pointed out Iran.

1. Language- Does a controversial Pre-Cuneiform writing count?
2. Urban Development- Unknown, nothing was mentioned that I'm aware of.
3. Multiple Social Classes- Maybe, the elaborate burial sites that were unearthed suggests a form of religion and that the persons buried were of social importance. It was also said that a semblance of legal structure were found... if we have a priest, a lawyer, a dead rich guy and a group of mound builders, will this count?
4. Farming- Most likely... please make this a bonus point.
5. Control Over the Natural Environment- Does building a huge multi-chambered cairn and elaborate burial mounds count?

What I find interesting is they didn't found any artifacts resembling a weapon at the site.

So if we will strictly adhere to the criteria of a civilization, Arrata-Ukraine failed miserably. In Varna, Bulgaria on the other hand, local archeologists are still looking for sponsors to continue the dig. More than 20 years have passed since the discovery of the gold hoard and the Bulgarian government ordered to stop the dig.
smithsonianmag.com

Culture yes, civilization no... but isn't civilization just a manifestation of culture?

a reply to: combatmaster
I can't answer your question right now, my wife is standing behind me.

originally posted by: MaxTamesSiva
a reply to: Byrd
I truly appreciate it for pointing out the difference between a culture and a civilization. There could be no point in discussing the topic of this thread much further if we adopt the definition of civilization you cited and if our benchmark will be India, Sumeria and Egypt, the list will probably be quite short... not that I'm complaining, I'm all for higher standards.

Yes, it's a higher standard than a lot of people around here use, but that IS the standard and has been for a century.
Misuse of the word "civilization" is rampant on boards like this. And that's okay sometimes.
But not when somebody tries to compare an ancient culture to an ancient civilization, thinking they've "disproven the experts."

If a person wants to claim the experts are wrong about the rise of civilizations and which are the oldest, that person is obligated to use the same standard as anthropologists use.

If they don't, it's like saying "My chicken is a horse, and that proves that not all horses have four legs."

Harte

originally posted by: MaxTamesSiva
a reply to: Byrd
I truly appreciate it for pointing out the difference between a culture and a civilization. There could be no point in discussing the topic of this thread much further if we adopt the definition of civilization you cited and if our benchmark will be India, Sumeria and Egypt, the list will probably be quite short... not that I'm complaining, I'm all for higher standards.

I understand it's frustrating but it shows the need for a clear definition. The average person, like Tim and Heatherlee Hooker, doesn't understand the difference.

If you are a researcher, exact definitions are a necessary tool to make sure you are comparing two things that are alike. The definition I use comes from researchers... specifically anthropology and archaeology.

On googling the definition of civilization there are more than 29 million results, depending on the context, whether historical, anthropological, sociological etc. A random sampling will usually enumerate a list of features, key elements, characteristics or even a shorter list of characteristics and a lecture. We can't even use Oxford Dictionary's definition here in our discussion. One source had a lax definition, to quote:

Heh. We train our browsers and they reflect our biases. When I google the same thing, my results are from dictionaries and encyclopedias and Wikipedia instead of blogs. They are written for different focuses, but they all say basically the same thing - a society that has developed far enough (in other words, has enough people) to develop a social structure, ruling structures, farming, and domestication.

So let's apply it to Arrata-Ukraine, please note that it is Shilov's position that Arrata is in the Ukraine, Kantzveldt already pointed out Iran.

1. Language- Does a controversial Pre-Cuneiform writing count?

Without other indications, no. And the "pre-cuneiform" isn't proven.

2. Urban Development- Unknown, nothing was mentioned that I'm aware of.

None, actually.

3. Multiple Social Classes- Maybe, the elaborate burial sites that were unearthed suggests a form of religion and that the persons buried were of social importance. It was also said that a semblance of legal structure were found... if we have a priest, a lawyer, a dead rich guy and a group of mound builders, will this count?

Yes and no. The Mound Builder culture in the US had all of these plus farming but is not a civilization.

4. Farming- Most likely... please make this a bonus point.
5. Control Over the Natural Environment- Does building a huge multi-chambered cairn and elaborate burial mounds count?

Yes and yes... but again, needs a certain level of development including symbols and a certain level of population. No cities, no real writing system = culture.

What I find interesting is they didn't found any artifacts resembling a weapon at the site.

That says something about the site but not the culture. One assumes they hunted animals for food; hence they had weapons.

So if we will strictly adhere to the criteria of a civilization, Arrata-Ukraine failed miserably. In Varna, Bulgaria on the other hand, local archeologists are still looking for sponsors to continue the dig. More than 20 years have passed since the discovery of the gold hoard and the Bulgarian government ordered to stop the dig.
smithsonianmag.com

Hopefully they get it before treasure hunters do!

Culture yes, civilization no... but isn't civilization just a manifestation of culture?

No, not necessarily. See the Mound Builder Culture or the Chaco Culture... etc. Civilizations have culture but not the other way around.