The Rise of Power and the 6000-year-old Shared Idea of the Solid Wheel as well as the Spoked Wheel-Shaped Ritual Motif

ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref

Indo-European Wheel Words

What exactly is the evidence that Proto-Indo-Europeans had wheels and wagons? And what is the significance of *kwekwlo-?

“Wheels, it appears, are not that old. They first turn up, in the form of molded clay wheels on toys, in Ukraine’s Tripolye B2 culture. After this date, there is an explosion of evidence for wheels across Europe and down into the Middle East. So (just going back 500 years to be safe) wheels probably weren’t invented much before, say, 4300 BCE or around 6,320 years ago then. Why does this matter? Frankly, it doesn’t. This is even more true now that the war of arguments over the age of Proto-Indo-European (PIE) is largely won (not in my favor I should add – apart from Anatolian, it probably existed as a mass of dialects somewhere around 4000-3000 BCE or 6,020-5,020 years ago). However, there are still questions to be answered about what has been taken by so many archaeologists and linguists to be a certainty.” ref

“The Halaf culture of 6500–5100 BC is sometimes credited with the earliest depiction of a wheeled vehicle, but this is doubtful as there is no evidence of Halafians using either wheeled vehicles or even pottery wheels. Precursors of wheels, known as “tournettes” or “slow wheels”, were known in the Middle East by the 5th millennium BC. One of the earliest examples was discovered at Tepe Pardis, Iran, and dated to 5200–4700 BC. These were made of stone or clay and secured to the ground with a peg in the center, but required significant effort to turn. True potter’s wheels, which are freely-spinning and have a wheel and axle mechanism, were developed in Mesopotamia (Iraq) by 4200–4000 BC. The oldest surviving example, which was found in Ur (modern day Iraq), dates to approximately 3100 BC. Wheel has been also found in the Indus Valley Civilization, a 4th millennium BCE civilization covering areas of present-day India and Pakistan.” ref

“The oldest indirect evidence of wheeled movement was found in the form of miniature clay wheels north of the Black Sea before 4000 BCE. From the middle of the 4th millennium BCE onward, the evidence is condensed throughout Europe in the form of toy cars, depictions, or ruts. In Mesopotamia, depictions of wheeled wagons found on clay tablet pictographs at the Eanna district of Uruk, in the Sumerian civilization are dated to c. 3500–3350 BCE. In the second half of the 4th millennium BCE, evidence of wheeled vehicles appeared near-simultaneously in the Northern (Maykop culture) and South Caucasus and Eastern Europe (Cucuteni-Trypillian culture). Depictions of a wheeled vehicle appeared between 3631 and 3380 BCE in the Bronocice clay pot excavated in a Funnelbeaker culture settlement in southern Poland. In nearby Olszanica, a 2.2 m wide door was constructed for wagon entry; this barn was 40 m long with 3 doors, dated to 5000 BCE – 7020 years old, and belonged to neolithic Linear Pottery culture. Surviving evidence of a wheel-axle combination, from Stare Gmajne near Ljubljana in Slovenia (Ljubljana Marshes Wooden Wheel), is dated within two standard deviations to 3340–3030 BCE, the axle to 3360–3045 BCE. Two types of early Neolithic European wheel and axle are known; a circumalpine type of wagon construction (the wheel and axle rotate together, as in Ljubljana Marshes Wheel), and that of the Baden culture in Hungary (axle does not rotate). They both are dated to c. 3200–3000 BCE. Some historians believe that there was a diffusion of the wheeled vehicle from the Near East to Europe around the mid-4th millennium BCE.” ref

“Early wheels were simple wooden disks with a hole for the axle. Some of the earliest wheels were made from horizontal slices of tree trunks. Because of the uneven structure of wood, a wheel made from a horizontal slice of a tree trunk will tend to be inferior to one made from rounded pieces of longitudinal boards. The spoked wheel was invented more recently and allowed the construction of lighter and swifter vehicles. The earliest known examples of wooden spoked wheels are in the context of the Sintashta culture, dating to c. 2000 BCE (Krivoye Lake). Soon after this, horse cultures of the Caucasus region used horse-drawn spoked-wheel war chariots for the greater part of three centuries. They moved deep into the Greek peninsula where they joined with the existing Mediterranean peoples to give rise, eventually, to classical Greece after the breaking of Minoan dominance and consolidations led by pre-classical Sparta and Athens. Celtic chariots introduced an iron rim around the wheel in the 1st millennium BCE.” ref

“In China, wheel tracks dating to around 2200 BCE have been found at Pingliangtai, a site of the Longshan Culture. Similar tracks were also found at Yanshi, a city of the Erlitou culture, dating to around 1700 BCE. The earliest evidence of spoked wheels in China comes from Qinghai, in the form of two-wheel hubs from a site dated between 2000 and 1500 BCE. In Britain, a large wooden wheel, measuring about 1 m (3.3 ft) in diameter, was uncovered at the Must Farm site in East Anglia in 2016. The specimen, dating from 1,100 to 800 BCE, represents the most complete and earliest of its type found in Britain. The wheel’s hub is also present. A horse’s spine found nearby suggests the wheel may have been part of a horse-drawn cart. The wheel was found in a settlement built on stilts over wetland, indicating that the settlement had some sort of link to dry land.” ref

“The wheel has also become a strong cultural and spiritual metaphor for a cycle or regular repetition (see chakra, reincarnation, Yin and Yang among others). As such and because of the difficult terrain, wheeled vehicles were forbidden in old Tibet. The wheel in ancient China is seen as a symbol of health and strength and utilized by some villages as a tool to predict future health and success. The diameter of the wheel is an indicator of one’s future health. The winged wheel is a symbol of progress, seen in many contexts including the coat of arms of Panama, the logo of the Ohio State Highway Patrol, and the State Railway of Thailand. The wheel is also the prominent figure on the flag of India. The wheel in this case represents law (dharma). It also appears in the flag of the Romani people, hinting to their nomadic history and their Indian origins. The introduction of spoked (chariot) wheels in the Middle Bronze Age appears to have carried somewhat of a prestige. The sun cross appears to have a significance in Bronze Age religion, replacing the earlier concept of a Solar barge with the more ‘modern’ and technologically advanced solar chariot. The wheel was also a solar symbol for the Ancient Egyptians.” ref

Damien Marie AtHope’s Art

ref

The “wheel” related word list

“Most linguists argue that the PIEs (Proto-Indo-Europeans) did have words for wheel. The candidates put forward for wheel or wagon-related words are nine reconstructed PIE word forms. These are:

*hurki , argued to mean “wheel”
*roteh2, argued to mean “wheel”
*kwékwlo-, argued to mean “wheel”
*kwelh1-, argued to mean “turn” perhaps in the sense of a turning wheel.
*h2eks-, argued to mean “axle”
*h2ih3s-, argued to mean “thill” or “wagon shaft”
*wéĝh-, argued to mean “convey in a vehicle”
*h3nebh-, argued to mean “nave” or “wheel hub”
*iugó-, argued to mean “yoke” ref

The end of the Proto-Indo-European?

“It should mention the IE Indo-European branches which are important to this discussion. Currently, it’s generally accepted by all sides that the Anatolian language branch was the earliest to become separated from the rest of the PIE Proto-Indo-European group. This branch, which included Hittite, is now extinct but it was once present across much of modern-day Turkey. Because the Anatolian languages are quite different from other IE languages they are sometimes excluded from PIE. Instead, an earlier grouping is defined, called Proto-Indo-Hittite. Although there is some discussion, the next language branch generally thought to have split from the main IE group is the Tocharian branch. This is also extinct, but was present in the Taklamakan desert, north of the Himalayas. After that no-one can really agree which language branch or branches were the next to separate off. Candidates include Celtic, Celto-Italic, Germanic, Greek-Armenian, Greek-Armenian-Indo-Iranian, Albanian, etc.” ref

*kwelh1-, “to turn”

“This root is reconstructed regularly from Latin colus, meaning “spun thread”, Old Indic cárati, Old Irish cul meaning “vehicle”, Old Norse hvel, meaning “wheel”, Old Prussian kelan, meaning “mill wheel”, Ukrainian коло (kolo), meaning “circle” (corrected 19/6/11), Bulgarian кола (cola), meaning “cart” and Greek πολος (polos), meaning “axis”, and Albanian sjell, meaning “to turn”, and Armenian shrjvel, meaning “turn around”. The form seems to have resulted in a variety of different words. Many, but not all, relate to wheels and transport. These words can be divided into two categories. Those such as hvel, kelan, cárati and sjell are all regularly derived from the PIE root with e-grade (it’s got the vowel ‘e’ in it) *kwelh1-. Those such as colus, cul, коло and polos are regularly derived seemingly from the PIE with o-grade *kwolh1-. Whilst this is a regular phenomenon it does, arguably, suggest subtly separate origins for the derivations between, say, Old Norse and Russian. Interestingly, Luwian and Hittite include the word kaluti, which seems to mean “a turn” or “a circle”. However, linguists seem to think it is not derived from the same root (presumably because it would have become something like kual-). Tocharian A lutk & B klutk, meaning “to turn”, may be also from *kwelh1– but are irregular if so.” ref

**roteh2*-, “wheel” (n)

“This is reconstructed regularly from Latin rota, Irish rath, Welsh rhōd, Lithuanian rãtas, Latvian rats and German rad (amongst others), all of them meaning “wheel” in the sense of a wagon, as well as Albanian rreth, meaning “circle”, and Old Indic rátha, meaning “chariot”. The etymology is pretty clear and unambiguous and it would be difficult to put forward an argument that the speakers of the root language of all of these did not have wheeled vehicles of some kind. It seems implausible that Tocharian A ratäk & B retke, meaning “army”, is derived from *roteh2 as tentatively suggested by Douglas Q Adams (PIE *roteh2– should become Tocharian *racä- as far as I can tell). Generally, it’s thought to be a Proto-Iranian loanword from *rataka, thought to mean “order” or “series”, although this itself has problems.” ref

**ak’s*– or **h2eks-*, “axle” (n)

“This root is reconstructed regularly from Old Indian ákṣa-, Latin axis, Irish ais, Welsh echel, German achse, Lithuanian ašìs, Russian ось (osi) and Old Greek άξονας (axonas) (among other languages). All mean either “wheel axle” or “axis on which something turns”. Therefore some relationship with a wheel seems reasonable.” ref

**h2ih3s*-, “thill” or “shaft” (n)

“This is reconstructed from Old Indic īṣá, Hittite hissa, and Russian vojë (among other languages) meaning “shaft”, as well as Old Greek óiαξ (óiaks), meaning “tiller”, and English oar. I admit to finding this PIE stem’s derivation tricky to follow. Regardless, its necessary connection with a wheeled wagon seems tenuous.” ref

**wéĝh*-, “convey in a vehicle” (v)

“This root is reconstructed regularly from German weg, English weigh, Latin vehō, Bulgarian веза (vesа) and Lithuanian vèžti . Meanings are generally on the lines of “carry” or “convey”, sometimes by means of a wagon. In Old Indic its cognate occurs in váhati, meaning “transport”. It’s also recognised in Tocharian A wkäṃ and B yakne, meaning “habit” or “manner”. Words meaning “wagon” have been derived from many of these words. However, there is nothing to indicate that the original PIE root particularly signified carrying something in any form of wheeled transport. In the case of Tocharian the link with wheeled transport, or in fact, any form of transport, is non-existent.” ref

**h1wŗgis*, “wheel” or “having circular form” (n)

“This is based on the zero-grade (i.e. missing the vowel, meaning that the r has to pretend to be a vowel) of the PIE root *h1werg-. It is thought to mean “to turn around”. This is argued to have descendants in both Hittite hurki, and Tocharian A yerkwanto and B wärkänt, all of which mean “wheel”. However, to quote David Anthony, “Tocharian specialist Don Ringe sees serious difficulties in deriving either Tocharian term from the same root that yielded Anatolian hurki-, suggesting that the Tocharian and Anatolian terms were unrelated and therefore do not require a Proto-Indo-European root.” ref

**h3nebh-*, “nave” or “hub” (n)

“This is reconstructed from Old Indic nábhya, meaning “wheel hub”, and many other languages including Greek omphalós, Latin umbilīcus, Old Irish imbliu, English navel, where it always means “navel”. Although it has come to mean “hub” in Old Indic, trying to assign any other meaning to the root but “navel” seems unreasonable.” ref

**iugó-*, “yoke” (v)

“This is reconstructed from Old Indic yoga, Greek zdügo, Latin iugum, Welsh iau, English yoke, Russian иго (igo), all meaning “a yoke” or “yoking”. Other words thought to be related are Tocharian A & B yuk, meaning “conquer” and Hittite juga-, of unknown meaning, but possibly “yoke”. This word appears to have meant “yoke” as in to tie animals to something such as a plough or wagon.” ref

**kwékwlo-*, “wheel” (n)

“This was originally reconstructed from Old Indic cakrá, meaning “circle” or “wheel”, Avestan caxrem, meaning “wheel” and Old English hweogol, hweowul, or hwēol, meaning “wheel” or “circular band”. Words also thought to derive from this root are Greek kuklos meaning “circle” or “wheel”, Tocharian A kukäl and B kokale, meaning “wagon”, and Lithuanian kãklas, meaning “neck”. Hittite kugullas could also derive easily from *kwékwlo-. However, its meaning, something along the lines of “lump” or “measure” or even “bread roll”, although unclear, is unlikely to be related to wheels. The reconstructed form *kwékwlo- appears to derive from the PIE root *kwélh1– (seen above) meaning something along the lines of “to turn”, by a process known as reduplication. Reduplication in IE is where a verb, noun, or adjective is expanded, often to give emphasis. This might have produced a shape like *kwékwelh1– or *kwékwolh1– which, by dropping the laryngeal h1 and adding a noun ending such as the animate non-neuter or masculine -os (all regular changes) would give *kwékwlos, meaning something like “revolver”, hence “wheel”.” ref

“The chance of reduplicating a root then turning it into a noun is reasonably high and may have been done many times in history. However, if it had been done by one of the descendants of IE it should have produced a distinctly different form, recognisable to an IE linguist. Indeed, in the opinion of one such linguist, Andrew Garrett, “… such an account is hardly possible for PNIE [Proto-Nuclear-Indo-European] *kwékwlos ‘wheel’ (in Germanic, Greek, Indo-Iranian, Tocharian…): though derived from *kwélh1– ‘turn’, a reduplicated C1e-C1C2-o- noun is so unusual morphologically that parallel independent formation is excluded.” This makes *kwékwlos the flagship word for the wheelies. It would suggest that any IE language that includes a word derived by regular rules of IE sound change from *kwékwlo- must have been part of a larger grouping somewhere in the second half of the fifth millennium BC or later. Following this argument, as both Tocharian and Greek have words supposedly derived from *kwékwlo- they must have split from the main IE group after wheels were invented. However, I seem to see weak points with this argument. Therefore it’s perhaps worth looking at the individual-derived words in more detail.” ref

Old Indic cakra, meaning “wheel’

“This, word, closely related to Avestan čaxra, meaning “circle” or “wheel”, can be derived by regular means from a PIE form *kwékwlo- via Proto-Indo-Iranian *kekro-. It is notably comparable to some Finno-Ugric words, such as Finnish kekri, which have meanings varying from perhaps “yearly cycle” to “circular”. Although this raises the possibility that the Indo-Iranian word is derived from a Finno-Ugric language, this is unlikely. Few, perhaps no, words have gone into Indo-Iranian from Finno-Ugric.” ref

English wheel, meaning “wheel”

“This is thought to come from Old English hweogul, hweowul or hwēol. PIE *kwekwlo- would develop into a form like *hwigwl. With the softening of gw to give *hwiwl this seems close enough to be reasonable. (If you want a much fuller understanding of this, the linguist Piotr Gąsiorowski has a post on it here.)” ref

Ancient Greek kuklos, meaning “circle” or “wheel”

“Χύχlος (kuklos), with an irregular plural χύχlα (kúkla), meaning “set of wheels” (NB the ancient Greek for “wheel” is τροχός trochos) is suggested to derive from a Proto-Greek form *kwukwlos, although without explanation for the change of vowel from PIE *kwékwlos. Postulating the Proto-Greek form *kwukwlos is an attempt by linguists to explain why the recorded ancient Greek form was not *téklos or *péklos, as would be expected from the normal sound change laws. For comparison, ancient Greek τέσσαρες/πέσσαρες (téssares or péttares, depending on dialect), both meaning “four”, are thought to be from PIE *kwetwares. This makes the derivation of kuklos from *kwekwlos strange. Sihler has suggested that “strongly labial environments” (i.e. using your lips to make a sound) may change a PIE “e” to PIE “o” (a result of ablaut), which would naturally change to “u” in Proto-Greek. One of two good examples of this that Sihler quotes is, of course, *kwékwlo-, the other being PIE *gwenh2-, which becomes Greek γυνή (guní) instead of, say, *bení or *dení. So Sihler’s preferred late PIE form is *kwokwlos. A third possible example of this rule given by Sihler is *swépnos becoming ϋπνος. However, Sihler himself expressed doubts about this, as it could simply be the natural change of zero-grade PIE *súpnos.” ref

“Much of Sihler’s argument depends on what you mean by a “strongly labial environment”. If this simply means that it has a labiovelar (e.g. kw or gw) in front of it, then it makes it difficult to explain why PIE *kwélh1- has derived words such as πόλος (pólos), πέλομαι (pélomai) and πέλω (pélō). If, on the other hand, “strongly labial” means that the vowel has two labiovelars or labials on either side then this rules out the use of such a rule for *gwenh2– to guní. Not much of a rule. Much more complex, but in a way clearer, is Piotr Gąsiorowski’s argument that kúklos is derived from the collective of *kwékwlos. Collectives are thought to be a type of PIE noun to indicate a set or grouping of something, in this case a “set of wheels” say. It is thought that when a collective form of a noun was created in PIE it had a different ending, *-eh2 instead of *-os (this is a regular process). The new form *kwékwleh2 , again by regular development of *-eh2 to *-a, and moving the stress to the end, would become *kwekwlá. From there, the first vowel might be weakened to make *kwɔkwlá and the first consonant delabialised, allowing it to become *kuklá in Greek.” ref

“(It should also be mention that Gąsiorowski’s argument has greater implications, as formation of the collective is something that appears to have happened only in early PIE, not late, and at a time when the Anatolian family was still close or had not yet branched off.) In for following his argument up to here but now Prof Gąsiorowski talks about regularisation of the accent to match the singular to make it kúkla. If that is regularisation with kúklos (which also exists) then that appears to mean that nominative singular kúklos and plural kúkloi were themselves changed from *péklos/i or *téklos/i to match *kuklá, which doesn’t seem to make sense. I’ve asked him about this and he resorted to Sihler’s argument about “strong labial environments”. Hmm. Does that mean that the collective argument is not needed?” ref

Lithuanian kãklas, meaning “neck”

“This word can be from PIE *kwekwlo- via Balto-Slavic *k:ikla-. However, it would again be preferable to derive kãklas from *kwokwlo-, as with Greek. If the form originally meant “wheel” it has changed this meaning considerably. This could possibly be achieved with a corruption of meaning to do with, say, wheeling your head around, although this seems a stretch (in both senses of the word).” ref

Tocharian kukäl (A) & kokale (B), meaning “chariot” or “wagon”

“(NB The Tocharian for “wheel” is, as stated above, A wärkänt, B yerkwanta) Kukäl and kokale are thought to derive from a Proto-Tocharian form, perhaps *kukäle. As with Greek there are problems deriving this form from PIE *kwekwlo-. The form necessary for giving the correct Tocharian should be, as Tocharian expert Douglas Adams noted, “closely related to, but phonologically distinct from … *kwekwlo- .” He suggests PIE *kwukwlo-. Alternatively, Don Ringe (2009) suggests the following, slightly tortuous derivation process (references removed): “*kwékwlos > *kwékwlë > *kwyékwlë > *kwyә́kwlë → Proto-Tocharian *kwә́kwlë ‘chariot, wagon’ (with adjustment of palatalization in a reduplicated form; or is this just straightforward assimilation?); > *kŭkl ~ *kŭkla- > *kukäl ~ kukla- → Tocharian A kukäl ~ kukla-; > *kwәkwә́lë > Tocharian B kokale.)” ref

“This looks a bit like the Greek derivation of Piotr Gąsiorowski. The reason for this complication is because PIE *kwékwlo- would give a Tocharian form of *käkla- or, following the sound change laws to their extremes, *käśla- or *śäśla- or *śla- (c.f. PIE *kwetares becomes Proto-Tocharian *ś(ä)twer, becoming Tocharian A śtwar and B śtwer). Looking at it another way, *kukäle could be derived from PIE *kwukwelo-, *gwugwelo-, *kukelo- or some other similar forms, but not obviously from *kwekwlo-. On the other hand, the –käl– element of both kukäl and kokale could simply be derived from PIE *kwelh1– (the root thought to mean “turn” mentioned earlier) without any reduplication. There are also other PIE roots that could give rise to the same element. For example PIE *kwele-, meaning to “move around” or “drive”, is thought to have produced the Tocharian stem käl-, to “lead” or “bring”. This would satisfy the Tocharian form in kukäl and kokale. Speculating wildly and unsensibly, the first element of kukäl and kokale could, conceivably, be related to the Tocharian word for “cow”, which is ko in Tocharian A and keǔ in Toch B (probably from another PIE root *gwow- through Proto-Tocharian *kew). Using this logic the words for “lead” and “cow” could be brought together in the Proto-Tocharian word *kukäle, meaning “cow bring thing”… Well, perhaps not.” ref

The significance of **kwekwlo-*

“Looking at the words supposedly derived from *kwekwlo- it seems that all apart from cakrá and caxrem and hwēol require some manipulation of the PIE form. There is at least the need for a second, o-grade form, *kwokwlo- and possibly a zero-grade-ish third (say *kwukwelo-). At the moment I can’t help having doubts about whether such a word as *kwekwlo-, meaning “wheel”, ever existed in the original PIE vocabulary. Its descendants, unlike those of *roteh2, are rather scarce among the different branches. More preferable is that different reduplicated forms occurred, with different meanings perhaps related to turning, at different times. So, to contradict Andrew Garrett, parallel independent formation from derivatives of *kwelh1– or *kwolh1– seems just as easy as anything.” ref

Discussion – who did have wheels?

“Certain forms, such as *roteh2 and *h 2eks-, appear to mean “wheel” and “axle” respectively. They seem to reflect a genuine, wheel-related origin and one or both appear in all the language families excluding Tocharian and Anatolian. As for *kwelh1 and *kwekwlos they may well be connected to an original word for wheel and they may not. If they were, then Greek would be part of the wheel set. It gets complicated if the Hittite word kugullas is added as part of the group, as it actually makes a worse case for these words being connected to wheels and a better case for them being connected to round and rollable things in general. Some words, such as *h2ih3s-,*wéĝh-,*iugó- and *h3nebh-, have meanings which do not necessarily require the use of wheels or wagons. Therefore their distribution in the language groups is not enough evidence for the use of wheels by PIEs. *hurki can be also excluded from the discussion as this form may well not have existed.” ref

Much of this doesn’t really matter anymore. When I first wrote this page there was still some chance that PIE was spread early from Anatolia with pre-wheel farmers, and I had some sympathy with this view. However, there is now a convincing genetic case for wheels being present at least during the time that all PIE languages except Anatolian were connected. So there’s no reason to think that late PIE speakers didn’t share (in some form) words for wheels. There are, of course, other lines of evidence, such as the IE word for wool (*h2/3wlh1-), also used to argue a late date for PIE. Despite this, I find myself surprised. Some archaeologists have, over the years, used words provided for them by linguists, such as those derived from *kwekwlo-, to make a case for the late date of PIE. In the case of Indo-Iranian and it’s links to Germanic this seems reasonable. However, this argument seems much more debatable for uniting Tocharian and Greek in the same time frame.” ref

“Don’t get me wrong, I’m not saying that Greek and Tocharian wheel words did not derive from PIE forms. I’m just saying that the case, always stated as watertight by people like David Anthony, seems anything but. What I’d now argue is that linguists should be tested on such things by being prepared to be asked ‘damn-fool’ questions by idiot students like me. Its benefits, like any teacher knows, are that it would: 1) improve their own understanding of PIE; 2) increase their engagement with others outside the profession (such as Colin Renfrew) and, 3) improve the students’ (i.e. the archaeologists’) understanding.” ref

1. 6,000-year-old Mehrgarh Spoked Wheel Amulet

“The 6,000-year-old amulet from Mehrgarh (Baluchistan, Pakistan), is currently identified as the oldest known artifact made by lost-wax casting and providing a better understanding of this fundamental invention.” ref

“Mehrgarh is a Neolithic site (dated c. 7000 BCE to c. 2500/2000 BCE or 9,020-4,520/4,020 years ago), which lies on the Kacchi Plain of Balochistan, Pakistan. Mehrgarh is located near the Bolan Pass, to the west of the Indus River valley, and between the present-day Pakistani cities of Quetta, Kalat, and Sibi. Archaeological material has been found in six mounds, and about 32,000 artifacts have been collected. The earliest settlement at Mehrgarh—in the northeast corner of the 495-acre (2.00 km2) site—was a small farming village dated between 7000 to 5500 BCE or 9,020-7,520 years ago.” ref

“Mehrgarh is one of the earliest sites with evidence of farming and herding in South Asia. Mehrgarh was influenced by the Near Eastern Neolithic, with similarities between “domesticated wheat varieties, early phases of farming, pottery, other archaeological artifacts, some domesticated plants and herd animals.” According to Parpola, the culture migrated into the Indus Valley and became the Indus Valley Civilisation. Jean-Francois Jarrige argues for an independent origin of Mehrgarh. Jarrige notes “the assumption that farming economy was introduced full-fledged from Near-East to South Asia,” and the similarities between Neolithic sites from eastern Mesopotamia and the western Indus valley, which are evidence of a “cultural continuum” between those sites. But given the originality of Mehrgarh, Jarrige concludes that Mehrgarh has an earlier local background,” and is not a “‘backwater’ of the Neolithic culture of the Near East.” ref

“Lukacs and Hemphill suggest an initial local development of Mehrgarh, with a continuity in cultural development but a change in population. According to Lukacs and Hemphill, while there is a strong continuity between the neolithic and chalcolithic (Copper Age) cultures of Mehrgarh, dental evidence shows that the chalcolithic population did not descend from the neolithic population of Mehrgarh, which “suggests moderate levels of gene flow.” They wrote that “the direct lineal descendents of the Neolithic inhabitants of Mehrgarh are to be found to the south and the east of Mehrgarh, in northwestern India and the western edge of the Deccan plateau,” with neolithic Mehrgarh showing greater affinity with chalcolithic Inamgaon, south of Mehrgarh, than with chalcolithic Mehrgarh.” ref

“Gallego Romero et al. state that their research on lactose tolerance in India suggests that “the west Eurasian genetic contribution identified by Reich et al. principally reflects gene flow from Iran and the Middle East.” Gallego Romero notes that Indians who are lactose-tolerant show a genetic pattern regarding this tolerance which is “characteristic of the common European mutation.” According to Romero, this suggests that “the most common lactose tolerance mutation made a two-way migration out of the Middle East less than 10,000 years ago. While the mutation spread across Europe, another explorer must have brought the mutation eastward to India – likely traveling along the coast of the Persian Gulf where other pockets of the same mutation have been found.” They further note that “[t]he earliest evidence of cattle herding in south Asia comes from the Indus River Valley site of Mehrgarh and is dated to 7,000 YBP.” ref

Periods of occupation

Mehrgarh Period I (pre-7000 BCE-5500 BCE)

“The Mehrgarh Period I (pre-7000 BCE-5500 BCE) was Neolithic and aceramic, without the use of pottery. The earliest farming in the area was developed by semi-nomadic people using plants such as wheat and barley and animals such as sheep, goats, and cattle. The settlement was established with unbaked mud-brick buildings and most of them had four internal subdivisions. Numerous burials have been found, many with elaborate goods such as baskets, stone and bone tools, beads, bangles, pendants, and occasionally animal sacrifices, with more goods left with burials of males. Ornaments of sea shell, limestone, turquoise, lapis lazuli, and sandstone have been found, along with simple figurines of women and animals. Sea shells from far sea shore and lapis lazuli found as far away as present-day Badakshan, Afghanistan shows good contact with those areas. A single ground stone ax was discovered in a burial, and several more were obtained from the surface. These ground stone axes are the earliest to come from a stratified context in South Asia. Periods I, II, and III are considered contemporaneous with another site called Kili Gul Mohammad. The aceramic Neolithic phase in the region is now called ‘Kili Gul Muhammad phase’, and it is dated 7000-5000 BC. Yet the Kili Gul Muhammad site, itself, may have started c. 5500 BCE or 7,520 years ago.” ref

Mehrgarh Period II (5500 BCE–4800 BCE) and Period III (4800 BCE–3500 BCE)

“The Mehrgarh Period II (5500 BCE–4800 BCE) and Merhgarh Period III (4800 BCE–3500 BCE) were ceramic Neolithic, using pottery, and later chalcolithic. Period II is at site MR4 and Period III is at MR2. Much evidence of manufacturing activity has been found and more advanced techniques were used. Glazed faience beads were produced and terracotta figurines became more detailed. Figurines of females were decorated with paint and had diverse hairstyles and ornaments. Two flexed burials were found in Period II with a red ochre cover on the body. The amount of burial goods decreased over time, becoming limited to ornaments and with more goods left with burials of females. The first button seals were produced from terracotta and bone and had geometric designs. Technologies included stone and copper drills, updraft kilns, large pit kilns, and copper melting crucibles. There is further evidence of long-distance trade in Period II: important as an indication of this is the discovery of several beads of lapis lazuli, once again from Badakshan. Mehrgarh Periods II and III are also contemporaneous with an expansion of the settled populations of the borderlands at the western edge of South Asia, including the establishment of settlements like Rana Ghundai, Sheri Khan Tarakai, Sarai Kala, Jalilpur, and Ghaligai.” ref

“In 2001, archaeologists studying the remains of nine men from Mehrgarh made the discovery that the people of this civilization had knowledge of proto-dentistry. In April 2006, it was announced in the scientific journal Nature that the oldest (and first early Neolithic) evidence for the drilling of human teeth in vivo (i.e. in a living person) was found in Mehrgarh. According to the authors, their discoveries point to a tradition of proto-dentistry in the early farming cultures of that region. “Here we describe eleven drilled molar crowns from nine adults discovered in a Neolithic graveyard in Pakistan that dates from 7,500 to 9,000 years ago. These findings provide evidence for a long tradition of a type of proto-dentistry in an early farming culture.” ref

Mehrgarh Periods IV, V and VI (3500 BCE-3000 BCE)

“Period IV was 3500 to 3250 BCE. Period V from 3250 to 3000 BCE and period VI was around 3000 BCE. The site containing Periods IV to VII is designated as MR1.” ref

Mehrgarh Period VII (2600 BCE-2000 BCE)

“Somewhere between 2600 BCE and 2000 BCE, the city seems to have been largely abandoned in favor of the larger and fortified town Nausharo five miles away when the Indus Valley Civilization was in its middle stages of development. Historian Michael Wood suggests this took place around 2500 BCE.” ref

Mehrgarh Period VIII

“The last period is found at the Sibri cemetery, about 8 kilometers from Mehrgarh.” ref

Lifestyle and technology

“Early Mehrgarh residents lived in mud brick houses, stored their grain in granaries, fashioned tools with local copper ore, and lined their large basket containers with bitumen. They cultivated six-row barley, einkorn and emmer wheat, jujubes, and dates, and herded sheep, goats, and cattle. Residents of the later period (5500 BCE to 2600 BCE) put much effort into crafts, including flint knapping, tanning, bead production, and metal working. Mehrgarh is probably the earliest known center of agriculture in South Asia. The oldest known example of the lost-wax technique comes from a 6,000-year-old wheel-shaped copper amulet found at Mehrgarh. The amulet was made from unalloyed copper, an unusual innovation that was later abandoned.” ref

Human figurines

“The oldest ceramic figurines in South Asia were found at Mehrgarh. They occur in all phases of the settlement and were prevalent even before pottery appears. The earliest figurines are quite simple and do not show intricate features. However, they grow in sophistication with time and by 4000 BC begin to show their characteristic hairstyles and typical prominent breasts. One Seated Mother Goddess dates to 3000–2500 BCE or 6,020-4,520 years ago. All the figurines up to this period were female. Male figurines appear only from period VII and gradually become more numerous. Many of the female figurines are holding babies, and were interpreted as depictions of the “mother goddess”. However, due to some difficulties in conclusively identifying these figurines with the “mother goddess”, some scholars prefer using the term “female figurines with likely cultic significance”.” ref

Pottery

“Evidence of pottery begins from Period II. In period III, the finds become much more abundant as the potter’s wheel is introduced, and they show more intricate designs and also animal motifs. The characteristic female figurines appear beginning in Period IV and the finds show more intricate designs and sophistication. Pipal leaf designs are used in decoration from Period VI. Some sophisticated firing techniques were used from Period VI and VII and an area reserved for the pottery industry has been found at mound MR1. However, by Period VIII, the quality and intricacy of designs seem to have suffered due to mass production, and due to a growing interest in bronze and copper vessels.” ref

Burials

“There are two types of burials in the Mehrgarh site. There were individual burials where a single individual was enclosed in narrow mud walls and collective burials with thin mud brick walls within which skeletons of six different individuals were discovered. The bodies in the collective burials were kept in a flexed position and were laid east to west. Child bones were found in large jars or urn burials (4000~3300 BCE).” ref

Metallurgy

“Metal finds have dated as early as Period IIB, with a few copper items.” ref

2. A partially reconstructed, wheeled toy from the Cucuteni Tripolye B2 culture

“The Cucuteni–Trypillia culture (Romanian: Cultura Cucuteni and Ukrainian: Трипільська культура), also known as the Tripolye culture (Russian: Трипольская культура), is a Neolithic–Eneolithic archaeological culture (c. 5500 to 2750 BCE 7,520-4,770 years ago) of Eastern Europe. It extended from the Carpathian Mountains to the Dniester and Dnieper regions, centered on modern-day Moldova and covering substantial parts of western Ukraine and northeastern Romania, encompassing an area of 350,000 km2 (140,000 sq mi), with a diameter of 500 km (300 mi; roughly from Kyiv in the northeast to Brașov in the southwest). The majority of Cucuteni–Trypillia settlements consisted of high-density, small settlements (spaced 3 to 4 kilometers apart), concentrated mainly in the Siret, Prut, and Dniester river valleys.” ref

“During the Middle Trypillia phase (c. 4000 to 3500 BCE), populations belonging to the Cucuteni–Trypillia culture built the largest settlements in Neolithic Europe, some of which contained as many as three thousand structures and were possibly inhabited by 20,000 to 46,000 people. One of the most notable aspects of this culture was the periodic destruction of settlements, with each single-habitation site having a lifetime of roughly 60 to 80 years. The purpose of burning these settlements is a subject of debate among scholars; some of the settlements were reconstructed several times on top of earlier habitational levels, preserving the shape and the orientation of the older buildings. One particular location; the Poduri site in Romania, revealed thirteen habitation levels that were constructed on top of each other over many years.” ref

The Cucuteni–Trypillia culture flourished in the territory of what is now Moldova, northeastern Romania, and parts of Western, Central, and Southern Ukraine. The culture thus extended northeast from the Danube river basin around the Iron Gates to the Black Sea and the Dnieper. It encompassed the central Carpathian Mountains as well as the plains, steppe, and forest steppe on either side of the range. Its historical core lay around the middle to upper Dniester (the Podolian Upland). During the Atlantic and Subboreal climatic periods in which the culture flourished, Europe was at its warmest and moistest since the end of the last Ice Age, creating favorable conditions for agriculture in this region. As of 2003, about 3,000 cultural sites have been identified, ranging from small villages to “vast settlements consisting of hundreds of dwellings surrounded by multiple ditches”.” ref

“Traditionally separate schemes of periodization have been used for the Ukrainian Trypillia and Romanian Cucuteni variants of the culture. The Cucuteni scheme, proposed by the German archaeologist Hubert Schmidt in 1932, distinguished three cultures: Pre-Cucuteni, Cucuteni, and Horodiştea–Folteşti; which were further divided into phases (Pre-Cucuteni I–III and Cucuteni A and B). The Ukrainian scheme was first developed by Tatiana Sergeyevna Passek in 1949 and divided the Trypillia culture into three main phases (A, B, and C) with further sub-phases (BI–II and CI–II). Initially, based on informal ceramic seriation, both schemes have been extended and revised since the first proposed, incorporating new data and formalized mathematical techniques for artifact seriation. The Cucuteni–Trypillia culture is commonly divided into an Early, Middle, Late period, with varying smaller sub-divisions marked by changes in settlement and material culture. A key point of contention lies in how these phases correspond to radiocarbon data.” ref

The following chart represents this most current interpretation:

• Early (Pre-Cucuteni I–III to Cucuteni A–B, Trypillia A to Trypillia BI–II):5800 to 5000 BCE

• Middle (Cucuteni B, Trypillia BII to CI–II): 5000 to 3500 BCE

• Late (Horodiştea–Folteşti, Trypillia CII): 3500 to 3000 BCE ref

Early period (5800–5000 BCE)

“The roots of Cucuteni–Trypillia culture can be found in the Starčevo–Körös–Criș and Vinča cultures of the 6th to 5th millennia, with additional influence from the Bug–Dniester culture (6500–5000 BC). During the early period of its existence (in the fifth millennium BCE), the Cucuteni–Trypillia culture was also influenced by the Linear Pottery culture from the north, and by the Boian culture from the south. Through colonization and acculturation from these other cultures, the formative Pre-Cucuteni/Trypillia A culture was established. Over the course of the fifth millennium, the Cucuteni–Trypillia culture expanded from its ‘homeland’ in the Prut–Siret region along the eastern foothills of the Carpathian Mountains into the basins and plains of the Dnieper and Southern Bug rivers of central Ukraine. Settlements also developed in the southeastern stretches of the Carpathian Mountains, with the materials known locally as the Ariuşd culture (see also: Prehistory of Transylvania). Most of the settlements were located close to rivers, with fewer settlements located on the plateaus. Most early dwellings took the form of pit-houses, though they were accompanied by an ever-increasing incidence of above-ground clay houses. The floors and hearths of these structures were made of clay, and the walls of clay-plastered wood or reeds. Roofing was made of thatched straw or reeds.” ref

“The inhabitants were involved with animal husbandry, agriculture, fishing, and gathering. Wheat, rye, and peas were grown. Tools included ploughs made of antler, stone, bone, and sharpened sticks. The harvest was collected with scythes made of flint-inlaid blades. The grain was milled into flour by quern-stones. Women were involved in pottery, textile– and garment-making, and played a leading role in community life. Men hunted, herded the livestock, made tools from flint, bone, and stone. Of their livestock, cattle were the most important, with swine, sheep, and goats playing lesser roles. The question of whether or not the horse was domesticated during this time of the Cucuteni–Trypillia culture is disputed among historians; horse remains have been found in some of their settlements, but it is unclear whether these remains were from wild horses or domesticated ones.” ref

“Clay statues of females and amulets have been found dating to this period. Copper items, primarily bracelets, rings, and hooks, are occasionally found as well. A hoard of a large number of copper items was discovered in the village of Cărbuna, Moldova, consisting primarily of items of jewelry, which were dated back to the beginning of the fifth millennium BCE. Some historians have used this evidence to support the theory that a social stratification was present in early Cucuteni culture, but this is disputed by others. Pottery remains from this early period are very rarely discovered; the remains that have been found indicate that the ceramics were used after being fired in a kiln. The outer color of the pottery is a smoky grey, with raised and sunken relief decorations. Toward the end of this early Cucuteni–Trypillia period, the pottery begins to be painted before firing. The white-painting technique found on some of the pottery from this period was imported from the earlier and contemporary (5th millennium) Gumelnița–Karanovo culture. Historians point to this transition to kiln-fired, white-painted pottery as the turning point for when the Pre-Cucuteni culture ended and Cucuteni Phase (or Cucuteni–Trypillia culture) began. Cucuteni and the neighbouring Gumelniţa–Karanovo cultures seem to be largely contemporary; the “Cucuteni A phase seems to be very long (4600–4050) and covers the entire evolution of the Gumelnița–Karanovo A1, A2, B2 phases (maybe 4650–4050).” ref

Middle period (4000–3500 BC)

“In the middle era, the Cucuteni–Trypillia culture spread over a wide area from Eastern Transylvania in the west to the Dnieper River in the east. During this period, the population immigrated into and settled along the banks of the upper and middle regions of the Right Bank (or western side) of the Dnieper River, in present-day Ukraine. The population grew considerably during this time, resulting in settlements being established on plateaus, near major rivers and springs. Their dwellings were built by placing vertical poles in the form of circles or ovals. The construction techniques incorporated log floors covered in clay, wattle-and-daub walls that were woven from pliable branches and covered in clay, and a clay oven, which was situated in the center of the dwelling. As the population in this area grew, more land was put under cultivation. Hunting supplemented the practice of animal husbandry of domestic livestock.” ref

“Tools made of flint, rock, clay, wood, and bones continued to be used for cultivation and other chores. Much less common than other materials, copper axes and other tools have been discovered that were made from ore mined in Volyn, Ukraine, as well as some deposits along the Dnieper river. Pottery-making by this time had become sophisticated, however, they still relied on techniques of making pottery by hand (the potter’s wheel was not used yet). Characteristics of the Cucuteni–Trypillia pottery included a monochromic spiral design, painted with black paint on a yellow and red base. Large pear-shaped pottery for the storage of grain, dining plates, and other goods, was also prevalent. Additionally, ceramic statues of female “goddess” figures, as well as figurines of animals and models of houses dating to this period have also been discovered. Some scholars have used the abundance of these clay female fetish statues to base the theory that this culture was matriarchal in nature. Indeed, it was partially the archaeological evidence from Cucuteni–Trypillia culture that inspired Marija Gimbutas, Joseph Campbell, and some latter 20th-century feminists to set forth the popular theory of an Old European culture of peaceful, egalitarian (counter to a widespread misconception, “matristic” not matriarchal), goddess-centred neolithic European societies that were wiped out by patriarchal, Sky Father-worshipping, warlike, Bronze-Age Proto-Indo-European tribes that swept out of the steppes north and east of the Black Sea.” ref

Late period (3500–3000 BC)

“During the late period, the Cucuteni–Trypillia territory expanded to include the Volyn region in northwest Ukraine, the Sluch and Horyn Rivers in northern Ukraine, and along both banks of the Dnieper river near Kyiv. Members of the Cucuteni–Trypillia culture who lived along the coastal regions near the Black Sea came into contact with other cultures. Animal husbandry increased in importance, as hunting diminished; horses also became more important. Outlying communities were established on the Don and Volga rivers in present-day Russia. Dwellings were constructed differently from previous periods, and a new rope-like design replaced the older spiral-patterned designs on the pottery. Different forms of ritual burial were developed where the deceased were interred in the ground with elaborate burial rituals. An increasingly larger number of Bronze Age artifacts originating from other lands were found as the end of the Cucuteni–Trypillia culture drew near.” ref

Decline and end: Decline and end of the Cucuteni–Trypillia culture

“There is a debate among scholars regarding how the end of the Cucuteni–Trypillia culture took place. According to some proponents of the Kurgan hypothesis of the origin of Proto-Indo-Europeans, and in particular the archaeologist Marija Gimbutas, in her book “Notes on the chronology and expansion of the Pit-Grave Culture” (1961, later expanded by her and others), the Cucuteni–Trypillia culture was destroyed by force. Arguing from archaeological and linguistic evidence, Gimbutas concluded that the people of the Kurgan culture (a term grouping the Yamnaya culture and its predecessors) of the Pontic–Caspian steppe, being most likely speakers of the Proto-Indo-European language, effectively destroyed the Cucuteni–Trypillia culture in a series of invasions undertaken during their expansion to the west. Based on this archaeological evidence Gimbutas saw distinct cultural differences between the patriarchal, warlike Kurgan culture and the more peaceful egalitarian Cucuteni–Trypillia culture, which she argued was a significant component of the “Old European cultures” which finally met extinction in a process visible in the progressing appearance of fortified settlements, hillforts and the graves of warrior-chieftains, as well as in the religious transformation from the matriarchy to patriarchy, in a correlated east–west movement. In this, “the process of Indo-Europeanization was a cultural, not a physical, transformation and must be understood as a military victory in terms of successfully imposing a new administrative system, language, and religion upon the indigenous groups.” ref

“Accordingly, these proponents of the Kurgan hypothesis hold that this invasion took place during the third wave of Kurgan expansion between 3000–2800 BC, permanently ending the Cucuteni–Trypillia culture. In his 1989 book In Search of the Indo-Europeans, Irish-American archaeologist J. P. Mallory, summarising the three existing theories concerning the end of the Cucuteni–Trypillia culture, mentions that archaeological findings in the region indicate Kurgan (i.e. Yamnaya culture) settlements in the eastern part of the Cucuteni–Trypillia area, co-existing for some time with those of the Cucuteni–Trypillia. Artifacts from both cultures found within each of their respective archaeological settlement sites attest to an open trade in goods for a period, though he points out that the archaeological evidence clearly points to what he termed “a dark age,” its population seeking refuge in every direction except east. He cites evidence of the refugees having used caves, islands, and hilltops (abandoning in the process 600–700 settlements) to argue for the possibility of a gradual transformation rather than an armed onslaught bringing about cultural extinction.” ref

“The obvious issue with that theory is the limited common historical life-time between the Cucuteni–Trypillia (4800–3000 BC) and the Yamnaya culture (3300–2600 BC); given that the earliest archaeological findings of the Yamnaya culture are located in the Volga–Don basin, not in the Dniester and Dnieper area where the cultures came in touch, while the Yamnaya culture came to its full extension in the Pontic steppe at the earliest around 3000 BC, the time the Cucuteni–Trypillia culture ended, thus indicating an extremely short survival after coming in contact with the Yamnaya culture. Another contradicting indication is that the kurgans that replaced the traditional horizontal graves in the area now contain human remains of a fairly diversified skeletal type approximately ten centimeters taller on average than the previous population. In the 1990s and 2000s, another theory regarding the end of the Cucuteni–Trypillia culture emerged based on climatic change that took place at the end of their culture’s existence that is known as the Blytt–Sernander Sub-Boreal phase. Beginning around 3200 BC, the earth’s climate became colder and drier than it had ever been since the end of the last Ice age, resulting in the worst drought in the history of Europe since the beginning of agriculture. The Cucuteni–Trypillia culture relied primarily on farming, which would have collapsed under these climatic conditions in a scenario similar to the Dust Bowl of the American Midwest in the 1930s.” ref

“According to The American Geographical Union, The transition to today’s arid climate was not gradual, but occurred in two specific episodes. The first, which was less severe, occurred between 6,700 and 5,500 years ago. The second, which was brutal, lasted from 4,000 to 3,600 years ago. Summer temperatures increased sharply, and precipitation decreased, according to carbon-14 dating. According to that theory, the neighboring Yamnaya culture people were pastoralists, and were able to maintain their survival much more effectively in drought conditions. This has led some scholars to come to the conclusion that the Cucuteni–Trypillia culture ended not violently, but as a matter of survival, converting their economy from agriculture to pastoralism, and becoming integrated into the Yamnaya culture.” ref

“However, the Blytt–Sernander approach as a way to identify stages of technology in Europe with specific climate periods is an oversimplification not generally accepted. A conflict with that theoretical possibility is that during the warm Atlantic period, Denmark was occupied by Mesolithic cultures, rather than Neolithic, notwithstanding the climatic evidence.[citation needed] Moreover, the technology stages varied widely globally. To this must be added that the first period of the climate transformation ended 500 years before the end of the Cucuteni–Trypillia culture and the second approximately 1400 years after.” ref

Economy: Economy of the Cucuteni–Trypillia culture

“Throughout the 2,750 years of its existence, the Cucuteni–Trypillia culture was fairly stable and static; however, there were changes that took place. This article addresses some of these changes that have to do with the economic aspects. These include the basic economic conditions of the culture, the development of trade, interaction with other cultures, and the apparent use of barter tokens, an early form of money.” ref

“Members of the Cucuteni–Trypillia culture shared common features with other Neolithic societies, including:

An almost nonexistent social stratification
Lack of a political elite
Rudimentary economy, most likely a subsistence or gift economy
Pastoralists and subsistence farmers” ref

Earlier societies of hunter-gatherer tribes had no social stratification, and later societies of the Bronze Age had noticeable social stratification, which saw the creation of occupational specialization, the state and social classes of individuals who were of the elite ruling or religious classes, full-time warriors, and wealthy merchants, contrasted with those individuals on the other end of the economic spectrum who were poor, enslaved and hungry. In between these two economic models (the hunter-gatherer tribes and Bronze Age civilizations), we find the later Neolithic and Eneolithic societies such as the Cucuteni–Trypillia culture, where the first indications of social stratification began to be found. However, it would be a mistake to overemphasize the impact of social stratification in the Cucuteni–Trypillia culture, since it was still (even in its later phases) very much an egalitarian society. And of course, social stratification was just one of the many aspects of what is regarded as a fully established a more civilized society, which began to appear in the Bronze Age.” ref

“Like other Neolithic societies, the Cucuteni–Trypillia culture had almost no division of labor. Although this culture’s settlements sometimes grew to become the largest on Earth at the time (up to 15,000 people in the largest), there is no evidence that has been discovered of labor specialization. Every household probably had members of the extended family who would work in the fields to raise crops, go to the woods to hunt game and bring back firewood, work by the river to bring back clay or fish, and all of the other duties that would be needed to survive. Contrary to popular belief, the Neolithic people experienced a considerable abundance of food and other resources. Since every household was almost entirely self-sufficient, there was very little need for trade. However, there were certain mineral resources that, because of limitations due to distance and prevalence, did form the rudimentary foundation for a trade network that towards the end of the culture began to develop into a more complex system, as is attested to by an increasing number of artifacts from other cultures that have been dated to the later period.” ref

“Toward the end of the Cucuteni–Trypillia culture’s existence (from roughly 3000 BC to 2750 BC), copper traded from other societies (notably, from the Balkans) began to appear throughout the region, and members of the Cucuteni–Trypillia culture began to acquire skills necessary to use it to create various items. Along with the raw copper ore, finished copper tools, hunting weapons, and other artifacts were also brought in from other cultures. This marked the transition from the Neolithic to the Eneolithic, also known as the Chalcolithic or Copper Age. Bronze artifacts began to show up in archaeological sites toward the very end of the culture. The primitive trade network of this society, that had been slowly growing more complex, was supplanted by the more complex trade network of the Proto-Indo-European culture that eventually replaced the Cucuteni–Trypillia culture.” ref

Pottery

“Most Cucuteni–Trypillia pottery was hand coiled from local clay. Long coils of clay were placed in circles to form first the base and then the walls of the vessel. Once the desired shape and height of the finished product was built up the sides would then be smoothed to create a seamless surface. This technique was the earliest form of pottery shaping and the most common in the Neolithic; however, there is some evidence that they also used a primitive type of slow-turning potter’s wheel, an innovation that did not become common in Europe until the Iron Age. Characteristically vessels were elaborately decorated with swirling patterns and intricate designs. Sometimes decorative incisions were added prior to firing, and sometimes these were filled with colored dye to produce a dimensional effect. In the early period, the colors used to decorate pottery were limited to a rusty-red and white. Later, potters added additional colors to their products and experimented with more advanced ceramic techniques.

“The pigments used to decorate ceramics were based on iron oxide for red hues, calcium carbonate, iron magnetite, and manganese Jacobsite ores for black and calcium silicate for white. The black pigment, which was introduced during the later period of the culture, was a rare commodity: taken from a few sources and circulated (to a limited degree) throughout the region. The probable sources of these pigments were Iacobeni in Romania for the iron magnetite ore and Nikopol in Ukraine for the manganese Jacobsite ore. No traces of the iron magnetite pigment mined in the easternmost limit of the Cucuteni–Trypillia region have been found to be used in ceramics from the western settlements, suggesting exchange throughout the entire cultural area was limited. In addition to mineral sources, pigments derived from organic materials (including bone and wood) were used to create various colors.” ref

“In the late period of Cucuteni–Trypillia culture, kilns with a controlled atmosphere were used for pottery production. These kilns were constructed with two separate chambers—the combustion chamber and the filling chamber— separated by a grate. Temperatures in the combustion chamber could reach 1000–1100 °C but were usually maintained at around 900 °C to achieve a uniform and complete firing of vessels. Toward the end of the Cucuteni–Trypillia culture, as copper became more readily available, advances in ceramic technology leveled off as more emphasis was placed on developing metallurgical techniques.” ref

Ceramic figurines

“An anthropomorphic ceramic artifact was discovered during an archaeological dig in 1942 on Cetatuia Hill near Bodeşti, Neamţ County, Romania, which became known as the “Cucuteni Frumusica Dance” (after a nearby village of the same name). It was used as a support or stand, and upon its discovery was hailed as a symbolic masterpiece of Cucuteni–Trypillia culture. It is believed that the four stylized feminine silhouettes facing inward in an interlinked circle represented a hora, or ritualistic dance. Similar artifacts were later found in Bereşti and Drăgușeni. Extant figurines excavated at the Cucuteni sites are thought to represent religious artifacts, but their meaning or use is still unknown. Some historians as Gimbutas claim that: …the stiff nude to be representative of death on the basis that the color white is associated with the bone (that which shows after death). Stiff nudes can be found in Hamangia, Karanovo, and Cucuteni cultures.” ref

“No examples of Cucuteni–Trypillia textiles have yet been found – preservation of prehistoric textiles is rare and the region does not have a suitable climate. However, impressions of textiles are found on pottery sherds (because the clay was placed there before it was fired). These show that woven fabrics were common in Cucuteni–Trypillia society. Finds of ceramic weights with drilled holes suggest that these were manufactured with a warp-weighted loom. It has also been suggested that these weights, especially “disposable” examples made from poor quality clay and inadequately fired, were used to weigh down fishing nets. These would probably have been frequently lost, explaining their inferior quality. Other pottery sherds with textile impressions, found at Frumuşica and Cucuteni, suggest that textiles were also knitted (specifically using a technique known as nalbinding).” ref

Weapons and tools

“Cucuteni–Trypillia tools were made from knapped and polished stone, organic materials (bone, antler, and horn), and in the later period, copper. Local Miorcani flint was the most common material for stone tools, but a number of other types are known to have been used, including chert, jasper, and obsidian. Presumably, these tools were hafted with wood, but this is not preserved. Weapons are rare but not unknown, implying the culture was relatively peaceful.” ref

Wheels

“Some researchers, e.g., Asko Parpola, an Indologist at the University of Helsinki in Finland, believe that the CT-culture used the wheel with wagons. However, only miniature models of animals and cups on 4 wheels have been found, and they date to the first half of the fourth millennium BCE. Such models are often thought to have been children’s toys; nevertheless, they do convey the idea that objects could be pulled on wheels. Up to now, there is no evidence for wheels used with real wagons.” ref

Ritual and Religion

“Some Cucuteni–Trypillia communities have been found that contain a special building located in the center of the settlement, which archaeologists have identified as sacred sanctuaries. Artifacts have been found inside these sanctuaries, some of them having been intentionally buried in the ground within the structure, that are clearly of a religious nature, and have provided insights into some of the beliefs, and perhaps some of the rituals and structure, of the members of this society. Additionally, artifacts of an apparent religious nature have also been found within many domestic Cucuteni–Trypillia homes. Many of these artifacts are clay figurines or statues. Archaeologists have identified many of these as fetishes or totems, which are believed to be imbued with powers that can help and protect the people who look after them. These Cucuteni–Trypillia figurines have become known popularly as goddesses; however, this term is not necessarily accurate for all female anthropomorphic clay figurines, as the archaeological evidence suggests that different figurines were used for different purposes (such as for protection), and so are not all representative of a goddess. There have been so many of these figurines discovered in Cucuteni–Trypillia sites that many museums in eastern Europe have a sizeable collection of them, and as a result, they have come to represent one of the more readily identifiable visual markers of this culture to many people.” ref

“The archaeologist Marija Gimbutas based at least part of her Kurgan Hypothesis and Old European culture theories on these Cucuteni–Trypillia clay figurines. Her conclusions, which were always controversial, today are discredited by many scholars, but still, there are some scholars who support her theories about how neolithic societies were matriarchal, non-warlike, and worshipped an “earthy” mother goddess, but were subsequently wiped out by invasions of patriarchal Indo-European tribes who burst out of the steppes of Russia and Kazakhstan beginning around 2500 BC, and who worshipped a warlike Sky God. However, Gimbutas’ theories have been partially discredited by more recent discoveries and analyses. Today there are many scholars who disagree with Gimbutas, pointing to new evidence that suggests a much more complex society during the Neolithic era than she had been accounting for.” ref

Further information: Proto-Indo-European Urheimat hypotheses

“One of the unanswered questions regarding the Cucuteni–Trypillia culture is the small number of artefacts associated with funerary rites. Although very large settlements have been explored by archaeologists, the evidence for mortuary activity is almost invisible. Making a distinction between the eastern Trypillia and the western Cucuteni regions of the Cucuteni–Trypillia geographical area, American archaeologist Douglass W. Bailey writes: There are no Cucuteni cemeteries and the Trypillia ones that have been discovered are very late. The discovery of skulls is more frequent than other parts of the body, however, because there has not yet been a comprehensive statistical survey done of all of the skeletal remains discovered at Cucuteni–Trypillia sites, precise post-excavation analysis of these discoveries cannot be accurately determined at this time. Still, many questions remain concerning these issues, as well as why there seems to have been no male remains found at all. The only definite conclusion that can be drawn from archaeological evidence is that in the Cucuteni–Trypillia culture, in the vast majority of cases, the bodies were not formally deposited within the settlement area.” ref

Vinča–Turdaș script

Symbols and proto-writing of the Cucuteni–Trypillia culture and Vinča symbols

“The mainstream academic theory is that writing first appeared during the Sumerian civilization in southern Mesopotamia, around 3300–3200 BC. in the form of the Cuneiform script. This first writing system did not suddenly appear out of nowhere,[original research?] but gradually developed from less stylized pictographic systems that used ideographic and mnemonic symbols that contained meaning, but did not have the linguistic flexibility of the natural language writing system that the Sumerians first conceived. These earlier symbolic systems have been labeled as proto-writing, examples of which have been discovered in a variety of places around the world, some dating back to the 7th millennium BCE.” ref

“One such early example of a proto-writing system are the Vinča symbols, which is a set of symbols depicted on clay artifacts associated with the Vinča culture, which flourished along the Danube River in the Pannonian Plain, between 6000 and 4000 BC. The first discovery of this script occurred at the archaeological site in the village of Turdaş (Romania), and consisted of a collection of artifacts that had what appeared to be an unknown system of writing. In 1908, more of these same kinds of artifacts were discovered at a site near Vinča, outside the city of Belgrade, Serbia. Scholars subsequently labeled this the “Vinča script” or “Vinča–Turdaş script”. There is a considerable amount of controversy surrounding the Vinča script as to how old it is, as well as whether it should be considered as an actual writing system, an example of proto-writing, or just a collection of meaningful symbols. Indeed, the entire subject regarding every aspect of the Vinča script is fraught with controversy.

“Beginning in 1875 up to the present, archaeologists have found more than a thousand Neolithic era clay artifacts that have examples of symbols similar to the Vinča script scattered widely throughout south-eastern Europe. This includes the discoveries of what appear to be barter tokens, which were used as an early form of currency. Thus it appears that the Vinča or Vinča–Turdaş script is not restricted to just the region around Belgrade, which is where the Vinča culture existed, but that it was spread across most of southeastern Europe, and was used throughout the geographical region of the Cucuteni–Trypillia culture. As a result of this widespread use of this set of symbolic representations, historian Marco Merlini has suggested that it be given a name other than the Vinča script, since this implies that it was only used among the Vinča culture around the Pannonian Plain, at the very western edge of the extensive area where examples of this symbolic system have been discovered. Merlini has proposed naming this system the Danube Script, which some scholars have begun to accept. However, even this name change would not be extensive enough, since it does not cover the region in Ukraine, as well as the Balkans, where examples of these symbols are also found. Whatever name is used, however (Vinča script, Vinča–Turdaș script, Vinča symbols, Danube script, or Old European script), it is likely that it is the same system.” ref

Archaeogenetics: Archaeogenetics of Europe

“Nikitin (2011) analyzed mtDNA recovered from Cucuteni–Trypillia human osteological remains found in the Verteba Cave (on the bank of the Seret River, Ternopil Oblast, Ukraine). It revealed that seven of the individuals whose remains where analysed belonged to: two to haplogroup HV(xH), two to haplogroup H, one to haplogroup R0(xHV), one to haplogroup J and one to haplogroup T4, the latter also being the oldest sample of the set. The authors conclude that the population living around Verteba Cave was fairly heterogenous, but that the wide chronological age of the specimens might indicate that the heterogeneity might have been due to natural population flow during this timeframe. The authors also link the R0(xHV) and HV(xH) haplogroups with European Paleolithic populations, and consider the T4 and J haplogroups as hallmarks of Neolithic demic intrusions from the southeast (the north-pontic region) rather than from the west (i.e. the Linear Pottery culture). A 2017 ancient DNA study found evidence of genetic contact between the Cucuteni–Trypillia culture and steppe populations from the east from as early as 3600 BCE, well before the influx of steppe ancestry into Europe associated with the Yamnaya culture. A 2018 study published in Nature included an analysis of three males from the Cucuteni–Trypillia culture. With respect to Y-DNA, two carried haplogroup G2a2b2a, while one carried G2a. With respect to mtDNA, the males carried H5a, T2b, and HV.” ref

3. Mesopotamian currently the Oldest Wheel

“The oldest existing wheel in Mesopotamia can be dated back to 3500 BCE. The Sumerians first used circular sections of logs as wheels to carry heavy objects, joining them together and rolling them along. Subsequently, they invented the sledge/sled and then combined the two. Eventually, they decided to drill a hole through the frame of the cart and make a place for the axle. Now both the wheels and axles could be used separately. The Sumerians realized that logs which had worn-out centers were more manageable and soon these became wheels which could be connected to a chariot.” ref

Primitive wheel form

“In its primitive form, a wheel is a circular block of a hard and durable material at whose center has been bored a hole through which is placed an axle bearing about which the wheel rotates when torque is applied to the wheel about its axis. The wheel and axle assembly can be considered one of the six simple machines. When placed vertically under a load-bearing platform or case, the wheel turning on the horizontal axle makes it possible to transport heavy loads. This arrangement is the main topic of this article, but there are many other applications of a wheel addressed in the corresponding articles: when placed horizontally, the wheel turning on its vertical axle provides the spinning motion used to shape materials (e.g. a potter’s wheel); when mounted on a column connected to a rudder or to the steering mechanism of a wheeled vehicle, it can be used to control the direction of a vessel or vehicle (e.g. a ship’s wheel or steering wheel); when connected to a crank or engine, a wheel can store, release, or transmit energy (e.g. the flywheel). A wheel and axle with force applied to create torque at one radius can translate this to a different force at a different radius, also with a different linear velocity.” ref

“The place and time of an “invention” of the wheel remains unclear, because the oldest hints do not guarantee the existence of real wheeled transport, or are dated with too much scatter. Mesopotamian civilization is credited with the invention of the wheel. The invention of the solid wooden disk wheel falls into the late Neolithic, and may be seen in conjunction with other technological advances that gave rise to the early Bronze Age. This implies the passage of several wheel-less millennia even after the invention of agriculture and of pottery, during the Aceramic Neolithic.

