JiscMail Logo
Email discussion lists for the UK Education and Research communities

Help for BRITARCH Archives


BRITARCH Archives

BRITARCH Archives


BRITARCH@JISCMAIL.AC.UK


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

BRITARCH Home

BRITARCH Home

BRITARCH  January 2016

BRITARCH January 2016

Options

Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password

Subject:

Re: 10,000BC new series

From:

Constantinos Ragazas <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

[log in to unmask]

Date:

Mon, 25 Jan 2016 11:44:13 -0500

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (76 lines)

Hi Tracy,

It wasn't my intention to bring up Gobekli Tepe in this discussion. But GeoCur has. And you have responded. So I must respond too.

You write, "... It [my article on Gobekli Tepe] leaves out many aspects that were theoretically found in the garden, such as no real evidence of a large amount of wooden planking, or the huge amount of bitumen that lined the wood, or the large amount of lead used, or the 22 feett thick walls. Plus I just don't agree with the location."

As you point out, these are "theoretical". Meaning, of course, they may not be found at all. Gobekli Tepe was reclaimed and used for agriculture for millennia following the collapse and rapid burial of the site (the open space below the hanging gardens when these caved-in). The large Palm tree trunks that underlined the garden beds would have protruded above the dirt and rubble. They would have been reclaimed and used elsewhere as valuable construction material. Or simply cleared away for the agricultural tilling of the land. Though these "theoretically" would be there, practically they would not be there.

As to your other points. Nothing in what was written or we know states explicitly there was only ONE "hanging garden" of Babylon. Or where it was. Likely, there were several. And at several different locations. The "hanging gardens" mentioned by Hero of Byzantium in his "Seven Wonders" was a "must see" destination for tourists traveling from Byzantium and other Asia Minor cities to Alexandria, Egypt. Ursa was a major city along that travel route. And is located in Ancient Mesopotamia/Babylon. And the "Hanking Gardens" at Gobekli Tepe were nearby. Hero's "Seven Wonders" was an early "tourist guide" for these travelers. I don't think Hero would have send them off to distant Bagdad or elsewhere sightseeing.

As for your comments on the TV series, why then call it "10,000 BC" ? If it wan't about 10,000BC? The title is contrived for a purpose! 

@GeoCur, you write, "A better guide is  the convergent evidence found at a monument like Gobekli Tepe ,built c.12,000 YA ."

Current views on Gobekli Tepe (and other examples you site) are current interpretations based on wishy-washy reasoning using unwarranted assumptions driven by ancestral worship.

I argued the argument, "if we can do a task using primitive tools than prehistoric people could have done similar tasks using the same tools", is fundamentally wrong. Do you dispute that?

Or is it the "principle of survival" as applied to prehistoric people that you have problems with.

@Dave Tooke, you write, "Hunter-Gatherers had more leisure time than we do today. [...] Agriculture is much harder work."

What is your theory, then, why prehistoric people would abandon a life of ease and leisure in an affluent hunter-gatherers Eden for a life of toil and suffering in an agricultural Inferno?"

Kostas
[log in to unmask]


-----Original Message-----
From: Little Light <[log in to unmask]>
To: BRITARCH <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Sat, Jan 23, 2016 11:30 AM
Subject: Re: [BRITARCH] 10,000BC new series


I read that article on Gobleki Tepe being the Ancient Hanging Gardens of 
Babylon and as well as it's written, it leaves out many aspects that 
were theoretically found in the garden, such as no real evidence of a 
large amount of wooden planking, or the huge amount of bitumen that 
lined the wood, or the large amount of lead used, or the 22 feett thick 
walls. Plus I just don't agree with the location.

As for the TV series, isn't the whole aspect of the programme supposed 
to be showing how people of modern society could cope in ancient 
circumstances?  They wouldn't have any knowledge of how to live like a 
stone age hunter/gatherer and have to learn the hard way.  It is an 
entertainment show with a bit of history rather than the other way 
around.  It really does show how most people would act if something did 
happen that caused an "end of the world scenario".  Most wouldn't be 
able to cope, they would be the first victims of any kind of 
"Armageddon"  Without mobile phones and access to the pleasant sides of 
life, they would crumple into a gibbering wreck.  It's normally the well 
prepared and the most unlikely of people that will survive.  Take that 
other TV programme that was on before Christmas, Hunted, who would have 
believed the final competitors who made it to the plane.  The ones that 
had done their research or prepared in advance were caught. There is a 
lot to learn from the new series of 10,000BC that we could do well in 
taking in and remembering.

Tracy

On 23/01/2016 10:59 AM, George Currie wrote:
> "Our differences with them is some 12,000 years of cultural, social and intellectual evolution. To argue (as GeoCur and many others have and do), if we can do a task using primitive tools than prehistoric people could have done similar tasks using the same tools, is fundamentally wrong.
>
> Our best guide to what prehistoric people would likely have done is to start with the physical conditions they had to endure. And apply the 'principle of survival' to their actions and intentions. I seriously doubt they would have the leisure and the decadence to self-indulge in impractical 'monument building'."
>
>   A better guide is  the convergent evidence found at a monument like Gobekli Tepe ,built c.12,000 YA .
>   As far as I am aware there is only one person who "argues" against this  evidence  .
>   See .  <a removedlink__2bbcfc53-0dea-4675-8e1f-f981606aa76a__href="http: tinyurl.com="" gvq9lwe" target="_blank">http://tinyurl.com/gvq9lwe
>   This is  equally  as hilarious as the  "argument " for the inability of decadent ,self indulgent Neolithic/EBA builders to build monuments such as Stonehenge , cursus , long barrows etc .
>
>
>
>
</a removedlink__2bbcfc53-0dea-4675-8e1f-f981606aa76a__href="http:>

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

JiscMail Tools


RSS Feeds and Sharing


Advanced Options


Archives

July 2019
June 2019
May 2019
April 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004
June 2004
May 2004
April 2004
March 2004
February 2004
January 2004
December 2003
November 2003
October 2003
September 2003
August 2003
July 2003
June 2003
May 2003
April 2003
March 2003
February 2003
January 2003
December 2002
November 2002
October 2002
September 2002
August 2002
July 2002
June 2002
May 2002
April 2002
March 2002
February 2002
January 2002
December 2001
November 2001
October 2001
September 2001
August 2001
July 2001
June 2001
May 2001
April 2001
March 2001
February 2001
January 2001
December 2000
November 2000
October 2000
September 2000
August 2000
July 2000
June 2000
May 2000
April 2000
March 2000
February 2000
January 2000
December 1999
November 1999
October 1999
September 1999
August 1999
July 1999
June 1999
May 1999
April 1999
March 1999
February 1999
January 1999
December 1998
November 1998
October 1998
September 1998
August 1998
July 1998
June 1998
May 1998


JiscMail is a Jisc service.

View our service policies at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/policyandsecurity/ and Jisc's privacy policy at https://www.jisc.ac.uk/website/privacy-notice

Secured by F-Secure Anti-Virus CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager