|Posted by big mike M on March 21, 2013 at 2:40 PM|
There seems to be a alot of controversy regarding if Vinca is a truely a civilization or not. I'm going to personally touch base on this subject one last time by correcting some flaws revolving around it. First thing I'm going to touch base on...One thing people say about Vinca is that it is older than both Ancient Egypt and Ancient Sumer. Well of course it is. It was a Neolithic culture so of course it's older than Sumer and Egypt which are Bronze Age civilizations. Still, the predecessors of Sumer and especially Egypt are much older than Vinca since they date to Epipaleolithic times.
As for Vinca, we know it was a Stone Age complex that used pictographic writing created complex burials and even organized settlements. We don't know what language these people spoke only that their society was based on agriculture and hunting.
Now I am going to touch base on the Ancient Egypt vs. Vinca controversy.
Ancient Egyptian civilization had began roughly around 3100 B.C...No European Civilization began that early besides Neolithic cultures, that were not civilizations and comparable to Ancient Egypt to the bit.
Some Eurocentrics like to use Vinca because it started around 5500 B.C and they try to claim it as a civilization and so they claim it predates Ancient Egypt. True Vinca does predate the Ancient Egyptian civilization, but not only is Vinca just NEOLITHIC CULTURE, but it’s still an lose-lose siltation for those who claim Vinca Predates Ancient Egypt. Because the Neolithic Egypt started as early as 6,000 B.C.
"By about 6000 BC the Neolithic culture rooted in the Nile Valley. During the Neolithic era, several predynastic cultures developed independently in Upper and Lower Egypt."
Not only that...A neolithic civilization at kerma seems to go back to 5000 b.c. as well or earlier.
A neolithic town was found at kerma at least around 4800 b.c..
It may have gone back to 5000 b.c. from some other info I have read.
If it goes back to 4800 b.c. it will still make the nile valley home of the first civilization on earth. Now I hav always stressed and believed that Sumer was the cradle of civilization, but I am to hearing new news.
It's possible that this Vinca civilization did not developed towns,just villages. There has been nothing that has indicated that Vinca has developed towns or cities Most people when defending Vinca just throw that in. Also Vinca did not have a calendar like nubia at that time or complex burials so it could not be a civilization like Nubia at that time, but a complex culture like some of the native american cultures of North America.
The Vinča culture, also known as Turdaș culture or Turdaș-Vinča culture, is a Neolithic archaeological culture in Southeastern Europe, dated to the period 5500–4500 BCE. Named for its type site, Vinča-Belo Brdo, a large tell settlement discovered by Serbian archaeologist Miloje Vasić in 1908, it represents the material remains of a prehistoric society mainly distinguished by its settlement pattern and ritual behaviour. Farming technology first introduced to the region during the First Temperate Neolithic was developed further by the Vinča culture, fuelling a population boom and producing some of the largest settlements in prehistoric Europe. These settlements maintained a high degree of cultural uniformity through the long-distance exchange of ritual items, but were probably not politically unified. Various styles of zoomorphic and anthropomorphic figurines are hallmarks of the culture, as are the Vinča symbols, which some conjecture to be an early form of proto-writing. Though not conventionally considered part of the Chalcolithic or "Copper Age", the Vinča culture provides the earliest known example of copper metallurgy.
Vinca seems to have settlements the size of towns at least or a city for it' time from what i have read just now but that's still will not make a culture a civilization.
Other elements must come into play at least.
To be called a civilization a culture must have division of labor, agriculture, structured goverment, organized warfare, social stratification,town or city,complex burials,and calendar(if there is no writing).
Nubia and sudan had all of this by 5000 b.c. or 4800 b.c. at least.
A stone circle at Nabta Playa in Egypt's(really lower nubia) Western Desert is thought to act as a calendar and was constructed around 7000 BC.
Çatalhöyük was the size of a city but they did not have most of what makes the core elements of a city or civilization,so even if they had the size they were still not a city of what I have learn recently and would not be called a civilization.
It would just be a large village or a proto-city.
A Civilization that has towns could function like city,that's why they could be called civilization combined with other elements.
A settlement the size of a town or city like Vinca would not still be called a civilization because that settlement does not function like a town or city because of other elements missing.
Jericho was the size of a town but again it did not have the elements that which makes it a civilization from what I learned. And Jericho is dated 9000 BC which is much older compared to Vinca.
All those other factors have to come into play like I said above, so these others were just complex cultures.
They still were not like Nubia at this time making Africa possibly the home of the first civilization.
A complex culture nabta playa is still older then Vinca.
Nabta Playa was once a large basin in the Nubian Desert, located approximately 800 kilometers south of modern day Cairo or about 100 kilometers west of Abu Simbel in southern Egypt, 22° 32' north, 30° 42' east. Today the region is characterized by numerous archaeological sites.
Nabta Playa would be older than Vinca if it was a civilization. It had more of the basic elements to be called civilization more so by 8000 or 7000 b.c. AT LEAST.
The only thing missing is that they still lived in villages and their settlements were not large enough to be called a towns,but if they did it could be called more clearly a civilization by 7000 b.c. to 6000 or around there at least.
This is what it had:
By the 7th millennium BC, exceedingly large and organized settlements were found in the region, relying on deep wells for sources of water. Huts were constructed in straight rows. Sustenance included fruit, legumes, millets, sorghum and tubers.
Also in the late 7th millennium BC, but a little later than the time referred to above, imported goats and sheep, apparently from Southwest Asia , appear. Many large hearths also appear.
High level of organization
Archaeological discoveries reveal that these prehistoric peoples led livelihoods seemingly at a higher level of organization than their contemporaries who lived closer to the Nile Valley.
The people of Nabta Playa had:
above-ground and below-ground stone construction,
villages designed in pre-planned arrangements, and
deep wells that held water throughout the year.
Findings also indicate that the region was occupied only seasonally, most likely only in the summer period, when the local lake filled with water for grazing cattle.
Religious ties to ancient Egypt
By the 6th millennium BC, evidence of a prehistoric religion or cult appears, with a number of sacrificed cattle buried in stone-roofed chambers lined with clay. It has been suggested that the associated cattle cult indicated in Nabta Playa marks an early evolution of Ancient Egypt's Hathor cult. For example, Hathor was worshipped as a nighttime protector in desert regions (see Serabit el-Khadim).
To directly quote professors Wendorf and Schild:
"...there are many aspects of political and ceremonial life in the Predynastic and Old Kingdom that reflects a strong impact from Saharan cattle pastoralists..."
Nevertheless, though the religious practices of the region involving cattle suggest ties to Ancient Egypt"
Egyptologist Mark Lehner cautions:
"It makes sense, but not in a facile, direct way. You can't go straight from these megaliths to the pyramid of Djoser.
Other subterranean complexes are also found in Nabta Playa, one of which included evidence of perhaps an early Nubian attempt at sculpture.
One of the world's earliest known examples of archeoastronomy."
Now some say Nabta Playa should be called a civilization because it had all these other element mentioned, and maybe it should.
If you could call it a civilization then the first civilization on earth would have started in lower nubia first.
I have mix feelings and at times I feel it should be called civilization,but it's clear the settlements no matter how complex must be at least the size of a town even if the villages function like a town or city...
Moving on now....
Another issue is that some people try to claim the Bosnia pyramids are man made. That is another flaw since..."In analysing the site, its known history, and the excavations; geologists, archeologists, and other scientists have concluded that they are natural formations and that there are no signs of human building involved. Additionally, scientists have criticised the Bosnian authorities for supporting the pyramid claim saying: "This scheme is a cruel hoax on an unsuspecting public and has no place in the world of genuine science."
National Geographic has also touched base on this sitution also..