4500–3300 BC (Copper Age): the invention of the potter’s wheel; earliest solid wooden wheels (disks with a hole for the axle); earliest wheeled vehicles; domestication of the horse
3300–2200 BC (Early Bronze Age)
2200–1550 BC (Middle Bronze Age): the invention of the spoked wheel and the chariot” ref

4. Wheel with axle and the Bronocice pot’s Pottery art

“This Ljubljana Marshes Wheel with axle is the oldest wooden wheel yet discovered dating to Copper Age (c. 3,130 BC). The Ljubljana Marshes Wheel is a wooden wheel that was found in the Ljubljana Marshes some 20 kilometers (12 mi) south of Ljubljana, the capital of Slovenia. In 2002 Slovenian archaeologists uncovered a wooden wheel some 20 kilometers southeast of Ljubljana. It was established that the wheel is between 5.100 and 5.350 years old. This makes it the oldest in the world ever found.” ref, ref, ref

The archaeological site

“Remains of pile dwellings were discovered in the Ljubljana Marshes as early as in 1875. Since 2011, the site has been protected as a UNESCO World Heritage Site as an example of prehistoric pile dwellings around the Alps, a special form of dwellings in areas with lakes and marshes. The archaeologists at the excavation site identified over one thousand piles in the bed of the Iška River, near Ig. They reconstructed the dwellings of 3.5 by 7 meters (11 ft 6 in × 23 ft 0 in) in size, separated by approximately 2 to 3 meters (6 ft 7 into 9 ft 10 in). The analyses of the piles revealed that the dwellings were repaired each year and that a new house had to be built on the same place in as little as 10 to 20 years. The earliest inhabitants settled in the region as early as 9,000 years ago. In the Mesolithic, they built temporary residences on isolated rocks in the marsh and on the fringe, living by hunting and gathering. The permanent settlements were not built until the first farmers appeared approximately 6,000 years ago during the Neolithic.” ref

The wooden wheel

“The wooden wheel belonged to a prehistoric two-wheel cart – a pushcart. Similar wheels have been found in the hilly regions of Switzerland and southwest Germany, but the Ljubljana Marshes wheel is bigger and older. It shows that wooden wheels appeared almost simultaneously in Mesopotamia and Europe. It has a diameter of 72 centimeters (28 3⁄8 in) and is made of ash wood, and its 124-centimetre-long (48 7⁄8 in) axle is made of oak. The axle was attached to the wheels with oak wood wedges, which meant that the axle rotated together with the wheels. The wheel was made from a tree that grew in the vicinity of the pile dwellings and at the time of the wheel, construction was approximately 80 years old. It appears that the wheel itself is primarily made of two planks of wood which are held together with four cross braces. The cross braces appear to have been held in place simply by a tenon arrangement, the braces being fitted into tenoned slots carved into the two main wheel sections.” ref

Bronocice pot

“The Bronocice pot, discovered in a village in Gmina Działoszyce, Świetokrzyskie Voivodeship in Małopolska, near Nida River, Poland, is a ceramic vase incised with one of the earliest known depictions of what may be a wheeled vehicle. It was dated by the radiocarbon method to the mid-fourth millennium BCE, and is attributed to the Funnelbeaker archaeological culture. Today it is housed in the Archaeological Museum of Kraków (Muzeum Archeologiczne w Krakowie), Poland. The picture on the pot symbolically depicts key elements of the prehistoric human environment. The most important component of the decoration are five rudimentary representations of what seems to be a wagon. They represent a vehicle with a shaft for a draught animal, and four wheels. The lines connecting them probably represent axles. The circle in the middle possibly symbolizes a container for harvest. Other images on the pot include a tree, a river, and what may be fields intersected by roads/ditches or the layout of a village. The Bronocice pot inscription markings may represent a kind of “pre-writing” symbolic system that was suggested by Marija Gimbutas in her model of Old European language, similar to Vinča culture logographics (5700–4500 BC).” ref

“The Bronocice pot is the earliest depiction of a wheel and axle. The wheel alone, without any further innovation, would not have done much for mankind. Rather, it was the combination of the wheel and axle that made early forms of transportation possible, including carts and chariots. The Bronocice pot, a piece of pottery discovered in Poland and dating to at least 3370 BCE, is believed to feature the earliest depiction of a wheeled vehicle. The evidence suggests that small wagons or carts, likely drawn by cattle, were in use in Central Europe by this time in human history. The first carts featured wheels and axles that turned together. Wooden pegs were used to fix the sledge so that when it rested on the rollers it did not move. The axle turned in between the pegs, allowing the axle and wheels to create all the movement. Later, the pegs were replaced with holes carved into the cart frame, and the axle was placed through the holes. This made it necessary for the larger wheels and thinner axle to be separate pieces. The wheels were attached to both sides of the axle.” ref

Finally, the fixed axle was invented, wherein the axle did not turn but was solidly connected to the cart frame. The wheels were fitted onto the axle in a way that allowed them to freely rotate. Fixed axles made for stable carts that could turn corners better. By this time the wheel can be considered a complete invention. Following the invention of the wheel, the Sumerians invented the sledge, a device consisting of a flat base mounted on a pair of runners with curved ends. The sledge was useful for transporting cargo over smooth terrain; however, the Sumerians quickly realized that the device would be more efficient once it was mounted on rollers.” ref

5. Clay model of a wheeled cart Hungary

“Clay model of a wheeled cart, from a grave at Szigetszentmárton, Hungary, end of the 4th millennium BCE; in the Hungarian National Museum, Budapest.” ref

“From the late 4th millennium a number of developments in the agricultural economy became prominent. They did not, however, begin all at once nor were they found everywhere. Some of them may have been in use for some time, and there also are distinct regional variations. Cumulatively, however, they add up to a new phase of agricultural organization. One of the most important developments was the management of animal herds for purposes other than the provision of meat. In the case of cattle, there is some evidence for milk production earlier, but dairying appears to have taken on a much more significant role from this time. Oxen were raised to provide traction. Sheep were managed not for meat but primarily as a source of manure and wool. Textiles in the early Neolithic Period were predominantly made of flax, but from the early 3rd-millennium wool was widely used, and spinning and weaving became important crafts and new ways of exploiting agricultural resources. New crops also were introduced. The most important were the vine and the olive, found in Greece from the early 3rd millennium. These tree crops represented an important addition to the range of agricultural produce and formed the basis for later developments in the Aegean.” ref

“There were also new technologies, especially the use of animal traction for the plow and for wheeled vehicles. The earliest evidence for plowing consists of marks preserved in the soil under burial mounds and dated to the end of the 4th millennium. A clay model of a wheeled cart of the same date is known from a grave at Szigetszentmárton, Hung., and actual wheels from northern Europe by 2500 BCE. In southeastern Spain, the most arid area of Europe, irrigation systems were probably introduced. These all represent important new technologies applied to agriculture and an intensification of energy expenditure in that field. The innovations outlined above marked the development of early agriculture toward a system more specifically adapted to the European environment and capable of producing a much wider range of outputs, especially of nonfood products. Some, such as wine and cloth, had a particular social significance, and others, especially the wheeled vehicle, led to further developments. The new agricultural regime also showed a better adaptation to the wide variety of regional environments in Europe and permitted expansion into new ecological zones. Whereas the earliest farmers mostly preferred the prime arable soils, such as the loess of central Europe, it was now possible, especially with the use of sheep, to exploit many less fertile soils.” ref

Social change

“The period from the late 4th millennium also saw many important social changes. They varied from region to region but laid the foundations for the society of the Bronze Age, which followed. In southeastern Europe about 3200 BCE, there was a major break in material culture and settlement patterns. The old styles of decorated pottery were replaced with new plainer forms, and the evidence for ritual, such as the figurines, ends. Many of the long-occupied tell sites were abandoned; the new settlement pattern shows many smaller sites and some larger ones which may have played a central role. In Greece there were similar changes, with population expansion especially in the south and the emergence of some sites as centers of authority; this period marked the beginning of the Aegean Bronze Age. Elsewhere in the Mediterranean, the changes are most marked in parts of Iberia. At Los Millares in southeastern Spain and in southern Portugal at sites such as Vila Nova de São Pedro, strongly fortified settlements accompanied by cemeteries containing rich collections of prestige goods suggest the appearance of a more hierarchically organized society.” ref

“Similar trends toward the emergence of sites of central authority took place in southern France, but there is little sign of such developments in Italy. In central and northern Europe, changes of a different nature began about 2800 BCE. The most obvious feature is two phases of new burial rites, comprising individual rather than communal burials with a particular emphasis on the deposition of prestige grave goods with adult males. The first phase, characterized by Corded Ware pottery and stone battle-axes, is found particularly in central and northern Europe. The second phase, dated to 2500–2200 BCE, is marked by Bell Beaker pottery and the frequent occurrence of copper daggers in the graves; it is found from Hungary to Britain and as far south as Italy, Spain, and North Africa. At the same time, there was an increase in the exchange of prestige goods such as amber, copper, and tools from particular rock sources. Both of these burial rites have been attributed to invading population groups. On the other hand, they may also be seen as a new expression of an ideology of social status, emphasizing control of resources rather than ancestral descent. Such an explanation fits better with a picture of slow internal development within European society. The new ideology did not prevail everywhere, however, and in Britain, for instance, the 3rd millennium saw the construction of massive ceremonial monuments such as Avebury and Stonehenge, before the introduction of individual burial rites at the end of the millennium.” ref

The Indo-Europeans

“When there is evidence for the languages spoken in Europe at the end of the prehistoric period, it is clear that with few exceptions, such as Basque or Etruscan, they belonged to the Indo-European language group, which also extended to India and Central Asia. This raises the question of when these languages, or their ancestral prototype, were first spoken in Europe. One theory links these languages with a particular population of Indo-Europeans and explains the expansion of the languages as the result of invasion or immigration; their origin is sought in the east, perhaps in the area north of the Black and Caspian seas. The invasion is associated with the new patterns of settlement, economy, material culture, burial, and social organization seen about 3000 BCE. These innovations, however, may be better attributed to internal developments. An alternative explanation for the origin of Indo-European languages associates it with the immigration of the first farmers from Anatolia at the beginning of the Neolithic Period, but the spread of farming does not seem to have been a uniform process or to have been achieved everywhere by population migration. There is, however, no single archaeological pattern that might correspond to a migration on an appropriate geographic scale throughout Europe, and all these explanations raise fundamental questions about the development, spread, and adoption of languages, the relationship of language to ethnic groups, and the correspondence of archaeologically recognizable patterns of material culture to either language or ethnicity.” ref

6. A toy chariot dating back 5,000 years ago Turkey

“A 5,000-year-old earthenware chariot is found among a treasure trove of relics in a child’s grave in Turkey. A toy chariot dating back 5,000 years has been discovered in Sogmatar, Turkey, in the south-east of the country. Archaeologists believe they may have found the world’s oldest ‘toy car’. Digs in the city have uncovered a number of tombs, including the child’s grave the mini-chariot was found, which have provided a fascinating insight into how ancient civilizations lived. Other finds during the prolonged dig include a 4,000-year-old rattle. Sogmatar is believed to have been the home of Moses when he had run away from the Pharaoh. In the necropolis part, in a tomb room, we found a toy carriage that belongs to the Bronze Age and believed to have been made for the children of kings or the leaders. This finding is very important for us as shows the aesthetic and cultural understanding of the period.” ref

7. Ancient Khafajah Animal Toy Car 4,920-4,350 years old

“A baked clay pull toy from the ancient city of Khafajah in Iraq, dated to 2900-2330 BCE. Wheeled toys, which are frequently animals, that you pull along haven’t changed over the eons. What’s to re-engineer? Little hands are made for gripping and pulling the string. Little eyes see and learn about the animal at the end of the tether. The child goes and the animal or vehicle “friend” follows along, as they mimic society around them, learning about life. These toys follow a similar pattern throughout most cultures and historical periods. Ancient clay pull toys have been found dating back to around 2500 BC at Harappa in Pakistan. Later, brass and bronze elephants and horses were common playthings among Indian children from wealthy families. Mexican archaeological sites have recovered many small-wheeled animal artifacts from 1500 BCE.” ref

Ancient Khafajah

“Khafajah or Khafaje is an archaeological site in Diyala Province (Iraq). It was part of the city-state of Eshnunna. The site lies 7 miles (11 km) east of Baghdad and 12 miles (19 km) southwest of Eshnunna. The site consists of four mounds, labeled A through D. The main one, Mound A, extends back as far as the Uruk period and contained an oval temple, a temple of the god Sin, not surely, and a temple of Nintu. The Dur-Samsuiluna fort was found on mounds B and C. Mound D contained private homes and a temple for the god Sin where the archive tablets where found in two heaps. Khafajah was occupied during the Early Dynastic Period, through the Sargonid Period, then came under the control of Eshnunna after the fall of the Ur III Empire. Later, after Eshnunna was captured by Babylon, a fort was built at the site by Samsu-iluna of the First Babylonian dynasty and named Dur-Samsuiluna. Mesopotamian chariots were created in Tutub.” ref

8. Khafajah Chariot art on pottery

“Scarlet Ware pottery excavated in Khafajah. 2800-2600 BCE, Early Dynastic II-III, Sumer. The history of Khafajah is known in somewhat more detail for a period of several decades as a result of the discovery of 112 clay tablets (one now lost) in a temple of Sin. The tablets constitute part of an official archive and include mostly loan and legal documents.” ref

“Ancient Khafajah in Iraq which part of the city-state of Eshnunna. Eshnunna (modern Tell Asmar) was an ancient Sumerian (and later Akkadian) city and city-state in central Mesopotamia.” ref, ref

9. Sumerian Drawn cart

“A depiction of an onager-drawn cart on the Sumerian “battle standard of Ur.” ref

“Three thousand years of endless warfare led to a series of innovations in military technology and strategy. About 4.5 k.y.a., the Sumerian and Akkadian kings, and later the Babylonians and Assyrians, abandoned their role as high priests and became military commanders. They had at their disposal a well-trained and equipped professional army. The soldiers wore metal helmets, held a metal shield in one hand, and a spear, arrow, sling, or some other powerful weapon in the other hand. A battle may have begun with chariots rushing into an enemy column creating chaos, followed by the charge of a cavalry, and culminating with the onrush of foot soldiers engaging in a savage hand-to-hand combat. The Assyrians were also masters of siege warfare, using iron-headed battering rams to destroy defensive stone walls. What might have motivated the rulers to spend so much of the state’s resources, and so much effort and energy, to prepare for and embark on their military expeditions? What motivated rank-and-file soldiers to go into battle and sacrifice their lives? It is likely that city-states had genuine grievances over competing for dwindling water supplies caused by the building of local irrigation systems upstream. Other disputes arose over land boundaries and property rights. Conflicts may also have been generated by access to trade routes and sources of needed raw materials. Even when city-states were unified into large kingdoms and empires, the wars did not end. In fact, wars became more destructive as rulers with more resources now fought each other with better weapons and larger armies. The brutality of the armies, if anything intensified. Assyrian pictures of brutality were perhaps used to intimidate the people in conquered lands; pictures advertised the brutality of the soldiers and the torture methods used against the enemy. Prisoners were beheaded and their heads were displayed as trophies. Other prisoners were chained and marched off to be sold as slaves.” ref

10. Indus Valley Culture Wheeled Toy Chariot

“The Indus Valley Civilisation (IVC) was a Bronze Age civilization in the northwestern regions of South Asia, lasting from 3300-1300 BCE or 5,320-3320 years ago, and in its mature form from 2600-1900 BCE or 4,620-3,920 years ago. Together with ancient Egypt and Mesopotamia, it was one of three early civilizations of the Near East and South Asia, and of the three, the most widespread, its sites spanning an area stretching from northeast Afghanistan, through much of Pakistan, and into western and northwestern India. It flourished in the basins of the Indus River, which flows through the length of Pakistan, and along with a system of perennial, mostly monsoon-fed, rivers that once coursed in the vicinity of the seasonal Ghaggar-Hakra river in northwest India and eastern Pakistan. The civilization’s cities were noted for their urban planning, baked brick houses, elaborate drainage systems, water supply systems, clusters of large non-residential buildings, and new techniques in handicraft (carnelian products, seal carving) and metallurgy (copper, bronze, lead, and tin). The large cities of Mohenjo-daro and Harappa very likely grew to contain between 30,000 and 60,000 individuals, and the civilization itself during its fluorescence may have contained between one and five million individuals.” ref

“Gradual drying of the region’s soil during the 3rd millennium BCE may have been the initial spur for the urbanization associated with the civilization, but eventually weaker monsoons and reduced water supply caused the civilization’s demise, and to scatter its population eastward and southward. The Indus civilization is also known as the Harappan Civilisation, after its type site, Harappa, the first of its sites to be excavated early in the 20th century in what was then the Punjab province of British India and now is Pakistan. The discovery of Harappa and soon afterwards Mohenjo-daro was the culmination of work beginning in 1861 with the founding of the Archaeological Survey of India during the British Raj. There were however earlier and later cultures often called Early Harappan and Late Harappan in the same area; for this reason, the Harappan civilization is sometimes called the Mature Harappan to distinguish it from these other cultures.” ref

“By 2002, over 1,000 Mature Harappan cities and settlements had been reported, of which just under a hundred had been excavated, However, there are only five major urban sites: Harappa, Mohenjo-daro (UNESCO World Heritage Site), Dholavira, Ganeriwala, and Rakhigarhi. The early Harappan cultures were preceded by local Neolithic agricultural villages, from which the river plains were populated. The Harappan language is not directly attested, and its affiliation is uncertain since the Indus script is still undeciphered. A relationship with the Dravidian or Elamo-Dravidian language family is favored by a section of scholars like leading Finnish Indologist, Asko Parpola.” ref

“The Indus civilization was roughly contemporary with the other riverine civilizations of the ancient world: Egypt along the Nile, Mesopotamia in the lands watered by the Euphrates and the Tigris, and China in the drainage basin of the Yellow River and the Yangtze. By the time of its mature phase, the civilization had spread over an area larger than the others, which included a core of 1,500 kilometers (900 mi) up the alluvial plain of the Indus and its tributaries. In addition, there was a region with disparate flora, fauna, and habitats, up to ten times as large, which had been shaped culturally and economically by the Indus.” ref

“Around 6500 BCE, agriculture emerged in Balochistan, on the margins of the Indus alluvium. In the following millennia, settled life made inroads into the Indus plains, setting the stage for the growth of rural and urban human settlements. The more organized sedentary life, in turn, led to a net increase in the birth rate. The large urban centers of Mohenjo-daro and Harappa very likely grew to containing between 30,000 and 60,000 individuals, and during the civilization’s florescence, the population of the subcontinent grew to between 4–6 million people. During this period the death rate increased as well, for close living conditions of humans and domesticated animals led to an increase in contagious diseases. According to one estimate, the population of the Indus civilization at its peak may have been between one and five million.” ref

“The Indus Valley Civilisation (IVC) extended from Pakistan’s Balochistan in the west to India’s western Uttar Pradesh in the east, from northeastern Afghanistan in the north to India’s Gujarat state in the south. The largest number of sites are in Gujarat, Haryana, Punjab, Rajasthan, Uttar Pradesh, Jammu, and Kashmir states in India, and Sindh, Punjab, and Balochistan provinces in Pakistan. Coastal settlements extended from Sutkagan Dor in Western Baluchistan to Lothal in Gujarat. An Indus Valley site has been found on the Oxus River at Shortugai in northern Afghanistan, in the Gomal River valley in northwestern Pakistan, at Manda, Jammu on the Beas River near Jammu, India, and at Alamgirpur on the Hindon River, only 28 km (17 mi) from Delhi. The southernmost site of the Indus valley civilization is Daimabad in Maharashtra. Indus Valley sites have been found most often on rivers, but also on the ancient seacoast, for example, Balakot, and on islands, for example, Dholavira.” ref

“The cities of the Indus Valley Civilisation had “social hierarchies, their writing system, their large planned cities and their long-distance trade [which] mark them to archaeologists as a full-fledged ‘civilization.'” The mature phase of the Harappan civilization lasted from c. 2600–1900 BCE. With the inclusion of the predecessor and successor cultures – Early Harappan and Late Harappan, respectively – the entire Indus Valley Civilisation may be taken to have lasted from the 33rd to the 14th centuries BCE. It is part of the Indus Valley Tradition, which also includes the pre-Harappan occupation of Mehrgarh, the earliest farming site of the Indus Valley. Several periodizations are employed for the periodization of the IVC. The most commonly used classifies the Indus Valley Civilisation into Early, Mature, and Late Harappan Phase. An alternative approach by Shaffer divides the broader Indus Valley Tradition into four eras, the pre-Harappan “Early Food Producing Era,” and the Regionalisation, Integration, and Localisation eras, which correspond roughly with the Early Harappan, Mature Harappan, and Late Harappan phases.” ref

Pre-Harappan era: Mehrgarh

“Mehrgarh is a Neolithic (7000 BCE to c. 2500 BCE) mountain site in the Balochistan province of Pakistan, which gave new insights on the emergence of the Indus Valley Civilization. Mehrgarh is one of the earliest sites with evidence of farming and herding in South Asia. Mehrgarh was influenced by the Near Eastern Neolithic, with similarities between “domesticated wheat varieties, early phases of farming, pottery, other archaeological artifacts, some domesticated plants and herd animals.” Jean-Francois Jarrige argues for an independent origin of Mehrgarh. Jarrige notes “the assumption that farming economy was introduced full-fledged from Near-East to South Asia,” and the similarities between Neolithic sites from eastern Mesopotamia and the western Indus valley, which are evidence of a “cultural continuum” between those sites. But given the originality of Mehrgarh, Jarrige concludes that Mehrgarh has an earlier local background,” and is not a “‘backwater’ of the Neolithic culture of the Near East.” ref

“Lukacs and Hemphill suggest an initial local development of Mehrgarh, with a continuity in cultural development but a change in population. According to Lukacs and Hemphill, while there is a strong continuity between the neolithic and chalcolithic (Copper Age) cultures of Mehrgarh, dental evidence shows that the chalcolithic population did not descend from the neolithic population of Mehrgarh, which “suggests moderate levels of gene flow.” Mascarenhas et al. (2015) note that “new, possibly West Asian, body types are reported from the graves of Mehrgarh beginning in the Togau phase (3800 BCE).” Gallego Romero et al. (2011) state that their research on lactose tolerance in India suggests that “the west Eurasian genetic contribution identified by Reich et al. (2009) principally reflects gene flow from Iran and the Middle East.” They further note that “[t]he earliest evidence of cattle herding in south Asia comes from the Indus River Valley site of Mehrgarh and is dated to 7,000 YBP.” ref

Early Harappan

The Early Harappan Ravi Phase, named after the nearby Ravi River, lasted from c. 3300 BCE until 2800 BCE. It started when farmers from the mountains gradually moved between their mountain homes and the lowland river valleys, and is related to the Hakra Phase, identified in the Ghaggar-Hakra River Valley to the west, and predates the Kot Diji Phase (2800–2600 BCE, Harappan 2), named after a site in northern Sindh, Pakistan, near Mohenjo-daro. The earliest examples of the Indus script date to the 3rd millennium BCE. The mature phase of earlier village cultures is represented by Rehman Dheri and Amri in Pakistan. Kot Diji represents the phase leading up to Mature Harappan, with the citadel representing centralized authority and an increasingly urban quality of life. Another town of this stage was found at Kalibangan in India on the Hakra River.” ref

“Trade networks linked this culture with related regional cultures and distant sources of raw materials, including lapis lazuli and other materials for bead-making. By this time, villagers had domesticated numerous crops, including peas, sesame seeds, dates, and cotton, as well as animals, including the water buffalo. Early Harappan communities turned to large urban centers by 2600 BCE, from where the mature Harappan phase started. The latest research shows that Indus Valley people migrated from villages to cities. The final stages of the Early Harappan period are characterized by the building of large walled settlements, the expansion of trade networks, and the increasing integration of regional communities into a “relatively uniform” material culture in terms of pottery styles, ornaments, and stamp seals with Indus script, leading into the transition to the Mature Harappan phase.” ref

