[HN Gopher] Ancient civilisation under eastern Turkey estimated ...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Ancient civilisation under eastern Turkey estimated to be 11k-13k
       years old
        
       Author : benbreen
       Score  : 166 points
       Date   : 2022-05-20 21:01 UTC (1 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.spectator.co.uk)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.spectator.co.uk)
        
       | h2odragon wrote:
       | The excessively phallic architecture was buried with great
       | prejudice, apparently. making it the first known triumph of
       | matriarchal justice and an example for the modern feminist
       | movement, surely?
       | 
       | /s, but I wonder what the A/B on a headline like that would be.
        
         | [deleted]
        
       | TeeMassive wrote:
        
       | DrBenCarson wrote:
       | > extensive article about 'ancient eastern Turkey'
       | 
       | > no mention of Armenia and/or ancient Armenia
       | 
       | Mmm...kay
       | 
       | For the curious, this is what Armenia used to look like on a map
       | before that whole 'genocide' thing:
       | https://www.gampr.org/historicaltimeline
        
         | [deleted]
        
         | thriftwy wrote:
         | Every nation has such a map and we probably need three earths
         | to satisfy all of these.
        
       | hrdwdmrbl wrote:
       | There's an old saying about online headlines: If the headline
       | asks a question, the answer is always no. If the answer were yes,
       | the headline would say so.
        
         | 867-5309 wrote:
         | not all questions have binary answers
        
         | ergonaught wrote:
         | And yet the answer is yes.
        
           | runesofdoom wrote:
           | Only if we count 35 years of archeology at Gobekli Tepe as
           | 'unknown'.
           | 
           | I find this particular set of archeological investigations to
           | be amazing, and I'm glad to see larger awareness of them. But
           | I think there's a good argument that Betteridge's law of
           | headlines still applies.
           | https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Betteridge_law_of_headlines
        
         | SemanticStrengh wrote:
         | A 2016 study of a sample of academic journals that set out to
         | test Betteridge's law and Hinchliffe's rule (see below) found
         | that few titles were posed as questions and of those, few were
         | yes/no questions and they were more often answered "yes" in the
         | body of the article rather than "no".[12]
        
           | ksaj wrote:
           | This is similar to:
           | 
           | - Look before you leap - He who hesitates is lost
           | 
           | Studies and adages aren't all that different, it seems.
        
         | ksaj wrote:
         | This time, the answer seems to be yes. It's really quite
         | impressive if these were created by hunter-gatherers before the
         | invention of written language.
        
         | capableweb wrote:
         | Betteridge's law of headlines:
         | 
         | > "Any headline that ends in a question mark can be answered by
         | the word no." ... It is based on the assumption that if the
         | publishers were confident that the answer was yes, they would
         | have presented it as an assertion; by presenting it as a
         | question, they are not accountable for whether it is correct or
         | not.
         | 
         | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Betteridge%27s_law_of_headline...
        
         | notacoward wrote:
         | Betteridge's Law from 2009, arguably repeating offline
         | antecedents all the way back to 1991. If that seems old, maybe
         | archaeology isn't for you.
        
       | jscipione wrote:
       | -1 on this article and its abundant phallic references. +1 on
       | Gobekli Tepe being evidence of a pre-literate advanced
       | civilization.
        
         | mysecretaccount wrote:
         | As far as civilizations go, Gobekli Tepe is not really
         | "advanced".
         | 
         | edit: I'm not sure why the downvotes, trying to clarify that
         | this does not add credence to pseudohistorical narratives about
         | long-lost advanced civilizations.
        
           | pjscott wrote:
           | That really depends on what you mean by "advanced". It's
           | evidence of a larger, more organized, more hierarchical
           | civilization than archaeologists had expected to see anywhere
           | near its time period. This is either evidence that they had
           | agriculture way back then _or_ that these things that we
           | normally associate with sedentary agricultural civilization
           | are separable from it. Either one is surprising!
        