Moving along now...
What people also don't tell you is that Europe during the Neolithic era was influenced by outside sources...Including Vinca.
Prehistoric contacts over the Straits of Gibraltar
indicated by genetic analysis of Iberian
Bronze Age cattle.
"Previously, the appearance of the Late Atlantic Neolithic culture had been placed at a significantly later date than the Egyptian culture, and this chronology and the cultural similarity were interpreted as implying that Egypt was the original source (14). However, more accurate radiocarbon dates obtained from Late Atlantic Neolithic culture sites subsequently redated the origin of this culture to being approximately the same as that of the predynastic Badarian Egyptian culture (15), leading to the hypothesis that these two cultures might derive from a common area, perhaps through pastoral groups living in the Sahara. The culture linked to the Late Atlantic Neolithic period is known to have been dedicated almost exclusively to cattle breeding, secondarily complemented by sheep and goat breeding (14), suggesting that an investigation of the origin of Iberian cattle may offer further insight into early Iberian–African cultural contacts."
Anthropological evidence, all proves Africans were in Europe over 6000 years ago and modern inhabitants also prove this by carrying said African markers...
African genetic markers in the Balkans.
"“The presence of E-M78* Y chromosomes in the Balkans (two Albanians), previously described virtually only in northeast Africa, upper Nile, gives rise to the question of what the original source of the E-M78 may have been. Correlations between human-occupation sites and radiocarbon-dated climatic fluctuations in the eastern Sahara and Nile Valley during the Holocene provide a framework for interpreting the main southeast European centric distribution of E-V13. A recent archaeological study reveals that during a desiccation period in North Africa, while the eastern Sahara was depopulated, a refugium existed on the border of present-day Sudan and Egypt, near Lake Nubia, until the onset of a humid phase around 8500 BC (radiocarbon-calibrated date). The rapid arrival of wet conditions during this Early Holocene period provided an impetus for population movement into habitat that was quickly settled afterwards. Hg E-M78* representatives, although rare overall, still occur in Egypt, which is a hub for the distribution of the various geographically localized M78-related sub-clades. The northward-moving rainfall belts during this period could have also spurred a rapid migration of Mesolithic foragers northwards in Africa, the Levant and ultimately onwards to Asia Minor and Europe, where they each eventually differentiated their regionally distinctive branches.”
It is a historical facr that Neolithic culture was introduced from the outside, likely southwest Asia, via peoples of African and Southwest Asian ancestry. This reflected both in DNA NRY E1b1b and mtDNA N1a as well as skeletal remains showing 'Negroid' features. Yes Negroid features and I'll get into that later.
Larry Angel (1972): one can identify Negroid traits of nose and prognathism appearing in Natufian latest hunters (McCown, 1939) and in Anatolian and Macedonian first farmers probably from Nubia via the predecesors of the Badarians and Tasians.
And more recently from Brace (2005): The surprise is that the Neolithic peoples of Europe and their Bronze Age successors are not closely related to the modern inhabitants, although the prehistoric/modern ties are somewhat more apparent in southern Europe. It is a further surprise that the Epipalaeolithic Natufian of Israel from whom the Neolithic realm was assumed to arise has a clear link to Sub-Saharan Africa...
When canonical variates are plotted, neither sample ties in with Cro-Magnon as was once suggested. The data treated here support the idea that the Neolithic moved out of the Near East into the circum-Mediterranean areas and Europe by a process of demic diffusion but that subsequently the in situ residents of those areas, derived from the Late Pleistocene inhabitants, absorbed both the agricultural life way and the people who had brought it.
This is the reason why Neolithic folks of Balkan Europe such as in Vinca, Bulgaria and Lerna, Greece display 'Negroid' features.
These Bulgaria Skulls show Negroid features.
A Negroid skull...
From what said...I would say Vinca was a complex culture and was to an extent influenced by outside people with evidence of DNA and cranial.