Mature Harappan

“According to Giosan et al. (2012), the slow southward migration of the monsoons across Asia initially allowed the Indus Valley villages to develop by taming the floods of the Indus and its tributaries. Flood-supported farming led to large agricultural surpluses, which in turn supported the development of cities. The IVC residents did not develop irrigation capabilities, relying mainly on the seasonal monsoons leading to summer floods. Brooke further notes that the development of advanced cities coincides with a reduction in rainfall, which may have triggered a reorganization into larger urban centers. According to J.G. Shaffer and D.A. Lichtenstein, the Mature Harappan Civilisation was “a fusion of the Bagor, Hakra, and Kot Diji traditions or ‘ethnic groups’ in the Ghaggar-Hakra valley on the borders of India and Pakistan”. By 2600 BCE, the Early Harappan communities turned into large urban centres. Such urban centres include Harappa, Ganeriwala, Mohenjo-daro in modern-day Pakistan, and Dholavira, Kalibangan, Rakhigarhi, Rupar, and Lothal in modern-day India. In total, more than 1,000 cities and settlements have been found, mainly in the general region of the Indus and Ghaggar-Hakra Rivers and their tributaries.” ref

Late Harappan

“Around 1900 BCE signs of a gradual decline began to emerge, and by around 1700 BCE most of the cities had been abandoned. Recent examination of human skeletons from the site of Harappa has demonstrated that the end of the Indus civilization saw an increase in inter-personal violence and in infectious diseases like leprosy and tuberculosis. According to historian Upinder Singh, “the general picture presented by the late Harappan phase is one of a breakdown of urban networks and an expansion of rural ones.” ref

“During the period of approximately 1900 to 1700 BCE, multiple regional cultures emerged within the area of the Indus civilization. The Cemetery H culture was in Punjab, Haryana, and Western Uttar Pradesh, the Jhukar culture was in Sindh, and the Rangpur culture (characterized by Lustrous Red Ware pottery) was in Gujarat.[201][202][203] Other sites associated with the Late phase of the Harappan culture are Pirak in Balochistan, Pakistan, and Daimabad in Maharashtra, India. The largest Late Harappan sites are Kudwala in Cholistan, Bet Dwarka in Gujarat, and Daimabad in Maharashtra, which can be considered as urban, but they are smaller and few in number compared with the Mature Harappan cities. Bet Dwarka was fortified and continued to have contacts with the Persian Gulf region, but there was a general decrease of long-distance trade. On the other hand, the period also saw a diversification of the agricultural base, with a diversity of crops and the advent of double-cropping, as well as a shift of rural settlement towards the east and the south.” ref

“The pottery of the Late Harappan period is described as “showing some continuity with mature Harappan pottery traditions,” but also distinctive differences. Many sites continued to be occupied for some centuries, although their urban features declined and disappeared. Formerly typical artifacts such as stone weights and female figurines became rare. There are some circular stamp seals with geometric designs, but lacking the Indus script which characterized the mature phase of the civilization. The script is rare and confined to potsherd inscriptions. There was also a decline in long-distance trade, although the local cultures show new innovations in faience and glass making, and carving of stone beads. Urban amenities such as drains and the public bath were no longer maintained, and newer buildings were “poorly constructed”. Stone sculptures were deliberately vandalized, valuables were sometimes concealed in hoards, suggesting unrest, and the corpses of animals and even humans were left unburied in the streets and in abandoned buildings.” ref

“During the later half of the 2nd millennium BCE, most of the post-urban Late Harappan settlements were abandoned altogether. Subsequent material culture was typically characterized by temporary occupation, “the campsites of a population which was nomadic and mainly pastoralist” and which used “crude handmade pottery.” However, there is greater continuity and overlap between Late Harappan and subsequent cultural phases at sites in Punjab, Haryana, and western Uttar Pradesh, primarily small rural settlements.” ref

Cities

“A sophisticated and technologically advanced urban culture is evident in the Indus Valley Civilisation, making them the first urban center in the region. The quality of municipal town planning suggests the knowledge of urban planning and efficient municipal governments which placed a high priority on hygiene, or, alternatively, accessibility to the means of religious ritual. As seen in Harappa, Mohenjo-daro and the recently partially excavated Rakhigarhi, this urban plan included the world’s first known urban sanitation systems: see hydraulic engineering of the Indus Valley Civilisation. Within the city, individual homes or groups of homes obtained water from wells. From a room that appears to have been set aside for bathing, waste water was directed to covered drains, which lined the major streets. Houses opened only to inner courtyards and smaller lanes. The house-building in some villages in the region still resembles in some respects the house-building of the Harappans.” ref

“The ancient Indus systems of sewerage and drainage that were developed and used in cities throughout the Indus region were far more advanced than any found in contemporary urban sites in the Middle East and even more efficient than those in many areas of Pakistan and India today. The advanced architecture of the Harappans is shown by their impressive dockyards, granaries, warehouses, brick platforms, and protective walls. The massive walls of Indus cities most likely protected the Harappans from floods and may have dissuaded military conflicts. The purpose of the citadel remains debated. In sharp contrast to this civilization’s contemporaries, Mesopotamia and ancient Egypt, no large monumental structures were built. There is no conclusive evidence of palaces or temples. Some structures are thought to have been granaries. Found at one city is an enormous well-built bath (the “Great Bath“), which may have been a public bath. Although the citadels were walled, it is far from clear that these structures were defensive.” ref

“Most city dwellers appear to have been traders or artisans, who lived with others pursuing the same occupation in well-defined neighborhoods. Materials from distant regions were used in the cities for constructing seals, beads, and other objects. Among the artifacts discovered were beautiful glazed faïence beads. Steatite seals have images of animals, people (perhaps gods), and other types of inscriptions, including the yet un-deciphered writing system of the Indus Valley Civilisation. Some of the seals were used to stamp clay on trade goods. Although some houses were larger than others, Indus Civilisation cities were remarkable for their apparent, if relative, egalitarianism. All the houses had access to water and drainage facilities. This gives the impression of a society with relatively low wealth concentration.” ref

Arts and crafts

“Various sculptures, seals, bronze vessels pottery, gold jewelry, and anatomically detailed figurines in terracotta, bronze, and steatite have been found at excavation sites. The Harappans also made various toys and games, among them cubical dice (with one to six holes on the faces), which were found in sites like Mohenjo-daro. A number of gold, terracotta, and stone figurines of girls in dancing poses reveal the presence of some dance form. These terracotta figurines included cows, bears, monkeys, and dogs. The animal depicted on a majority of seals at sites of the mature period has not been clearly identified. Part bull, part zebra, with a majestic horn, it has been a source of speculation. As yet, there is insufficient evidence to substantiate claims that the image had religious or cultic significance, but the prevalence of the image raises the question of whether or not the animals in images of the IVC are religious symbols. Many crafts including, “shell working, ceramics, and agate and glazed steatite bead making” were practiced and the pieces were used in the making of necklaces, bangles, and other ornaments from all phases of Harappan culture. Some of these crafts are still practiced in the subcontinent today. Some make-up and toiletry items (a special kind of combs (kakai), the use of collyrium, and a special three-in-one toiletry gadget) that were found in Harappan contexts still have similar counterparts in modern India. Terracotta female figurines were found (c. 2800–2600 BCE) which had red color applied to the “manga” (line of partition of the hair).” ref

Human statuettes

“A handful of realistic statuettes have been found at IVC sites, of which much the most famous is the lost-wax casting bronze statuette of a slender-limbed Dancing Girl adorned with bangles, found in Mohenjo-daro. Two other realistic statuettes have been found in Harappa in proper stratified excavations, which display near-Classical treatment of the human shape: the statuette of a dancer who seems to be male, and a red jasper male torso, both now in the Delhi National Museum. Sir John Marshall reacted with surprise when he saw these two statuettes from Harappa: When I first saw them I found it difficult to believe that they were prehistoric; they seemed to completely upset all established ideas about early art, and culture. Modeling such as this was unknown in the ancient world up to the Hellenistic age of Greece, and I thought, therefore, that some mistake must surely have been made; that these figures had found their way into levels some 3000 years older than those to which they properly belonged … Now, in these statuettes, it is just this anatomical truth which is so startling; that makes us wonder whether, in this all-important matter, Greek artistry could possibly have been anticipated by the sculptors of a far-off age on the banks of the Indus.” ref

“These statuettes remain controversial, due to their advanced techniques. Regarding the red jasper torso, the discoverer, Vats, claims a Harappan date, but Marshall considered this statuette is probably historical, dating to the Gupta period, comparing it to the much later Lohanipur torso. A second rather similar grey stone statuette of a dancing male was also found about 150 meters away in a secure Mature Harappan stratum. Overall, anthropologist Gregory Possehl tends to consider that these statuettes probably form the pinnacle of Indus art during the Mature Harappan period.” ref

Seals

“Thousands of steatite seals have been recovered, and their physical character is fairly consistent. In size, they range from squares of side 2 to 4 cm (3⁄4 to 1 1⁄2 in). In most cases, they have a pierced boss at the back to accommodate a cord for handling or for use as personal adornment. Seals have been found at Mohenjo-daro depicting a figure standing on its head, and another, on the Pashupati seal, sitting cross-legged in what some call a yoga-like pose (see image, the so-called Pashupati, below). This figure has been variously identified. Sir John Marshall identified a resemblance to the Hindu god, Shiva. A harp-like instrument depicted on an Indus seal and two shell objects found at Lothal indicate the use of stringed musical instruments. A human deity with the horns, hooves and tail of a bull also appears in the seals, in particular in a fighting scene with a horned tiger-like beast. This deity has been compared to the Mesopotamian bull-man Enkidu. Several seals also show a man fighting two lions or tigers, a “Master of Animals” motif common to civilizations in Western and South Asia.” ref

Trade and transportation

“The Indus civilization’s economy appears to have depended significantly on trade, which was facilitated by major advances in transport technology. The IVC may have been the first civilization to use wheeled transport. These advances may have included bullock carts that are identical to those seen throughout South Asia today, as well as boats. Most of these boats were probably small, flat-bottomed craft, perhaps driven by sail, similar to those one can see on the Indus River today; however, there is secondary evidence of sea-going craft. Archaeologists have discovered a massive, dredged canal and what they regard as a docking facility at the coastal city of Lothal in western India (Gujarat state). An extensive canal network, used for irrigation, has however also been discovered by H.-P. Francfort. During 4300–3200 BCE of the chalcolithic period (copper age), the Indus Valley Civilisation area shows ceramic similarities with southern Turkmenistan and northern Iran which suggest considerable mobility and trade. During the Early Harappan period (about 3200–2600 BCE), similarities in pottery, seals, figurines, ornaments, etc. document intensive caravan trade with Central Asia and the Iranian plateau.” ref

“Judging from the dispersal of Indus civilization artifacts, the trade networks economically integrated a huge area, including portions of Afghanistan, the coastal regions of Persia, northern and western India, and Mesopotamia, leading to the development of Indus-Mesopotamia relations. Studies of tooth enamel from individuals buried at Harappa suggest that some residents had migrated to the city from beyond the Indus Valley. There is some evidence that trade contacts extended to Crete and possibly to Egypt. There was an extensive maritime trade network operating between the Harappan and Mesopotamian civilizations as early as the middle Harappan Phase, with much commerce being handled by “middlemen merchants from Dilmun” (modern Bahrain and Failaka located in the Persian Gulf). Such long-distance sea trade became feasible with the development of plank-built watercraft, equipped with a single central mast supporting a sail of woven rushes or cloth.” ref

“It is generally assumed that most trade between the Indus Valley (ancient Meluhha?) and western neighbors proceeded up the Persian Gulf rather than overland. Although there is no incontrovertible proof that this was indeed the case, the distribution of Indus-type artifacts on the Oman peninsula, on Bahrain, and in southern Mesopotamia makes it plausible that a series of maritime stages linked the Indus Valley and the Gulf region. In the 1980s, important archaeological discoveries were made at Ras al-Jinz (Oman), demonstrating maritime Indus Valley connections with the Arabian Peninsula.” ref

Agriculture

“According to Gangal et al. (2014), there is strong archeological and geographical evidence that neolithic farming spread from the Near East into north-west India, but there is also “good evidence for the local domestication of barley and the zebu cattle at Mehrgarh.” According to Jean-Francois Jarrige, farming had an independent origin at Mehrgarh, despite the similarities which he notes between Neolithic sites from eastern Mesopotamia and the western Indus valley, which are evidence of a “cultural continuum” between those sites. Nevertheless, Jarrige concludes that Mehrgarh has an earlier local background,” and is not a “‘backwater’ of the Neolithic culture of the Near East.”[85] Archaeologist Jim G. Shaffer writes that the Mehrgarh site “demonstrates that food production was an indigenous South Asian phenomenon” and that the data support an interpretation of “the prehistoric urbanization and complex social organization in South Asia as based on indigenous, but not isolated, cultural developments”.” ref

“Jarrige notes that the people of Mehrgarh used domesticated wheats and barley, while Shaffer and Liechtenstein note that the major cultivated cereal crop was naked six-row barley, a crop derived from two-row barley. Gangal agrees that “Neolithic domesticated crops in Mehrgarh include more than 90% barley,” noting that “there is good evidence for the local domestication of barley.” Yet, Gangal also notes that the crop also included “a small amount of wheat,” which “are suggested to be of Near-Eastern origin, as the modern distribution of wild varieties of wheat is limited to Northern Levant and Southern Turkey.” The cattle that are often portrayed on Indus seals are humped Indian aurochs, which are similar to Zebu cattle. Zebu cattle is still common in India, and in Africa. It is different from the European cattle, and had been originally domesticated on the Indian subcontinent, probably in the Baluchistan region of Pakistan.” ref

“Research by J. Bates et al. (2016) confirms that Indus populations were the earliest people to use complex multi-cropping strategies across both seasons, growing foods during summer (rice, millets, and beans) and winter (wheat, barley, and pulses), which required different watering regimes. Bates et al. (2016) also found evidence for an entirely separate domestication process of rice in ancient South Asia, based around the wild species Oryza nivara. This led to the local development of a mix of “wetland” and “dryland” agriculture of local Oryza sativa indica rice agriculture, before the truly “wetland” rice Oryza sativa japonica arrived around 2000 BCE.” ref

Food

“According to Akshyeta Suryanarayan et. al. while large proportion of data remains ambiguous, being building of reliable local isotopic references for fats and oils still unavailable and lower lipid levels in preserved IVC vessels, available evidence indicates (food) vessel’s usage had been multi-functional, and across rural and urban settlements usage was similar; and cooking in Indus vessels constituted dairy products, ruminant carcass meat, and either non-ruminant adipose fats, plants, or mixtures of these products.” ref

Language

“It has often been suggested that the bearers of the IVC corresponded to proto-Dravidians linguistically, the break-up of proto-Dravidian corresponding to the break-up of the Late Harappan culture. Finnish Indologist Asko Parpola concludes that the uniformity of the Indus inscriptions precludes any possibility of widely different languages being used, and that an early form of Dravidian language must have been the language of the Indus people. Today, the Dravidian language family is concentrated mostly in southern India and northern and eastern Sri Lanka, but pockets of it still remain throughout the rest of India and Pakistan (the Brahui language), which lends credence to the theory.” ref

“According to Heggarty and Renfrew, Dravidian languages may have spread into the Indian subcontinent with the spread of farming. According to David McAlpin, the Dravidian languages were brought to India by immigration into India from Elam. In earlier publications, Renfrew also stated that proto-Dravidian was brought to India by farmers from the Iranian part of the Fertile Crescent, but more recently Heggarty and Renfrew note that “a great deal remains to be done in elucidating the prehistory of Dravidian.” They also note that “McAlpin’s analysis of the language data, and thus his claims, remain far from orthodoxy.” Heggarty and Renfrew conclude that several scenarios are compatible with the data, and that “the linguistic jury is still very much out.” ref

Possible writing system

“Between 400 and as many as 600 distinct Indus symbols have been found on seals, small tablets, ceramic pots, and more than a dozen other materials, including a “signboard” that apparently once hung over the gate of the inner citadel of the Indus city of Dholavira. Typical Indus inscriptions are no more than four or five characters in length, most of which (aside from the Dholavira “signboard”) are tiny; the longest on a single surface, which is less than 2.5 cm (1 in) square, is 17 signs long; the longest on any object (found on three different faces of a mass-produced object) has a length of 26 symbols.” ref

“While the Indus Valley Civilisation is generally characterized as a literate society on the evidence of these inscriptions, this description has been challenged by Farmer, Sproat, and Witzel (2004) who argue that the Indus system did not encode language, but was instead similar to a variety of non-linguistic sign systems used extensively in the Near East and other societies, to symbolize families, clans, gods, and religious concepts. Others have claimed on occasion that the symbols were exclusively used for economic transactions, but this claim leaves unexplained the appearance of Indus symbols on many ritual objects, many of which were mass-produced in moulds. No parallels to these mass-produced inscriptions are known in any other early ancient civilizations.” ref

“In a 2009 study by P.N. Rao et al. published in Science, computer scientists, comparing the pattern of symbols to various linguistic scripts and non-linguistic systems, including DNA and a computer programming language, found that the Indus script’s pattern is closer to that of spoken words, supporting the hypothesis that it codes for an as-yet-unknown language. Farmer, Sproat, and Witzel have disputed this finding, pointing out that Rao et al. did not actually compare the Indus signs with “real-world non-linguistic systems” but rather with “two wholly artificial systems invented by the authors, one consisting of 200,000 randomly ordered signs and another of 200,000 fully ordered signs, that they spuriously claim to represent the structures of all real-world non-linguistic sign systems”. Farmer et al. have also demonstrated that a comparison of a non-linguistic system like medieval heraldic signs with natural languages yields results similar to those that Rao et al. obtained with Indus signs. They conclude that the method used by Rao et al. cannot distinguish linguistic systems from non-linguistic ones.” ref

“The messages on the seals have proved to be too short to be decoded by a computer. Each seal has a distinctive combination of symbols and there are too few examples of each sequence to provide a sufficient context. The symbols that accompany the images vary from seal to seal, making it impossible to derive a meaning for the symbols from the images. There have, nonetheless, been a number of interpretations offered for the meaning of the seals. These interpretations have been marked by ambiguity and subjectivity. Photos of many of the thousands of extant inscriptions are published in the Corpus of Indus Seals and Inscriptions (1987, 1991, 2010), edited by Asko Parpola and his colleagues. The most recent volume republished photos taken in the 1920s and 1930s of hundreds of lost or stolen inscriptions, along with many discovered in the last few decades; formerly, researchers had to supplement the materials in the Corpus by the study of the tiny photos in the excavation reports of Marshall (1931), MacKay (1938, 1943), Wheeler (1947), or reproductions in more recent scattered sources. Edakkal Caves in Wayanad district of Kerala contain drawings that range over periods from as early as 5000 BCE to 1000 BCE. The youngest group of paintings have been in the news for a possible connection to the Indus Valley Civilisation.” ref

Religion

“The religion and belief system of the Indus Valley people have received considerable attention, especially from the view of identifying precursors to deities and religious practices of Indian religions that later developed in the area. However, due to the sparsity of evidence, which is open to varying interpretations, and the fact that the Indus script remains undeciphered, the conclusions are partly speculative and largely based on a retrospective view from a much later Hindu perspective. An early and influential work in the area that set the trend for Hindu interpretations of archaeological evidence from the Harappan sites was that of John Marshall, who in 1931 identified the following as prominent features of the Indus religion: a Great Male God and a Mother Goddess; deification or veneration of animals and plants; symbolic representation of the phallus (linga) and vulva (yoni); and, use of baths and water in religious practice. Marshall’s interpretations have been much debated, and sometimes disputed over the following decades.” ref

“One Indus Valley seal shows a seated figure with a horned headdress, possibly tricephalic and possibly ithyphallic, surrounded by animals. Marshall identified the figure as an early form of the Hindu god Shiva (or Rudra), who is associated with asceticism, yoga, and linga; regarded as a lord of animals; and often depicted as having three eyes. The seal has hence come to be known as the Pashupati Seal, after Pashupati (lord of all animals), an epithet of Shiva. While Marshall’s work has earned some support, many critics and even supporters have raised several objections. Doris Srinivasan has argued that the figure does not have three faces, or yogic posture, and that in Vedic literature Rudra was not a protector of wild animals. Herbert Sullivan and Alf Hiltebeitel also rejected Marshall’s conclusions, with the former claiming that the figure was female, while the latter associated the figure with Mahisha, the Buffalo God, and the surrounding animals with vahanas (vehicles) of deities for the four cardinal directions. Writing in 2002, Gregory L. Possehl concluded that while it would be appropriate to recognize the figure as a deity, its association with the water buffalo, and its posture as one of ritual discipline, regarding it as a proto-Shiva would be going too far. Despite the criticisms of Marshall’s association of the seal with a proto-Shiva icon, it has been interpreted as the Tirthankara Rishabhanatha by Jains and Vilas Sangave. Historians such as Heinrich Zimmer and Thomas McEvilley believe that there is a connection between the first Jain Tirthankara Rishabhanatha and the Indus Valley civilization.” ref

“Marshall hypothesized the existence of a cult of Mother Goddess worship based upon excavation of several female figurines, and thought that this was a precursor of the Hindu sect of Shaktism. However the function of the female figurines in the life of Indus Valley people remains unclear, and Possehl does not regard the evidence for Marshall’s hypothesis to be “terribly robust”. Some of the baetyls interpreted by Marshall to be sacred phallic representations are now thought to have been used as pestles or game counters instead, while the ring stones that were thought to symbolize yoni were determined to be architectural features used to stand pillars, although the possibility of their religious symbolism cannot be eliminated. Many Indus Valley seals show animals, with some depicting them being carried in processions, while others show chimeric creations. One seal from Mohenjo-daro shows a half-human, half-buffalo monster attacking a tiger, which may be a reference to the Sumerian myth of such a monster created by goddess Aruru to fight Gilgamesh.” ref