       | Barrera wrote:
       | A lot hinges on the dating of this site. How was it done?
       | 
       | According to this article[1] (which has a nice wide-angle view of
       | t-pillars in context), it was radiocarbon dating[1]. You find
       | bits of stuff at the site and the isotopic composition of the
       | carbon-containing material tells you the age based on known rates
       | of carbon-14 decay.
       | 
       | The actual isotopic analysis seems pretty solid.
       | 
       | The problem is that this isn't any ordinary site. The article
       | notes that the site appears to have been deliberately buried.
       | This raises the question of where the samples that were dated
       | actually came from.
       | 
       | This critical review suggests major problems with the older-than-
       | everything-else hypothesis for the site.[2] It notes that at
       | least some of the samples were dated from "fill," or the stuff
       | that was used by someone at some point to bury the site. And that
       | stuff could have itself come from sites much older than
       | Gobeklitepe:
       | 
       | > We already discussed the problem with dating "fills" as opposed
       | to dating "structures". A fill's date (no matter how confident we
       | may fill about its actual date) in no way dates structures, as it
       | simply can be coming from soil deposits that are either older or
       | younger than the structure itself. You can fill your home with
       | dirt from your yard, which could be from various geologic strata,
       | some containing fossils from the Pleistocene. This will not make
       | your home a Pleistocene Epoch home. Or you can currently fill a
       | 4th century BC Temple with soil from riverbanks containing live
       | exoskeletons; this will not render the Temple a 2000 AD
       | structure.
       | 
       | Even if the site wasn't deliberately buried, everything hinges on
       | where the fill came from. The base assumption of radiocarbon
       | dating is that no foreign material was brought in. The shakier
       | that assumption, the shakier the claim to the ages being quoted.
       | 
       | [1] https://www.asahi.com/ajw/articles/14487942
       | 
       | [2]
       | https://www.researchgate.net/publication/317433791_Dating_Go...
        
       | hrkucuk wrote:
       | This was apparently a brothel of some sort that's why nobody is
       | buried there for gods sake
        
         | [deleted]
        
       | maegul wrote:
       | I'm not sure I've seen such superficial commentary here (it feels
       | more like Reddit frankly) for such a popular thread.
       | 
       | Not really a criticism (ok maybe a little), but perhaps more of
       | an indication that these discoveries are truly novel and
       | baffling.
        
         | [deleted]
        
         | AlotOfReading wrote:
         | This is fairly typical for HN links that touch on ancient
         | archaeology, especially anything tangentially related to
         | popular alt-history figures like Graham Hancock. However,
         | metadiscussion about the quality of other comments feels like
         | it goes against a few of the rules. It's better to explain the
         | issues directly in replies.
        
       | SemanticStrengh wrote:
        
         | [deleted]
        
       | vmception wrote:
       | Return the slab
       | 
       | To seal it off again
       | 
       | No human remains and intentionally sealed off, take the hint
        
         | andrewljohnson wrote:
         | Why do you say this, are you implying there is some danger?
        
           | jonny_eh wrote:
           | They're making a joke.
        
             | andrewljohnson wrote:
             | What's the joke, is it an allusion?
        
               | jonny_eh wrote:
               | Every movie where they open something they shouldn't and
               | something dangerous escapes. The most popular being when
               | the Nazis open the ark of the covenant and their faces
               | melt (apologies for the spoilers).
        
               | tpmx wrote:
               | Somehow uncovering very old novel virus strains
               | compatible with humans was my first thought.
        
             | [deleted]
        
         | [deleted]
        
         | jonylaw wrote:
        
         | klyrs wrote:
         | It's a coverup!
        
           | [deleted]
        
       | robonerd wrote:
       | I eagerly await the admission from mainstream historians that all
       | these tons of rock were not carved by semi-nomadic hunter
       | gatherers. The scope of the stonework is evidence of agriculture;
       | it's obnoxiously obvious yet still fringe to say it.
        
         | throwyawayyyy wrote:
         | Graeber spends a lot of time arguing against exactly this
         | assumption in The Dawn of Everything. I.e. that agriculture
         | must come before civilization. Pretty persuasively, IMHO.
        
       | gobengo wrote:
       | 'eastern Turkey' aka Armenia
       | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armenian_genocide
        
         | hereforphone wrote:
         | Nice try
        
         | [deleted]
        
         | alephxyz wrote:
         | It's actually in southeastern Anatolia, not a region with a
         | historical Armenian presence
        
           | gobengo wrote:
           | maybe https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kingdom_of_Armenia_(antiq
           | uity)...
        
             | selimthegrim wrote:
             | Urartu is a little north of here
        
       | 5cott0 wrote:
       | Highly recommend THE DAWN OF EVERYTHING
       | 
       | https://us.macmillan.com/books/9780374157357/thedawnofeveryt...
        