“In contrast to contemporary Egyptian and Mesopotamian civilizations, Indus Valley lacks any monumental palaces, even though excavated cities indicate that the society possessed the requisite engineering knowledge. This may suggest that religious ceremonies, if any, may have been largely confined to individual homes, small temples, or the open air. Several sites have been proposed by Marshall and later scholars as possibly devoted to religious purpose, but at present only the Great Bath at Mohenjo-daro is widely thought to have been so used, as a place for ritual purification. The funerary practices of the Harappan civilization are marked by fractional burial (in which the body is reduced to skeletal remains by exposure to the elements before final interment), and even cremation.” ref

Ratha Indo-Iranian spoked-wheel

“Ratha (Proto-Indo-Iranian: *Hrátʰas, Sanskrit: रथ, rátha, Avestan: raθa) is the Indo-Iranian term for a spoked-wheel chariot or a cart of antiquity. Chariots figure prominently in the Rigveda, evidencing their presence in India in the 2nd millennium BCE. Notably, the Rigveda differentiates between the Ratha (chariot) and the Anas (often translated as “cart”). Rigvedic chariots are described as made of the wood of Salmali (RV 10.85.20), Khadira, and Simsapa (RV 3.53.19) trees. While the number of wheels varies, chariot measurements for each configuration are found in the Shulba Sutras. Chariots also feature prominently in later texts, including the other Vedas, the Puranas, and the great Hindu epics (Ramayana and Mahabharata). Indeed, most of the deities in the Hindu pantheon are portrayed as riding them. Among Rigvedic deities, notably Ushas (the dawn) rides in a chariot, as well as Agni in his function as a messenger between gods and men. In RV 6.61.13, the Sarasvati river is described as being wide and speedy, like a (Rigvedic) chariot.” ref

Indus Valley Civilization

“In the Indus Valley Civilization sites of Daimabad and Harappa in the Indian subcontinent, there is evidence for the use of terracotta model carts as early as 3500 BC during the Ravi Phase. During the Harappan Period (Harappa Phase, 2600–1900 BC) there was a dramatic increase in terracotta cart and wheel types at Harappa and other sites throughout the Indus region. The diversity in carts and wheels, including depictions of what may be spoked wheels, during this period of urban expansion and trade may reflect different functional needs, as well as stylistic and cultural preferences. The unique fonns and the early appearance of carts in the Indus valley region suggest that they are the result of indigenous technological development and not diffusion from West Asia or Central Asia as proposed by earlier scholars.” ref

Proto-Indo-Iranians

“The chariot must not necessarily be regarded as a marker for Indo-European or Indo-Iranian presence. According to Raulwing, it is an undeniable fact that only comparative Indo-European linguistics is able to furnish the methodological basics of the hypothesis of a “PIE chariot”, in other words: “Ausserhalb der Sprachwissenschaft winkt keine Rettung!” The earliest evidence for chariots in southern Central Asia (on the Oxus) dates to the Achaemenid period (apart from chariots harnessed by oxen, as seen on petroglyphs). No Andronovian chariot burial has been found south of the Oxus.” ref

Remains

“There are a few depictions of chariots among the petroglyphs in the sandstone of the Vindhya range. Two depictions of chariots are found in Morhana Pahar, Mirzapur district. One shows a team of two horses, with the head of a single driver visible. The other one is drawn by four horses, has six-spoked wheels, and shows a driver standing up in a large chariot-box. This chariot is being attacked, with a figure wielding a shield and a mace standing at its path, and another figure armed with bow and arrow threatening its right flank. It has been suggested (Sparreboom 1985:87) that the drawings record a story, most probably dating to the early centuries BC, from some center in the area of the Ganges–Yamuna plain into the territory of still neolithic hunting tribes. The drawings would then be a representation of foreign technology, comparable to the Arnhem Land Aboriginal rock paintings depicting Westerners. The very realistic chariots carved into the Sanchi stupas are dated to roughly the 1st century. The earliest Copper-Bronze Age chariot remains that have been found in India (at Sinauli) have been dated to 1900BCE. There is evidence of wheeled vehicles (especially miniature models) in the Indus Valley Civilization, but not of chariots.” ref

“Indus valley sites have offered several instances of evidence of spoked wheels. Archaeologist B. B. Lal argues that finds of terracotta wheels painted lines (or low relief lines) and similar seals indicate the existence and use of spoked wheel chariots in Harappan Civilization, as showed in the Bhirrana excavations in 2005–06. Bhagwan Singh had made a similar assertion and S.R. Rao had presented evidence of chariots in bronze models from Daimabad (Late Harappan). The archaeologists at Daimabad are not unanimous about the date of the bronzes discovered there. On the basis of the circumstantial evidence, M. N. Deshpande, S. R. Rao, and S. A. Sali are of view that these objects belong to the Late Harappan period. Looking at the analysis of the elemental composition of these artifacts, D. P. Agarwal concluded that these objects may belong to the historical period. His conclusion is based on these objects containing more than 1% arsenic, while no arsenical alloying has been found in any other Chalcolithic artifacts.” ref

In Hindu temple festivals

“Ratha or Rath means a chariot or car made from wood with wheels. The Ratha may be driven manually by rope, pulled by horses or elephants. Rathas are used mostly by the Hindu temples of South India for Rathoutsava (Car festival). During the festival, the temple deities are driven through the streets, accompanied by the chanting of mantra, hymns, shloka or bhajan. Ratha Yatra is a huge Hindu festival associated with Lord Jagannath held at Puri in the state of Orissa, India during the months of June or July. In some Hindu temples, there are shrines or buildings named rathas because they have the shape of a huge chariot or because they contain a divinity as does a temple chariot. The most known are the Pancha Rathas (=5 rathas) in Mahabalipuram, although not with the shape of a chariot. Another example is the Jaga mohan of the Konark Sun Temple in Konarâk, built on a platform with twelve sculptures of wheels, as a symbol of the chariot of the Sun. In Hindu temple architecture, a ratha is a facet or vertical offset projections on the tower (generally a Shikhara).” ref

ref, ref

e61c7102a88f679f17280afca3772f69-archaeology-irish

Damien Marie AtHope’s Art

ref

Predecessors to the domestic horse?

“A 2005 study analyzed the mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) of a worldwide range of equids, from 53,000-year-old fossils to contemporary horses. Their analysis placed all equids into a single clade, or group with a single common ancestor, consisting of three genetically divergent species: Hippidion, the New World stilt-legged horse, and equus, the true horse. The true horse included prehistoric horses and the Przewalski’s horse, as well as what is now the modern domestic horse, belonged to a single Holarctic species. The true horse migrated from the Americas to Eurasia via Beringia, becoming broadly distributed from North America to central Europe, north and south of Pleistocene ice sheets. It became extinct in Beringia around 14,200 years ago, and in the rest of the Americas around 10,000 years ago. This clade survived in Eurasia, however, and it is from these horses which all domestic horses appear to have descended. These horses showed little phylogeographic structure, probably reflecting their high degree of mobility and adaptability.” ref

“Therefore, the domestic horse today is classified as Equus ferus caballus. No genetic originals of native wild horses currently exist. The Przewalski diverged from the modern horse before domestication. It has 66 chromosomes, as opposed to 64 among modern domesticated horses, and their Mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) forms a distinct cluster. Genetic evidence suggests that modern Przewalski’s horses are descended from a distinct regional gene pool in the eastern part of the Eurasian steppes, not from the same genetic group that gave rise to modern domesticated horses. Nevertheless, evidence such as the cave paintings of Lascaux suggests that the ancient wild horses that some researchers now label the “Tarpan subtype” probably resembled Przewalski horses in their general appearance: big heads, dun coloration, thick necks, stiff upright manes, and relatively short, stout legs.” ref

Shamanic horse tradition:

“The horse occupies a very special place in shamanic rituals and mythology. The horse – primarily a carrier of souls and a burial animal – is used by the shaman in various situations as a means of helping to achieve a state of ecstasy. It is known that the eight-legged horse is a typical shamanic attribute. Eight-hoofed or headless horses are recorded in mythology and rituals of Germanic and Japanese “male unions”. The horse is a mythical image of Death, it delivers the deceased to the other world, makes the transition from one world to another.” ref

“Throughout history, horses have been credited with the gift of clairvoyance, which allows them to see the invisible danger. Therefore, they are considered especially susceptible to witch conspiracies. In the old days, witches took them at night to go to the Sabbath, they rushed on them for a long time and returned at dawn exhausted and covered with sweat and foam. To thwart “witch racing”, witchcraft and the evil eye, horse owners put trinkets and amulets installs and attached copper bells to their reins. During the witch hunt, it was believed that the devil and the witch could turn into horses.” ref

Domestication of the horse

“A number of hypotheses exist on many of the key issues regarding the domestication of the horse. Although horses appeared in Paleolithic cave art as early as 30,000 BCE, these were wild horses and were probably hunted for meat. How and when horses became domesticated is disputed. The clearest evidence of early use of the horse as a means of transport is from chariot burials dated c. 2000 BCE. However, an increasing amount of evidence supports the hypothesis that horses were domesticated in the Eurasian Steppes approximately 3500 BCE or around 5,500 years ago or so; recent discoveries in the context of the Botai culture suggest that Botai settlements in the Akmola Province of Kazakhstan are the location of the earliest domestication of the horse. Use of horses spread across Eurasia for transportation, agricultural work, and warfare.” ref

“The date of the domestication of the horse depends to some degree upon the definition of “domestication”. Some zoologists define “domestication” as human control over breeding, which can be detected in ancient skeletal samples by changes in the size and variability of ancient horse populations. Other researchers look at the broader evidence, including skeletal and dental evidence of working activity; weapons, art, and spiritual artifacts; and lifestyle patterns of human cultures. There is also evidence that horses were kept as meat animals before they were trained as working animals.” ref

“Attempts to date domestication by genetic study or analysis of physical remains rests on the assumption that there was a separation of the genotypes of domesticated and wild populations. Such a separation appears to have taken place, but dates based on such methods can only produce an estimate of the latest possible date for domestication without excluding the possibility of an unknown period of earlier gene flow between wild and domestic populations (which will occur naturally as long as the domesticated population is kept within the habitat of the wild population). Further, all modern horse populations retain the ability to revert to a feral state, and all feral horses are of domestic types; that is, they descend from ancestors that escaped from captivity.” ref

“Whether one adopts the narrower zoological definition of domestication or the broader cultural definition that rests on an array of zoological and archaeological evidence affects the time frame chosen for the domestication of the horse. The date of 4000 BCE is based on evidence that includes the appearance of dental pathologies associated with bitting, changes in butchering practices, changes in human economies and settlement patterns, the depiction of horses as symbols of power in artifacts, and the appearance of horse bones in human graves. On the other hand, measurable changes in size and increases in variability associated with domestication occurred later, about 2500–2000 BCE, as seen in horse remains found at the site of Csepel-Haros in Hungary, a settlement of the Bell Beaker culture.” ref

“Use of horses spread across Eurasia for transportation, agricultural work, and warfare. Horses and mules in agriculture used a breastplate type harness or a yoke more suitable for oxen, which was not as efficient at utilizing the full strength of the animals as the later-invented padded horse collar that arose several millennia later.” ref

ref

I think it possible that Proto-Indo-Europian language starts 7,022-6,022 and the time of kings could start around, an overlapping time, or with/reason-behind Horse burials that start as 6,022-5,522 years ago.

“A monarchy is a form of government in which a person, the monarch, is head of state for life or until abdication. The political legitimacy and authority of the monarch may vary from restricted and largely symbolic (constitutional monarchy), to fully autocratic (absolute monarchy), and can expand across the domains of the executive, legislative, and judicial. Monarchs can carry various titles such as emperor, empress, king, queen, raja, khan, tsar, sultan, shah, or pharaoh. The succession of monarchs is in most cases hereditary, often building dynastic periods. However, elective and self-proclaimed monarchies are possible. Aristocrats, though not inherent to monarchies, often serve as the pool of persons to draw the monarch from and fill the constituting institutions (e.g. diet and court), giving many monarchies oligarchic elements.” ref

“Most historians have suggested that Sumer was first permanently settled between 5500 and 4000 BCE so 7,533-4,022 years ago by a West Asian people who spoke the Sumerian language (pointing to the names of cities, rivers, basic occupations, etc., as evidence), thought to be a non-Semitic and non-Indo-European agglutinative language isolate. In contrast to its Semitic neighbors, it was not an inflected language. However, Sumerian civilization took form in the Uruk period (4th millennium BCE 6,022-5,022 years ago), continuing into the Jemdet Nasr and Early Dynastic periods.” ref

“The word “monarch” (Late Latin: monarchia) comes from the Ancient Greek word μονάρχης (monárkhēs), derived from μόνος (mónos, “one, single”) and ἄρχω (árkhō, “to rule”): compare ἄρχων (árkhōn, “ruler, chief”). It referred to a single at least nominally absolute ruler. In current usage the word monarchy usually refers to a traditional system of hereditary rule, as elective monarchies are quite rare.” ref

Damien Marie AtHope’s Art

ref, ref, ref, ref, ref

Male “King/Ruler/Chief” was likely the first ritual sex with the sacred horse completing the ceremony then it changed to chief queen likely having sex with the horse then only as a symbolic act of chief queen laying down with a suffocated horse beneath a linen blanket and mimicked sex.

“Man/god with horse-sized penis participating in royal/fertility ritual? Indo-European horse-sacrifice is one of the world’s most ancient and widespread traditions. The great Indo-European tradition of horse sacrifice in a 4000-year historic context, from the Sintashta culture in Russia in the east to historical Scandinavia in the west. In a brief history of Indo-European studies on the great horse sacrifices, we will present Indian, Irish, Greek, and Roman sacrificial traditions and
discuss how similarities across time and space have, for over a century, led different scholars to retrace these traditions to a common ‘Proto-Indo-European’ origin.” ref

Mythology: Horse worship and White horse (mythology)

“The reconstructed myth involves the coupling of a king with a divine mare which produced the divine twins. A related myth is that of a hero magically twinned with a horse foaled at the time of his birth (for example Cuchulainn, Pryderi), suggested to be fundamentally the same myth as that of the divine twin horsemen by the mytheme of a “mare-suckled” hero from Greek and medieval Serbian evidence, or mythical horses with human traits (Xanthos), suggesting totemic identity of the hero or king with the horse.” ref

Vedic (Indian): Ashvamedha

“Ashvamedha was a political ritual that was focused on the king’s right to rule. The horse had to be a stallion and it would be permitted to wander for a year, accompanied by people of the king. If the horse roamed off into lands of an enemy then that territory would be taken by the king, and if the horse’s attendants were killed in a fight by a challenger then the king would lose the right to rule. But if the horse stayed alive for a year then it was taken back to the king’s court where it was bathed, consecrated with butter, decorated with golden ornaments, and then sacrificed. After the completion of this ritual, the king would be considered as the undisputed ruler of the land which was covered by the horse.” ref

“the sacrifice is connected with the elevation or inauguration of a member of the Kshatriya warrior caste
the ceremony took place in spring or early summer
the horse sacrificed was a stallion which won a race at the right side of the chariot
the horse sacrificed was white-colored with dark circular spots, or with a dark front part, or with a tuft of dark blue hair
it was bathed in water, in which mustard and sesame are mixed
it was suffocated alongside a hornless ram and a he-goat, among other animals
the chief queen lay down with the suffocated horse beneath a linen blanket and mimicked sexual intercourse with it, while the other queens perambulated the scene, slapping their thighs and fanning themselves
the stallion was dissected along the “knife-paths” — with three knives made from gold, copper, and iron — and its portions awarded to various deities, symbolically invoking sky, atmosphere, and earth, while other priests started reciting the verses of Vedas, seeking healing and rejuvenation for the horse.” ref

Leda and the Swan: possibly relates back to 24,000–15,000 years old Mal’ta–Buret’ culture, Lake Baikal, Siberia?

Horse Worship/Sacrifice: mythical union of Ruling Elite/Kingship and the Horse

Damien Marie AtHope’s Art

ref, ref, ref

Ancient North Eurasian (ANE)

Ancient Beringian/Ancestral Native American (AB/ANA)

Eastern Hunter-Gatherer (EHG)

Western Hunter-Gatherers (WHG)

Western Steppe Herders (WSH)

Scandinavian Hunter-Gatherer (SHG)

Early European Farmers (EEF)

Jōmon people (Ainu people OF Hokkaido Island)

Neolithic Iranian farmers (Iran_N) (Iran Neolithic)

Amur Culture (Amur watershed)

Haplogroup R possible time of origin about 27,000 years in Central Asia, South Asia, or Siberia:

Mal’ta–Buret’ culture (24,000-15,000 years ago)
Afontova Gora culture (21,000-12,000 years ago)
Trialetian culture (16,000–8000 years ago)
Samara culture (7,000-6,500 years ago)
Khvalynsk culture (7,000-6,500 years ago)
Afanasievo culture (5,300-4,500 years ago)
Yamna/Yamnaya Culture (5,300-4,500 years ago)
Andronovo culture (4,000–2,900 years ago) ref

Groups partially derived from the Ancient North Eurasians

“The ANE lineage is defined by association with the MA-1, or “Mal’ta boy”, remains of 24,000 years ago in central Siberia Mal’ta-Buret’ culture 24,000-15,000 years ago. The Ancient North Eurasians (ANE) samples (Afontova Gora 3, Mal’ta 1, and Yana-RHS) show evidence for minor gene flow from an East Asian-related group (simplified by the Amis, Han, or Tianyuan) but no evidence for ANE-related geneflow into East Asians (Amis, Han, Tianyuan), except the Ainu, of North Japan.” ref

“The ANE lineage is defined by association with the MA-1, or “Mal’ta boy”, remains of 24,000 years ago in central Siberia Mal’ta-Buret’ culture 24,000-15,000 years ago “basal to modern-day Europeans”. Some Ancient North Eurasians also carried East Asian populations, such as Tianyuan Man.” ref

“Bronze-age-steppe Yamnaya and Afanasevo cultures were ANE at around 50% and Eastern Hunter-Gatherer (EHG) at around 75% ANE. Karelia culture: Y-DNA R1a-M417 8,400 years ago, Y-DNA J, 7,200 years ago, and Samara, of Y-haplogroup R1b-P297 7,600 years ago is closely related to ANE from Afontova Gora, 18,000 years ago around the time of blond hair first seen there.” ref

Ancient North Eurasian

“In archaeogenetics, the term Ancient North Eurasian (often abbreviated as ANE) is the name given to an ancestral West Eurasian component that represents descent from the people similar to the Mal’ta–Buret’ culture and populations closely related to them, such as from Afontova Gora and the Yana Rhinoceros Horn Site. Significant ANE ancestry are found in some modern populations, including Europeans and Native Americans.” ref

“The ANE lineage is defined by association with the MA-1, or “Mal’ta boy“, the remains of an individual who lived during the Last Glacial Maximum, 24,000 years ago in central Siberia, Ancient North Eurasians are described as a lineage “which is deeply related to Paleolithic/Mesolithic hunter-gatherers in Europe,” meaning that they diverged from Paleolithic Europeans a long time ago.” ref

“The ANE population has also been described as having been “basal to modern-day Europeans” but not especially related to East Asians, and is suggested to have perhaps originated in Europe or Western Asia or the Eurasian Steppe of Central Asia. However, some samples associated with Ancient North Eurasians also carried ancestry from an ancient East Asian population, such as Tianyuan Man. Sikora et al. (2019) found that the Yana RHS sample (31,600 years ago) in Northern Siberia “can be modeled as early West Eurasian with an approximately 22% contribution from early East Asians.” ref

“Populations genetically similar to MA-1 were an important genetic contributor to Native Americans, Europeans, Central Asians, South Asians, and some East Asian groups, in order of significance. Lazaridis et al. (2016:10) note “a cline of ANE ancestry across the east-west extent of Eurasia.” The ancient Bronze-age-steppe Yamnaya and Afanasevo cultures were found to have a noteworthy ANE component at ~50%.” ref

“According to Moreno-Mayar et al. 2018 between 14% and 38% of Native American ancestry may originate from gene flow from the Mal’ta–Buret’ people (ANE). This difference is caused by the penetration of posterior Siberian migrations into the Americas, with the lowest percentages of ANE ancestry found in Eskimos and Alaskan Natives, as these groups are the result of migrations into the Americas roughly 5,000 years ago.” ref

“Estimates for ANE ancestry among first wave Native Americans show higher percentages, such as 42% for those belonging to the Andean region in South America. The other gene flow in Native Americans (the remainder of their ancestry) was of East Asian origin. Gene sequencing of another south-central Siberian people (Afontova Gora-2) dating to approximately 17,000 years ago, revealed similar autosomal genetic signatures to that of Mal’ta boy-1, suggesting that the region was continuously occupied by humans throughout the Last Glacial Maximum.” ref

“The earliest known individual with a genetic mutation associated with blonde hair in modern Europeans is an Ancient North Eurasian female dating to around 16000 BCE or around 18,000 years ago from the Afontova Gora 3 site in Siberia. It has been suggested that their mythology may have included a narrative, found in both Indo-European and some Native American fables, in which a dog guards the path to the afterlife.” ref

“Genomic studies also indicate that the ANE component was introduced to Western Europe by people related to the Yamnaya culture, long after the Paleolithic. It is reported in modern-day Europeans (7%–25%), but not of Europeans before the Bronze Age. Additional ANE ancestry is found in European populations through paleolithic interactions with Eastern Hunter-Gatherers, which resulted in populations such as Scandinavian Hunter-Gatherers.” ref

“The Ancient North Eurasians (ANE) split from the ancestors of European peoples somewhere in the Middle East or South-central Asia, and used a northern dispersal route through Central Asia into Northern Asia and Siberia. Genetic analyses show that all ANE samples (Afontova Gora 3, Mal’ta 1, and Yana-RHS) show evidence for minor gene flow from an East Asian-related group (simplified by the Amis, Han, or Tianyuan). In contrast, no evidence for ANE-related geneflow into East Asians (Amis, Han, Tianyuan), except the Ainu, was found.” ref

“Genetic data suggests that the ANE formed during the Terminal Upper-Paleolithic (36,000 years ago) period from a deeply European-related population, which was once widespread in Northern Eurasia, and from an early East Asian-related group, which migrated northwards into Central Asia and Siberia, merging with this deeply European-related population. These population dynamics and constant northwards geneflow of East Asian-related ancestry would later gave rise to the “Ancestral Native Americans” and Paleosiberians, which replaced the ANE as dominant population of Siberia.” ref

Groups partially derived from the Ancient North Eurasians

“Eastern Hunter-Gatherer (EHG) is a lineage derived predominantly (75%) from ANE. It is represented by two individuals from Karelia, one of Y-haplogroup R1a-M417, dated c. 8,400 years ago, the other of Y-haplogroup J, dated c. 7,200 years ago; and one individual from Samara, of Y-haplogroup R1b-P297, dated c. 7,600 years ago. This lineage is closely related to the ANE sample from Afontova Gora, dated c. 18,000 years ago. After the end of the Last Glacial Maximum, the Western Hunter-Gatherers (WHG) and EHG lineages merged in Eastern Europe, accounting for early presence of ANE-derived ancestry in Mesolithic Europe. Evidence suggests that as Ancient North Eurasians migrated West from Eastern Siberia, they absorbed Western Hunter-Gatherers and other West Eurasian populations as well.” ref

“Caucasian Hunter-Gatherer (CHG) is represented by the Satsurblia individual dated ~13,000 years ago (from the Satsurblia cave in Georgia), and carried 36% ANE-derived admixture. While the rest of their ancestry is derived from the Dzudzuana cave individual dated ~26,000 years ago, which lacked ANE-admixture, Dzudzuana affinity in the Caucasus decreased with the arrival of ANE at ~13,000 years ago Satsurblia.” ref

“Scandinavian Hunter-Gatherer (SHG) is represented by several individuals buried at Motala, Sweden ca. 6000 BCE or around 8,000 years ago. They were descended from Western Hunter-Gatherers who initially settled Scandinavia from the south, and later populations of EHG who entered Scandinavia from the north through the coast of Norway.” ref

“Iran Neolithic (Iran_N) individuals dated ~8,500 years ago carried 50% ANE-derived admixture and 50% Dzudzuana-related admixture, marking them as different from other Near-Eastern and Anatolian Neolithics who didn’t have ANE admixture. Iran Neolithics were later replaced by Iran Chalcolithics, who were a mixture of Iran Neolithic and Near Eastern Levant Neolithic.” ref

“Ancient Beringian/Ancestral Native American are specific archaeogenetic lineages, based on the genome of an infant found at the Upward Sun River site (dubbed USR1), dated to 11,500 years ago. The AB lineage diverged from the Ancestral Native American (ANA) lineage about 20,000 years ago.” ref

“West Siberian Hunter-Gatherer (WSHG) are a specific archaeogenetic lineage, first reported in a genetic study published in Science in September 2019. WSGs were found to be of about 30% EHG ancestry, 50% ANE ancestry, and 20% to 38% East Asian ancestry.” ref

“Western Steppe Herders (WSH) is the name given to a distinct ancestral component that represents descent closely related to the Yamnaya culture of the Pontic–Caspian steppe. This ancestry is often referred to as Yamnaya ancestry or Steppe ancestry.” ref

“Late Upper Paeolithic Lake Baikal – Ust’Kyakhta-3 (UKY) 14,050-13,770 years ago were mixture of 30% ANE ancestry and 70% East Asian ancestry.” ref

“Lake Baikal Holocene – Baikal Eneolithic (Baikal_EN) and Baikal Early Bronze Age (Baikal_EBA) derived 6.4% to 20.1% ancestry from ANE, while rest of their ancestry was derived from East Asians. Fofonovo_EN near by Lake Baikal were mixture of 12-17% ANE ancestry and 83-87% East Asian ancestry.” ref

“Hokkaido Jōmon people specifically refers to the Jōmon period population of Hokkaido in northernmost Japan. Though the Jōmon people themselves descended mainly from East Asian lineages, one study found an affinity between Hokkaido Jōmon with the Northern Eurasian Yana sample (an ANE-related group, related to Mal’ta), and suggest as an explanation the possibility of minor Yana gene flow into the Hokkaido Jōmon population (as well as other possibilities). A more recent study by Cooke et al. 2021, confirmed ANE-related geneflow among the Jōmon people, partially ancestral to the Ainu people. ANE ancestry among Jōmon people is estimated at 21%, however, there is a North to South cline within the Japanese archipelago, with the highest amount of ANE ancestry in Hokkaido and Tohoku.” ref

Damien Marie AtHope’s Art

ref , ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref

Pottery before the Pre-Pottery Neolithic? Pre-Pottery Neolithic (10000 – 6500 BCE) and Pottery Neolithic (7000–5000 BCE)

ref

“Dené–Caucasian is a discredited language family proposal that includes widely-separated language groups spoken in the Northern Hemisphere: Sino-Tibetan languages, Yeniseian languages, Burushaski and North Caucasian languages in Asia; Na-Dené languages in North America; and the Vasconic languages from Europe (including Basque). A narrower connection specifically between North American Na-Dené and Siberian Yeniseian (the Dené–Yeniseian languages hypothesis) was proposed by Edward Vajda in 2008, and has met with some acceptance within the community of professional linguists. The validity of the rest of the family, however, is viewed as doubtful or rejected by nearly all historical linguists.” ref

“The Dené–Caucasian family tree and approximate divergence dates (estimated by modified glottochronology) proposed by S. A. Starostin and his colleagues from the Tower of Babel project:

Dené–Caucasian languages [8,700 BCE or around 10,700 years ago]
- Na-Dené languages (Athabascan–Eyak–Tlingit)
- Sino-Vasconic languages [7,900 BCE or around 9,900 years ago]
  - Vasconic (see below)
  - Sino-Caucasian languages [6,200 BCE or around 8,200 years ago]
    - Burushaski
    - Caucaso-Sino-Yeniseian [5,900 BCE or around 7,900 years ago]
      - North Caucasian languages
      - Sino-Yeniseian [5,100 BCE or around 7,100 years ago]
        
        Yeniseian languages
        
        Sino-Tibetan languages ” ref

“John D. Bengtson groups Basque, Caucasian and Burushaski together in a Macro-Caucasian (earlier Vasco-Caucasian) family (see the section on Macro-Caucasian below). According to him, it is as yet premature to propose other nodes or subgroupings, but he notes that Sumerian seems to share the same number of isoglosses with the (geographically) western branches as with the eastern ones:

Dené–Caucasian
- The Macro-Caucasian family
  - Basque
  - North Caucasian
  - Burushaski
- Sumerian
- Sino-Tibetan
- Yeniseian
- Na-Dené” ref

“It has been conjectured that the North-West Caucasian languages may be genetically related to the Indo-European family, at a time depth of perhaps 12,000 years before the present. This hypothesized proto-language is called Proto-Pontic, but is not widely accepted. There does at least appear to have been extensive contact between the two proto-languages, and the resemblances may be due to this influence. A few linguists have proposed even broader relationships, of which the Dene–Caucasian hypothesis is perhaps the most popular. Dene–Caucasian links the North Caucasian (including Northwest Caucasian), Basque, Burushaski, Yeniseian, Sino-Tibetan, and Na–Dene families. However, this is an even more tentative hypothesis than Nostratic, which attempts to relate Kartvelian, Indo-European, Uralic, and Altaic, etc., and which is widely considered to be undemonstrated.” ref

“Nostratic is a hypothetical language macrofamily including many of the language families of northern Eurasia. Though a historically important proposal, in a contemporary context it is typically considered a fringe theory. Although the exact composition varies based on proponent, it typically comprises Kartvelian, Indo-European and Uralic languages; some languages from the similarly controversial Altaic family; the Afroasiatic languages; as well as the Dravidian languages (sometimes also Elamo-Dravidian).” ref

“Iran Neolithic (Iran_N) individuals dated ~8,500 years ago carried 50% Ancient North Eurasian-derived admixture and 50% Dzudzuana-related admixture, marking them as different from other Near-Eastern and Anatolian Neolithics who didn’t have Ancient North Eurasian admixture. Iran Neolithics were later replaced by Iran Chalcolithics, who were a mixture of Iran Neolithic and Near Eastern Levant Neolithic.” ref

I speculate that possibly this “Iran Neolithic” difference is a later migration relating to Ancient North Eurasian admixture, with the source languages from Siberia (pre-proto-indo-europeain, like some kind of pre/proto-Yeniseian, or Dené–Yeniseian languages/or Dené–Caucasian) that then merged into proto-indo-European languages seen just west of Iran in the Caucasus and East Turkey areas. Also, I speculate that the idea of pottery was likewise brought by these peoples and they, to me could have influenced the creation of the earliest pottery in Tell Hassuna and Jarmo (Iraq).

“Proto-Yeniseian or Proto-Yeniseic is the unattested reconstructed proto-language from which all Yeniseian languages are thought to descend from. It is uncertain whether Proto-Yeniseian had a similar tone/pitch accent system as Ket people, who practiced Shamanism and connected to Tengrism. Many studies about Proto-Yeniseian phonology have been done, however there are still many things unclear about Proto-Yeniseian. The probable location of the Yeniseian homeland is proposed on the basis of geographic names and genetic studies, which suggests a homeland in Southern Siberia.” ref

“Tengri (Old Turkic: 𐰚𐰇𐰚:𐱅𐰭𐰼𐰃, romanized: Kök Teŋri/Teŋiri, lit. ’Blue Heaven’; Old Uyghur: tängri; Middle Turkic: تآنغرِ; Ottoman Turkish: تڭری; Kyrgyz: Теңир; Kazakh: Тәңір; Turkish: Tanrı; Azerbaijani: Tanrı; Bulgarian: Тангра; Proto-Turkic *teŋri / *taŋrɨ; Mongolian script: ᠲᠩᠷᠢ, T’ngri; Mongolian: Тэнгэр, Tenger; Uyghur: تەڭرى tengri ) is the all-encompassing God of Heaven in the traditional Turkic, Yeniseian, Mongolic, and various other nomadic Altaic religious beliefs. Tengri is not considered a deity in the usual sense, but a personification of the universe. However, some qualities associated with Tengri as the judge and source of life, and being eternal and supreme, led European and Muslim writers to identify Tengri as a deity of Turkic and Mongolic peoples. According to Mongolian belief, Tengri’s will (jayayan) may break its own usual laws and intervene by sending a chosen person to earth. It is also one of the terms used for the primary chief deity of the early Turkic and Mongolic peoples. Worship surrounding Tengri is called Tengrism. The core beings in Tengrism are the Sky Father (Tenger Etseg) and the Earth Mother (Umay Ana). It involves ancestor worship, as Tengri was thought to have been the ancestral progenitor of mankind in Turkic regions and Mongolia, shamanism, animism, and totemism.” ref

“Tengrism (also known as Tengriism, Tengerism, or Tengrianism) is a religion originating in the Eurasian steppes, based on shamanism and animism. It generally involves the titular sky god Tengri, who is not considered a deity in the usual sense but a personification of the universe. According to some scholars, adherents of Tengrism view the purpose of life to be in harmony with the universe.It was the prevailing religion of the Göktürks, Xianbei, Bulgars, Xiongnu, Yeniseian, and Mongolic peoples and Huns, as well as the state religion of several medieval states: the First Turkic Khaganate, the Western Turkic Khaganate, the Eastern Turkic Khaganate, Old Great Bulgaria, the First Bulgarian Empire, Volga Bulgaria, Khazaria, and the Mongol Empire. In the Irk Bitig, a ninth century manuscript on divination, Tengri is mentioned as Türük Tängrisi (God of Turks). According to many academics, Tengrism was, and to some extent still is, a predominantly polytheistic religion based on the shamanistic concept of animism, and was first influenced by monotheism during the imperial period, especially by the 12th–13th centuries. Abdulkadir Inan argues that Yakut and Altai shamanism are not entirely equal to the ancient Turkic religion.” ref

“The term also describes several contemporary Turkic and Mongolic native religious movements and teachings. All modern adherents of “political” Tengrism are monotheists. Tengrism has been advocated for in intellectual circles of the Turkic nations of Central Asia (Kyrgyzstan with Kazakhstan) and Russia (Tatarstan, Bashkortostan) since the dissolution of the Soviet Union during the 1990s. Still practiced, it is undergoing an organized revival in Buryatia, Sakha (Yakutia), Khakassia, Tuva and other Turkic nations in Siberia. Altaian Burkhanism and Chuvash Vattisen Yaly are contemporary movements similar to Tengrism. The term tengri (compare with Kami) can refer to the sky deity Tenger Etseg – also Gök Tengri; Sky father, Blue sky – or to other deities. While Tengrism includes the worship of personified gods (tngri) such as Ülgen and Kaira,Tengri is considered an “abstract phenomenon”. In Mongolian folk religion, Genghis Khan is considered one of the embodiments, if not the main embodiment, of Tengri’s will. The forms of the name Tengri (Old Turkic: Täŋri) among the ancient and modern Turkic and Mongolic are Tengeri, Tangara, Tangri, Tanri, Tangre, Tegri, Tingir, Tenkri, Tangra, Teri, Ter, and Ture. The name Tengri (“the Sky”) is derived from Old Turkic: Tenk (“daybreak”) or Tan (“dawn”). Meanwhile, Stefan Georg proposed that the Turkic Tengri ultimately originates as a loanword from Proto-Yeniseian *tɨŋgɨr- “high”. Mongolia is sometimes poetically called the “Land of Eternal Blue Sky” (Mönkh Khökh Tengeriin Oron) by its inhabitants. According to some scholars, the name of the important deity Dangun (also Tangol) (God of the Mountains) of the Korean folk religion is related to the Siberian Tengri (“Heaven”), while the bear is a symbol of the Big Dipper (Ursa Major).” ref

“Tiān (天) is one of the oldest Chinese terms for heaven and a key concept in Chinese mythology, philosophy, and religion. During the Shang dynasty (17th―11th century BCE), the Chinese referred to their highest god as Shàngdì (上帝, “Lord Above”) or Dì (帝, “Lord”). During the following Zhou dynasty, Tiān became synonymous with this figure. Before the 20th century, worship of Tiān was an orthodox state religion of China. In Chinese culture, heaven tends to be “synonymous with order”, “containing the blueprints for creation”, “the mandate by which earthly rulers govern, and the standards by which to measure beauty, goodness, and truth.” Zhou dynasty nobles made the worship of heaven a major part of their political philosophy and viewed it as “many gods” who embodied order and kingship, as well as the mandate of heaven. For the etymology of tiān, Schuessler links it with the Mongolian word tengri “sky, heaven, heavenly deity” or the Tibeto-Burman words taleŋ (Adi) and tǎ-lyaŋ (Lepcha), both meaning “sky”. He also suggests a likely connection between Chinese tiān 天, diān 巔 “summit, mountaintop”, and diān 顛 “summit, top of the head, forehead”, which have cognates such as Zemeic Naga tiŋ “sky”. However, other reconstructions of 天’s OC pronunciation *qʰl’iːn or *l̥ˤi[n] reconstructed a voiceless lateral onset, either a cluster or a single consonant, respectively. Baxter & Sagart pointed to attested dialectal differences in Eastern Han Chinese, the use of 天 as a phonetic component in phono-semantic compound Chinese characters, and the choice of 天 to transcribe foreign syllables, all of which prompted them to conclude that, around 200 CE, 天’s onset had two pronunciations: coronal *tʰ & dorsal *x, both of which likely originated from an earlier voiceless lateral *l̥ˤ.” ref

“In Taoism and Confucianism, Tiān (the celestial aspect of the cosmos, often translated as “Heaven“) is mentioned in relationship to its complementary aspect of Dì (地, often translated as “Earth“). They are thought to maintain the two poles of the Three Realms (三界) of reality, with the middle realm occupied by Humanity (人, rén), and the lower world occupied by demons (魔, mó) and “ghosts”, the damned, (鬼, guǐ). Tiān was variously thought as a “supreme power reigning over lesser gods and human beings” that brought “order and calm…or catastrophe and punishment”, a god, destiny, an “impersonal” natural force that controlled various events, a holy world or afterlife containing other worlds or afterlives, or one or more of these. “Confucianism has a religious side with a deep reverence for Heaven and Earth (Di), whose powers regulate the flow of nature and influence human events.” Yin and yang are also thought to be integral to this relationship and permeate both, as well as humans and man-made constructs. This “cosmos” and its “principles” is something that “[t]he ways of man should conform to, or else” frustration will result. Many Confucianists, both historically and in current times, use the I Ching to divine events through the changes of Tiān and other “natural forces”. Historical and current Confucianists were/are often environmentalists out of their respect for Heaven and the other aspects of nature and the “Principle” that comes from their unity and, more generally, harmony as a whole, which is “the basis for a sincere mind.” The Emperor of China as Tianzi was formerly vital to Confucianism. Mount Tai is seen as a sacred place in Confucianism and was traditionally the most revered place where Chinese emperors offered sacrifices to heaven and earth. Some tiān in Chinese folk religion were thought to be many different or a hierarchy of multiple, sphere-like realms that contained morally ambiguous creatures and spirits such as huli jing and fire-breathing dragons. ” ref

“Paleo-Siberian languages, languages spoken in Asian Russia (Siberia) that belong to four genetically unrelated groups—Yeniseian, Luorawetlan, Yukaghir, and Nivkh.” ref

Proto-Indo-European mythology

“Proto-Indo-European mythology is the body of myths and deities associated with the Proto-Indo-Europeans, speakers of the hypothesized Proto-Indo-European language. Although the mythological motifs are not directly attested – since Proto-Indo-European speakers lived in preliterate societies – scholars of comparative mythology have reconstructed details from inherited similarities found among Indo-European languages, based on the assumption that parts of the Proto-Indo-Europeans’ original belief systems survived in the daughter traditions. The Proto-Indo-European pantheon includes a number of securely reconstructed deities, since they are both cognates – linguistic siblings from a common origin – and associated with similar attributes and body of myths: such as *Dyḗws Ph₂tḗr, the daylight-sky god; his consort *Dʰéǵʰōm, the earth mother; his daughter *H₂éwsōs, the dawn goddess; his sons the Divine Twins; and *Seh₂ul and *Meh₁not, a solar goddess and moon god, respectively. Some deities, like the weather god *Perkʷunos or the herding-god *Péh₂usōn, are only attested in a limited number of traditions – Western (i.e. European) and Graeco-Aryan, respectively – and could therefore represent late additions that did not spread throughout the various Indo-European dialects.” ref

“Some myths are also securely dated to Proto-Indo-European times, since they feature both linguistic and thematic evidence of an inherited motif: a story portraying a mythical figure associated with thunder and slaying a multi-headed serpent to release torrents of water that had previously been pent up; a creation myth involving two brothers, one of whom sacrifices the other in order to create the world; and probably the belief that the Otherworld was guarded by a watchdog and could only be reached by crossing a river. Various schools of thought exist regarding possible interpretations of the reconstructed Proto-Indo-European mythology. The main mythologies used in comparative reconstruction are Indo-Iranian, Baltic, Roman, and Norse, often supported with evidence from the Celtic, Greek, Slavic, Hittite, Armenian, Illyrian, and Albanian traditions as well.” ref

“Early agricultural communities such as Chogha Golan in 10,000 BCE or around 12,000 years ago, along with settlements such as Chogha Bonut (the earliest village in Elam) in 8000 BCE or around 10,000 years ago, began to flourish in and around the Zagros Mountains region in western Iran. Around about the same time, the earliest-known clay vessels and modeled human and animal terracotta figurines were produced at Ganj Dareh, also in western Iran. There are also 10,000-year-old human and animal figurines from Tepe Sarab in Kermanshah Province among many other ancient artifacts.” ref

I also speculate that there may be a connection with this to the earliest pottery in Turkey from Boncuklu Höyük as well.