         | tombh wrote:
         | Me too. It's essentially a polemic of the common idea that
         | modernity "fell" from Eden, or more conventionally, "fell" from
         | Rousseau's State of Nature.
         | 
         | Gobekli Tepi is used as one of many examples of how nowadays
         | the evidence is stacked against the idea of agriculture being
         | an inevitable and necessary step on the road to civilisation
         | and all its concomitant ills. Rather the picture is far less
         | linear, indeed it would seem that many societies both knew and
         | had the ability to farm, but actively chose not to.
         | 
         | I haven't finished it yet, but personally it's bringing
         | "modernity" down a peg or 10. It seems that all the possible
         | forms of social organisation that we can imagine, and more,
         | have already been experimented with, multiple times even.
         | What's unique about our version, isn't so much its innovation,
         | but merely its scale. And if we consider this current scale as,
         | encompassing-all-the-lands-we-know-of, then that too has
         | already been and, crucially, gone. What if there have already
         | been societies that, not only witnessed that ultimate jeopardy
         | of the complete collapse of their all-encompassing
         | civilisation, but also went beyond and innovated a post-
         | civilisation society? In some ways that would make them more
         | "modern" than us.
        
       | [deleted]
        
       | gerdesj wrote:
       | We need an older word than civilisation in English.
       | 
       | Civis (citizen) is Latin (civil etc) which is only around 2500
       | years old give or take a bit. We also have polis (city) related
       | words from old Greek for politician, police polite etc.
       | 
       | We clearly need some words derived from really old Anatolian
       | languages or perhaps there are some already.
        
         | Tagbert wrote:
         | "Civilization" Congress from an Indo-European root "kei"
         | meaning "to lie" as on a surface. That takes it back about
         | 4-5000 years. That PIE root certainly had an older ancestral
         | word. Since PIE is from just north of Anatolia it is possible
         | that PIE is descended from a language of Gobekli Tepe.
        
         | Bjartr wrote:
         | Why is the age of the word or its roots significant here?
        
           | imbnwa wrote:
           | Take a swing at it, but I wager the idea is that the Latin
           | and Greek words presume a state of human community that
           | doesn't exhaust these even older configurations, premised as
           | they are on erected physical barriers between inside and
           | outside, state and nature, whereas a hunter-gather group
           | building something like Tepe defies this difference.
           | 
           | Aristotle asserted that human communities form no less
           | naturally than a hive of bees or an ant mound (something
           | Spinoza will echo thousands of years later), in contrast to
           | say Hobbesian theory of community, but he jumped right to the
           | configuration of the city straight from there when we have
           | glimpses of stranger possibilities that arose before, and
           | labeled all other configurations defective.
        
         | bobkazamakis wrote:
         | >We need an older word than civilisation in English.
         | 
         | >Civis (citizen) is Latin (civil etc) which is only around 2500
         | years old give or take a bit.
         | 
         | Do we need a new word for yeet? Seems like that might be
         | outdated too!
        
       | sydthrowaway wrote:
       | So the Proto Indo Europeans have finally been found.
        
         | selimthegrim wrote:
         | Could be the proto-Vainakh/Chechens for all we know
        
         | danans wrote:
         | What makes you think the site is Indo-European? There's no
         | obvious link mentioned in the article, and the site predates
         | earliest known Indo-European migrations by 4000 years.
        
       | [deleted]
        
       | smoothsnake5 wrote:
        
       | Mo3 wrote:
       | Some day, they'll find us too.
        
         | jonylaw wrote:
        
         | travis_brooks wrote:
         | Right, the future archeologists will find some old parking
         | meters and assume the primitive ancients had some sort of steel
         | penis cult.
        
       | lovemenot wrote:
       | >> I am staring at about a dozen, stiff, eight-foot high, orange-
       | red penises, carved from living bedrock, and semi-enclosed in an
       | open chamber. A strange carved head (of a man, a demon, a priest,
       | a God?), also hewn from the living rock, gazes at the phallic
       | totems - like a primitivist gargoyle.
       | 
       | [x] Earliest known example
       | 
       | [x] Giant penises
       | 
       | Second Life will one day become a digital archeologist's
       | incredible discovery
        
         | [deleted]
        
       | jonny_eh wrote:
       | I skimmed the article but didn't see how they determined its age.
        
         | its_ethan wrote:
         | I was looking for this too -- 11,000 years is sort of the
         | benchmark for earliest civilization, so having that be the
         | bounding side for how "young" this place could be struck me as
         | some equivalent to click bait?
         | 
         | edit: looks like someone posted from another source that it was
         | with radiocarbon dating - no reason to think that's incorrect,
         | it just would've been a nice extra sentence or two to include
         | to avoid this very hang-up that at least two people had..
        
           | aksss wrote:
           | But I think the question is radiocarbon dating of what..??
           | Saying they dated a lithic archeological site with
           | radiocarbon measurements doesn't tell us anymore than they
           | measured something with a given method. What was the
           | something??
           | 
           | I posted an extract from link earlier in this thread about
           | the other site, which explained that they were dating the
           | laminae on the structure that started forming after the fill,
           | or sampling organic material tossed in with the fill, but
           | neither really gets at how old the structure itself it.
           | Curious to understand more if people find it.
        
         | layer8 wrote:
         | Radiocarbon dating:
         | https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gobekli_Tepe#Chronology
        
         | aksss wrote:
         | From Gobekli Tepe, but probably similar:
         | 
         | "At the end of its uselife, the megalithic enclosures of
         | Gobekli Tepe were refilled systematically. This special element
         | of the site formation process makes it hard to date the
         | enclosures by the radiocarbon method, as there is no clear
         | correlation of the fill with the architecture. Several ways
         | have been explored to overcome this situation, including the
         | dating of carbonate laminae on architectural structures, of
         | bones and the remains of short-lived plants from the filling.
         | The data obtained from pedogenic carbonates on architectural
         | structures back the relative stratigraphic sequence observed
         | during the excavation. But, unfortunately, they are of no use
         | in dating the sampled structures themselves, as the carbonate
         | layers started forming only after the moment of their burial.
         | At least these samples offer a good terminus ante quem for the
         | refilling of the enclosures. For layer III this terminus ante
         | quem lies in the second half of the 9th millennium calBC, while
         | for layer II it is located in the middle of the 8th millennium
         | calBC."
         | 
         | https://www.researchgate.net/publication/258182967_Radiocarb...
        
       | mftb wrote:
       | Glad to see work continuing in this area. I've been keeping an
       | eye out, since first reading about Gobekli Tepe (related site
       | nearby) several years ago. If they're truly as old as purported,
       | that's interesting.
        
       | wolverine876 wrote:
       | Is there any serious scientific source for this story? A report
       | in a journal?
        
       | ThalesX wrote:
       | > But I do definitely know this: some time in 8000 BC the
       | creators of Gobekli Tepe buried their great structures under tons
       | of rubble. They entombed it. We can speculate why. Did they feel
       | guilt? Did they need to propitiate an angry God? Or just want to
       | hide it?' Klaus was also fairly sure on one other thing. 'Gobekli
       | Tepe is unique.'
       | 
       | I think it'd be rather hard for a hunter gatherer society to
       | realistically cover such a large area under tons of rubble. It
       | makes me wonder if this covering with rubble is somehow related
       | to the Black Sea deluge hypothesis
       | [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Sea_deluge_hypothesis]:
       | 
       | > "In 1997, William Ryan, Walter Pitman, Petko Dimitrov, and
       | their colleagues first published the Black Sea deluge hypothesis.
       | They proposed that a catastrophic inflow of Mediterranean
       | seawater into the Black Sea freshwater lake occurred around 7600
       | years ago, c. 5600 BCE .
       | 
       | > As proposed, the Early Holocene Black Sea flood scenario
       | describes events that would have profoundly affected prehistoric
       | settlement in eastern Europe and adjacent parts of Asia and
       | possibly was the basis of oral history concerning Noah's flood.
       | Some archaeologists support this theory as an explanation for the
       | lack of Neolithic sites in northern Turkey. In 2003, Ryan and
       | coauthors revised the dating of the early Holocene flood to 8800
       | years ago, c. 6800 BCE."
       | 
       | I think there's a poetic feel to it (which makes me wholly
       | question it); the start of agriculture, Babylon, The Garden of
       | Eden, Noah's ark, all wrapped in one, discovered by a shepherd in
       | the hills and filled with penises.
        
         | AlotOfReading wrote:
         | It's worth noting that Karahan Tepe, Gobekli Tepe, and most of
         | the other PPN-A/B sites in Southern Anatolia are on top of
         | hills and mountains at fairly high elevations. They're not
         | really candidates for any sort of flood event.
         | 
         | As for the poetic feel, the term of art is a 'just-so story'.
        
           | ThalesX wrote:
           | Just for wonder's sake. Do you think it could be possible for
           | a system of underground waterways to basically be pushed
           | uphill by a natural dam breaking and the pressure of the
           | Mediterranean sea forcing the water to sort of gush uphill?
           | 
           | Similar to [https://www.amusingplanet.com/2018/02/why-is-
           | water-pouring-o...] (just a quick Google search, maybe not
           | the best article):
           | 
           | > "In the Estonian village of Tuhala, there is a well that
           | starts spouting water after a heavy downpour. The well
           | happens to be placed just over an underground river. After
           | rain water floods the river, water pressure builds to the
           | point that it shoots up out of the well, sometimes up to half
           | a meter high. This continues for a few days. During this
           | time, more than 100 liters of water can flow out every
           | second."
        
         | pvg wrote:
         | _I think it 'd be rather hard for a hunter gatherer society to
         | realistically cover such a large area under tons of rubble_
         | 
         | People didn't think hunter gatherer societies were able to
         | build such structures and complexes in general. It seems a lot
         | less likely that the Mediterranean flooded an area that far
         | from the Black Sea that also happens to be 700m above sea
         | level.
        
         | aksss wrote:
         | > it'd be rather hard for a hunter gatherer society to
         | realistically cover such a large area under tons of rubble
         | 
         | We should be careful about underestimating the capabilities of
         | predecessor cultures. We don't even know to what extent these
         | sites were hunter-gatherer societies, right? Isn't a good part
         | of its significance that it's pushing the clock back on our
         | assumptions?
        
           | ThalesX wrote:
           | > We should be careful about underestimating the capabilities
           | of predecessor cultures
           | 
           | This is surely true, however allowing oneself to imagine and
           | dream, especially when not in a position of authority in the
           | matter can't be that bad, can it? I'm wholly open to any and
           | all possibilities and rebuttals.
           | 
           | > We don't even know to what extent these sites were hunter-
           | gatherer societies, right?
           | 
           | I think the article mentions this is a theory they have.
           | 
           | > Isn't a good part of its significance that it's pushing the
           | clock back on our assumptions?
           | 
           | It is! I hope I'm not detracting from it by entertaining a
           | wild thought.
        
       | user3939382 wrote:
       | In response to which Graham Hancock slowly sits back in his chair
       | and breathes a sigh of victorious relief.
        
         | [deleted]
        
       | poundtown wrote:
       | is this the same thing graham hancock(Gobekli Tepe) has been
       | going on about for sometime or is this different?
        
         | pvg wrote:
         | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karahan_Tepe
         | 
         | It's nearby but it's a different site
        
       | haspoken wrote:
       | https://archive.ph/ER5d9
        
       | tsunamifury wrote:
       | There have been a few articles written about Turkey attempting to
       | derive its current power legitimacy narrative by creating this
       | story of an ancient civilization being founded within their
       | borders. They have pointed out that this is a common trend among
       | dictators that often stretched credulity to the limit (Sadam and
       | Babylon, Mogabe and ancient southern Egypt, Mussolini and the
       | Roman Empire etc) and many attempt to build up their propaganda
       | with such connections.
       | 
       | Im curious how true that is, but there is a trend.
        
         | hereforphone wrote:
         | Those borders didn't exist at the time the "ancient
         | civilization" was constructed. So what's the point?
        
           | DrBenCarson wrote:
           | It inspires nationalism which enables dictators
        
             | hereforphone wrote:
             | Erdogan is a dictator propped up on Islamic sentiment and
             | tradition. He is not a nationalist.
        
           | tsunamifury wrote:
           | And Zimbabwe was no where near the Egyptian Southern Kingdom,
           | and Mussolini came ~1800 years after the height of the Roman
           | Empire. There is no point other than attempting to create a
           | narrative of ancient power & nationalism and aligning it with
           | yourself. Propaganda doesn't operate with logic.
        
           | nyolfen wrote:
           | the 'point' is being able to say that turkey is the world-
           | historical nexus of civilization, with the earliest urban
           | civilization, which feeds nationalist narratives. every
           | country likes to think they're special.
        
         | wolverine876 wrote:
         | Another archeological propaganda technique is to omit from the
         | history the people you don't like and/or who you don't want to
         | have any claim to the territory. Without naming names, one
         | country likes to skip back thousands of years.
        
           | jonylaw wrote:
        
         | pvg wrote:
         | What are some such articles?
        
         | [deleted]
        
           | [deleted]
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2022-05-20 23:00 UTC)