“12 fired clay samples and an unfired marl sample from the late 9th and early 8th-millennium BCE site of Boncuklu Höyük (8300–7800 cal BCE or around 10,300 to 9,800 years ago) in the Konya Plain, Turkey. The clay vessels from Boncuklu Höyük, an early Neolithic site in central Anatolia, are much earlier than the accepted date for the introduction of pottery in Anatolia, c. 7000 cal BCE or around 9,000 years ago.” ref

Proto-Indo-European (PIE) is the reconstructed common ancestor of the Indo-European language family:

Subdivisions	Albanian (Albanoid) Anatolian Armenian Balto-Slavic Celtic Dacian Elymian Germanic Hellenic Illyrian Indo-Iranian Italic Liburnian Ligurian Lusitanian Messapic Paeonian Phrygian Thracian Tocharian

“Western Iran was inhabited by a population genetically most similar to hunter-gatherers from the Caucasus, but distinct from the Neolithic Anatolian people who later brought food production into Europe. While some degree of cultural diffusion between Anatolia, Western Iran, and other neighboring regions is possible, the genetic dissimilarity between early Anatolian farmers and the inhabitants of Ganj Dareh supports a model in which Neolithic societies in these areas were distinct. The genome of an early Neolithic female from Ganj Dareh, GD13a, from the Central Zagros (Western Iran), dated to 10000-9700 cal years ago, a region located at the eastern edge of the Near East. Ganj Dareh is well known for providing the earliest evidence of herd management of goats beginning at 9,900 years ago. The mitochondrion of GD13a (91.74X) was assigned to haplogroup X, most likely to the subhaplogroup X2, which has been associated with an early expansion from the Near East and has been found in early Neolithic samples from Anatolia, Hungary, and Germany. GD13a did not cluster with any other early Neolithic individual from Eurasia in any of the analyses. Also genetically close to GD13a were ancient samples from Steppe populations (Yamanya & Afanasievo) that were part of one or more Bronze age migrations into Europe, as well as early Bronze age cultures in that continent (Corded Ware), in line with previous relationships observed for the Caucasus Hunter-Gatherers.” ref

“Subclade X2 appears to have undergone extensive population expansion and dispersal around or soon after the Last Glacial Maximum, roughly 20,000 years ago. It is more strongly represented in the Near East, the Caucasus, and southern Europe, and somewhat less strongly present in the rest of Europe. The highest concentrations are found in the Ojibwe (25%), Sioux (15%), Nuu-Chah-Nulth (12%), Georgia (8%), Orkney (7%), and amongst the Druze Assyrian community in Israel (27%). Subclades of X2 are not present in South Americans Amerindian populations. The oldest known human associated with X2 is Kennewick Man, whose c. 9000-year old remains were discovered in Washington State. The lineage of haplogroup X in the Americas is not derived from a European subclade, but rather represents an independent subclade, labeled X2a. The X2a subclade has not been found in Eurasia, and has most likely arisen within the early Paleo-Indian population, at roughly 13,000 years ago. A basal variant of X2a was found in the Kennewick Man fossil (ca. 9,000 years ago). No presence of mt-DNA ancestral to X2a has been found in Europe or the Near East. New World lineages X2a and X2g are not derived from the Old World lineages X2b, X2c, X2d, X2e, and X2f, indicating an early origin of the New World lineages “likely at the very beginning of their expansion and spread from the Near East.” ref

“Although it occurs only at a frequency of about 3% for the total current indigenous population of the Americas, it is a bigger haplogroup in northern North America, where among the Algonquian peoples it comprises up to 25% of mtDNA types. It is also present in lesser percentages to the west and south of this area—among the Sioux (15%), the Nuu-chah-nulth (11%–13%), the Navajo (7%), and the Yakama (5%). In Latin America, Haplotype X6 was present in the Tarahumara 1.8% (1/53) and Huichol 20% (3/15) X6 and X7 was also found in 12% in Yanomani people. Unlike the four main Native American mtDNA haplogroups (A, B, C, D), X is not strongly associated with East Asia. The main occurrence of X in Asia discovered so far is in the Altai people in Siberia. One theory of how the X Haplogroup ended up in North America is that the people carrying it migrated from central Asia along with haplogroups A, B, C, and D, from an ancestor from the Altai Region of Central Asia. Two sequences of haplogroup X2 were sampled further east of Altai among the Evenks of Central Siberia. These two sequences belong to X2* and X2b. It is uncertain if they represent a remnant of the migration of X2 through Siberia or a more recent input.” ref

“Haplogroup X has been found in various other bone specimens that were analysed for ancient DNA, including specimens associated with the Alföld Linear Pottery (X2b-T226C, Garadna-Elkerülő út site 2, 1/1 or 100%), Linearbandkeramik (X2d1, Halberstadt-Sonntagsfeld, 1/22 or ~5%), and Iberia Chalcolithic (X2b, La Chabola de la Hechicera, 1/3 or 33%; X2b, El Sotillo, 1/3 or 33%; X2b, El Mirador Cave, 1/12 or ~8%) cultures. Abel-beth-maachah 2201 was a man who lived between 1014 and 836 BCE during the Levant Iron Age and was found in the region now known as Abel Beth Maacah, Metula, Israel. He was associated with the Galilean cultural group. His direct maternal line belonged to mtDNA haplogroup X2b. Haplogroup X has been found in ancient Assyria and ancient Egyptian mummies excavated at the Abusir el-Meleq archaeological site in Middle Egypt, which date from the late New Kingdom and Roman periods. Fossils excavated at the Late Neolithic site of Kelif el Boroud in Morocco, which have been dated to around 5,000 years old, have also been found to carry the X2 subclade.” ref

“Migration from Siberia behind the formation of Göbeklitepe: Expert states. People who migrated from Siberia formed the Göbeklitepe, and those in Göbeklitepe migrated in five other ways to spread to the world, said experts about the 12,000-year-old Neolithic archaeological site in the southwestern province of Şanlıurfa.“ The upper paleolithic migrations between Siberia and the Near East is a process that has been confirmed by material culture documents,” he said.” ref

“Semih Güneri, a retired professor from Caucasia and Central Asia Archaeology Research Center of Dokuz Eylül University, and his colleague, Professor Ekaterine Lipnina, presented the Siberia-Göbeklitepe hypothesis they have developed in recent years at the congress held in Istanbul between June 11 and 13. There was a migration that started from Siberia 30,000 years ago and spread to all of Asia and then to Eastern and Northern Europe, Güneri said at the international congress.” ref

“The relationship of Göbeklitepe high culture with the carriers of Siberian microblade stone tool technology is no longer a secret,” he said while emphasizing that the most important branch of the migrations extended to the Near East. “The results of the genetic analyzes of Iraq’s Zagros region confirm the traces of the Siberian/North Asian indigenous people, who arrived at Zagros via the Central Asian mountainous corridor and met with the Göbeklitepe culture via Northern Iraq,” he added.” ref

“Emphasizing that the stone tool technology was transported approximately 7,000 kilometers from east to west, he said, “It is not clear whether this technology is transmitted directly to long distances by people speaking the Turkish language at the earliest, or it travels this long-distance through using way stations.” According to the archaeological documents, it is known that the Siberian people had reached the Zagros region, he said. “There seems to be a relationship between Siberian hunter-gatherers and native Zagros hunter-gatherers,” Güneri said, adding that the results of genetic studies show that Siberian people reached as far as the Zagros.” ref

“There were three waves of migration of Turkish tribes from the Southern Siberia to Europe,” said Osman Karatay, a professor from Ege University. He added that most of the groups in the third wave, which took place between 2600-2400 BCE, assimilated and entered the Germanic tribes and that there was a genetic kinship between their tribes and the Turks. The professor also pointed out that there are indications that there is a technology and tool transfer from Siberia to the Göbeklitepe region and that it is not known whether people came, and if any, whether they were Turkish.” ref

“Around 12,000 years ago, there would be no ‘Turks’ as we know it today. However, there may have been tribes that we could call our ‘common ancestors,’” he added. “Talking about 30,000 years ago, it is impossible to identify and classify nations in today’s terms,” said Murat Öztürk, associate professor from İnönü University. He also said that it is not possible to determine who came to where during the migrations that were accepted to have been made thousands of years ago from Siberia. On the other hand, Mehmet Özdoğan, an academic from Istanbul University, has an idea of where “the people of Göbeklitepe migrated to.” ref

“According to Özdoğan, “the people of Göbeklitepe turned into farmers, and they could not stand the pressure of the overwhelming clergy and started to migrate to five ways.” “Migrations take place primarily in groups. One of the five routes extends to the Caucasus, another from Iran to Central Asia, the Mediterranean coast to Spain, Thrace and [the northwestern province of] Kırklareli to Europe and England, and one route is to Istanbul via [Istanbul’s neighboring province of] Sakarya and stops,” Özdoğan said. In a very short time after the migration of farmers in Göbeklitepe, 300 settlements were established only around northern Greece, Bulgaria, and Thrace. “Those who remained in Göbeklitepe pulled the trigger of Mesopotamian civilization in the following periods, and those who migrated to Mesopotamia started irrigated agriculture before the Sumerians,” he said.” ref

ref

“The new study appears to align with the spread of Indo-European languages and was closely tied to the diffusion of agriculture from Anatolia (modern-day Turkey) around 8,000 to 9,500 years ago.” ref

World’s oldest known fort was constructed by hunter-gatherers 8,000 years ago in Siberia

“The fact that this Stone Age fort was built by hunter-gatherers is transforming our understanding of ancient human societies. Hunter-gatherers built the oldest known fort in the world about 8,000 years ago in Siberia, a new study finds. Archaeologists have long associated fortresses with permanent agricultural settlements. However, this cluster of fortified structures reveals that prehistoric groups were constructing protective edifices much earlier than originally thought.” ref

“These hunter-gatherers “defy conventional stereotypes that depict such societies as basic and nomadic, unveiling their capacity to construct intricate structures,” study co-author Tanja Schreiber, an archaeologist at Free University of Berlin, told Live Science in an email. Located along the Amnya River in western Siberia, remains of the Amnya fort include roughly 20 pit-house depressions scattered across the site, which is divided into two sections: Amnya I and Amnya II. Radiocarbon dating confirmed that the settlement was first inhabited during the Mesolithic, or Middle Stone Age, according to the study. When constructed, each pit house would have been protected by earthen walls and wooden palisades — two construction elements that suggest “advanced agricultural and defensive capabilities” by the inhabitants, the archaeologists said in a statement.” ref

“One of the Amnya fort’s most astonishing aspects is the discovery that approximately 8,000 years ago, hunter-gatherers in the Siberian Taiga built intricate defense structures,” Schreiber said. “This challenges traditional assumptions that monumental constructions were solely the work of agricultural communities.” It’s unknown what triggered the need for these fortified structures in the first place, but the strategic location overlooking the river would have not only been an ideal lookout point for potential threats but also allowed hunter-gatherers to keep tabs on their fishing and hunting grounds, the researchers noted.” ref

Damien Marie AtHope’s Art

ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref

Who were the Groups migrating and merging with the previous Groups of Europe 9,000 to 7,000 years ago?

Pic ref

Ancient Human Genomes…Present-Day Europeans – Johannes Krause (Video)

Ancient North Eurasian (ANE)

Eastern Hunter-Gatherer (EHG)

Western Hunter-Gatherers (WHG)

Scandinavian Hunter-Gatherer (SHG)

Early European Farmers (EEF)

A quick look at the Genetic history of Europe

“The most significant recent dispersal of modern humans from Africa gave rise to an undifferentiated “non-African” lineage by some 70,000-50,000 years ago. By about 50–40 ka a basal West Eurasian lineage had emerged, as had a separate East Asian lineage. Both basal East and West Eurasians acquired Neanderthal admixture in Europe and Asia. European early modern humans (EEMH) lineages between 40,000-26,000 years ago (Aurignacian) were still part of a large Western Eurasian “meta-population”, related to Central and Western Asian populations. Divergence into genetically distinct sub-populations within Western Eurasia is a result of increased selection pressure and founder effects during the Last Glacial Maximum (LGM, Gravettian). By the end of the LGM, after 20,000 years ago, A Western European lineage, dubbed West European Hunter-Gatherer (WHG) emerges from the Solutrean refugium during the European Mesolithic. These Mesolithic hunter-gatherer cultures are substantially replaced in the Neolithic Revolution by the arrival of Early European Farmers (EEF) lineages derived from Mesolithic populations of West Asia (Anatolia and the Caucasus). In the European Bronze Age, there were again substantial population replacements in parts of Europe by the intrusion of Ancient North Eurasian (ANE) lineages from the Pontic–Caspian steppes. These Bronze Age population replacements are associated with the Beaker culture archaeologically and with the Indo-European expansion linguistically.” ref

“As a result of the population movements during the Mesolithic to Bronze Age, modern European populations are distinguished by differences in WHG, EEF, and ANE ancestry. Admixture rates varied geographically; in the late Neolithic, WHG ancestry in farmers in Hungary was at around 10%, in Germany around 25%, and in Iberia as high as 50%. The contribution of EEF is more significant in Mediterranean Europe, and declines towards northern and northeastern Europe, where WHG ancestry is stronger; the Sardinians are considered to be the closest European group to the population of the EEF. ANE ancestry is found throughout Europe, with a maximum of about 20% found in Baltic people and Finns. Ethnogenesis of the modern ethnic groups of Europe in the historical period is associated with numerous admixture events, primarily those associated with the Roman, Germanic, Norse, Slavic, Berber, Arab and Turkish expansions. Research into the genetic history of Europe became possible in the second half of the 20th century, but did not yield results with a high resolution before the 1990s. In the 1990s, preliminary results became possible, but they remained mostly limited to studies of mitochondrial and Y-chromosomal lineages. Autosomal DNA became more easily accessible in the 2000s, and since the mid-2010s, results of previously unattainable resolution, many of them based on full-genome analysis of ancient DNA, have been published at an accelerated pace.” ref

Origins of ‘Transeurasian’ languages traced to Neolithic millet farmers in north-eastern China about 9,000 years ago

“A study combining linguistic, genetic, and archaeological evidence has traced the origins of a family of languages including modern Japanese, Korean, Turkish and Mongolian and the people who speak them to millet farmers who inhabited a region in north-eastern China about 9,000 years ago. The findings outlined on Wednesday document a shared genetic ancestry for the hundreds of millions of people who speak what the researchers call Transeurasian languages across an area stretching more than 5,000 miles (8,000km).” ref

“Millet was an important early crop as hunter-gatherers transitioned to an agricultural lifestyle. There are 98 Transeurasian languages, including Korean, Japanese, and various Turkic languages in parts of Europe, Anatolia, Central Asia, and Siberia, various Mongolic languages, and various Tungusic languages in Manchuria and Siberia. This language family’s beginnings were traced to Neolithic millet farmers in the Liao River valley, an area encompassing parts of the Chinese provinces of Liaoning and Jilin and the region of Inner Mongolia. As these farmers moved across north-eastern Asia over thousands of years, the descendant languages spread north and west into Siberia and the steppes and east into the Korean peninsula and over the sea to the Japanese archipelago.” ref

ref

“Altaic (also called Transeurasian) is a proposed language family that would include the Turkic, Mongolic, and Tungusic language families and possibly also the Japonic and Koreanic languages. Speakers of these languages are currently scattered over most of Asia north of 35 °N and in some eastern parts of Europe, extending in longitude from Turkey to Japan. The group is named after the Altai mountain range in the center of Asia.” ref

ref

Tracing population movements in ancient East Asia through the linguistics and archaeology of textile production – 2020

Abstract

“Archaeolinguistics, a field which combines language reconstruction and archaeology as a source of information on human prehistory, has much to offer to deepen our understanding of the Neolithic and Bronze Age in Northeast Asia. So far, integrated comparative analyses of words and tools for textile production are completely lacking for the Northeast Asian Neolithic and Bronze Age. To remedy this situation, here we integrate linguistic and archaeological evidence of textile production, with the aim of shedding light on ancient population movements in Northeast China, the Russian Far East, Korea, and Japan. We show that the transition to more sophisticated textile technology in these regions can be associated not only with the adoption of millet agriculture but also with the spread of the languages of the so-called ‘Transeurasian’ family. In this way, our research provides indirect support for the Language/Farming Dispersal Hypothesis, which posits that language expansion from the Neolithic onwards was often associated with agricultural colonization.” ref

Pic ref

Ancient Women Found in a Russian Cave Turn Out to Be Closely Related to The Modern Population https://www.sciencealert.com/ancient-women-found-in-a-russian-cave-turn-out-to-be-closely-related-to-the-modern-population

Abstract

“Ancient genomes have revolutionized our understanding of Holocene prehistory and, particularly, the Neolithic transition in western Eurasia. In contrast, East Asia has so far received little attention, despite representing a core region at which the Neolithic transition took place independently ~3 millennia after its onset in the Near East. We report genome-wide data from two hunter-gatherers from Devil’s Gate, an early Neolithic cave site (dated to ~7.7 thousand years ago) located in East Asia, on the border between Russia and Korea. Both of these individuals are genetically most similar to geographically close modern populations from the Amur Basin, all speaking Tungusic languages, and, in particular, to the Ulchi. The similarity to nearby modern populations and the low levels of additional genetic material in the Ulchi imply a high level of genetic continuity in this region during the Holocene, a pattern that markedly contrasts with that reported for Europe.” ref

ref

8,000 years ago in Siberia, the World’s oldest known fortress (fortified structure) was constructed by hunter-gatherers.

“Archaeologists have long associated fortresses with permanent agricultural settlements. However, this cluster of fortified structures reveals that prehistoric groups were constructing protective edifices much earlier than originally thought. Located along the Amnya River in western Siberia, remains of the Amnya fort include roughly 20 pit-house depressions scattered across the site, which is divided into two sections: Amnya I and Amnya II. “One of the Amnya fort’s most astonishing aspects is the discovery that approximately 8,000 years ago, hunter-gatherers in the Siberian Taiga built intricate defense structures,” Schreiber said. “This challenges traditional assumptions that monumental constructions were solely the work of agricultural communities.” It’s unknown what triggered the need for these fortified structures in the first place, but the strategic location overlooking the river would have not only been an ideal lookout point for potential threats but also allowed hunter-gatherers to keep tabs on their fishing and hunting grounds, the researchers noted.” ref

“Hunter-gatherers built the oldest known fort in the world about 8,000 years ago in Siberia, a new study finds. “It remains uncertain whether these constructions were commissioned by those in authority or if the entire community collaborated in constructing them for the purpose of protecting people or valuables,” Schreiber said. “Ethnohistorical records offer a nuanced comprehension of these forts, disclosing various potential reasons for fortifying residences.” Ancient forts were built for a number of reasons, according to these records, “such as securing possessions or individuals, handling armed conflicts, addressing imbalances in attacker-defender ratios, thwarting raids and functioning as elaborate signals by influential chiefs,” Schreiber said.” ref

So, this almost 8,000-year-old war evidence is just a little bit before the 7,000 to 5,000 years ago, time of clan violence and World War 0. When it went down to 14 women to 1 man in genetics due to wars.

“6200 – 6000 BCE or 8,200 to 8,000 years ago: The 8.2-kiloyear event, involved a rapid cooling, it was a sudden decrease of global temperatures, probably caused by the final collapse of the Laurentide Ice Sheet, which led to drier conditions in East Africa and Mesopotamia. In West Asia, especially Mesopotamia, the 8.2-kiloyear event was a 300-year aridification and cooling episode, which may have provided the natural force for Mesopotamian irrigation agriculture and surplus production, which were essential for the earliest formation of classes and urban life. Lacustrine sediment records show that Western Siberia underwent humidification and the Tarim Basin shows a major dry spell during the 8.2 ka event.” ref, ref

“6200 – 5600 BCE or 8,200 to 7,600 years ago: Sudden rise in sea level (Meltwater pulse 1C) by 6.5 m (21 ft) in less than 140 years; this concludes the early Holocene sea level rise and sea level remains largely stable throughout the Neolithic.” ref
“6100 BCE or 8,100 years ago: Great Britain had become an island.” ref
“6,000 BCE or 8,000 years ago: Approximately 8,000 years ago (c. 6000 BCE), a massive volcanic landslide off Mount Etna, Sicily, caused a megatsunami that devastated the eastern Mediterranean coastline on the continents of Asia, Africa, and Europe.” ref
“6,000 BCE or 8,000 years ago: Neolithic culture and technology had spread from the Near East and into Eastern Europe by 6000 BC. Its development in the Far East grew apace and there is increasing evidence through the millennium of its presence in prehistoric Egypt and the Far East. In much of the world, however, including Northern and Western Europe, people still lived in scattered Palaeolithic hunter-gatherer communities.” ref
“6,000 BCE or 8,000 years ago: The oldest fort is in Siberia around 6000 BCE.” ref
“5500 BCE or 7,500 years ago: Copper smelting in evidence in Pločnik and Belovode, Serbia.” ref

“Four identified cultures starting around 5300 BCE or 7,300 years ago, were the Dnieper-Donets, the Narva (eastern Baltic), the Ertebølle (Denmark and northern Germany), and the Swifterbant (Low Countries). They were linked by a common pottery style that had spread westward from Asia: starting in south China, then the Lake Baikal area of Siberia, then west to Europe and is sometimes called “ceramic Mesolithic“, distinguishable by a point or knob base and flared rims.” ref, ref, ref, ref

“The Baikal area, has a long history of human habitation. Some 160 km northwest of the lake, remains of a young human male known as MA-1 or “Mal’ta Boy” are indications of local habitation by the Mal’ta–Buret’ culture ca. 24,000 years old (who I think were involved in Shamanism and may have by their descendants or those with related DNA spread shamanism all over).” ref

“Siberian cultural identity is closely connected with the mythology and ancient religion of the – shamanism, whose rituals, images, symbols, and motifs are often manifested in the clients’ dreams.” ref

“The earliest Indigenous peoples of Siberia were hunter-gatherers distantly related to modern Europeans, and diverged from a shared ancestral population around 38kya before populating Siberia. In Siberia, they received geneflow from an East-Eurasian population, most closely related to the 40kya old Tianyuan man (c. 22-50%), representing a deep sister lineage of contemporary East Asian people, giving rise to a distinct Siberian lineage known as Ancient North Eurasian (such as the Mal’ta–Buret’ culture), populations carrying Ancient North Eurasian-related ancestry were probably widely distributed across northeast Eurasia.” ref

“The earliest known archaeological finds from Siberia date to the Lower Palaeolithic. In various places in West Siberia, the Baikal region and Yakutia, storage places from early Neolithic times have been found, which often remained in use for centuries. Alongside tent settlements which leave no traces in the ground, there were also huts, often dug slightly into the ground, whose walls and roofs were made of animal bone and reindeer antlers. Tools and weapons were mostly made from flint, slate, and bone, with few discernable differences between them despite their immense chronological and geographical scope. In some settlements, early artworks have been found, which consist of human, animal, and abstract sculptures and carvings. The Palaeolithic and Mesolithic inhabitants of Siberia were hunter-gatherers, whose prey consisted of mammoths and reindeer, and occasionally fish as well. In the 6th millennium BCE, pottery spread across the whole of Siberia, which scholars treat as the beginning of the Siberian Neolithic. Unlike Europe and the Near East, this event did not mark a major change in lifestyle, economy, or culture.” ref

“The last historical population movement can be associated with the Neo-Siberian expansion outgoing from Northeast Asia (15,000 years ago), and contributed ancestry to Indigenous groups throughout Siberia as well as to Native Americans, associated with the expansion of Paleo-Eskimo, and Eskimo-Aleut groups. Modern Indigenous peoples of Siberia derive varying degrees of ancestry from these three layers, although the Ancient North Eurasian-like ancestry has been largely replaced.” ref

“The increase in cases of interpersonal violence from the Mesolithic period is most likely related to better preservation and the much higher number of burials and more complete skeletons. Violence is present not only in recent hunter-gatherers and nomadic groups but also among Mesolithic hunter-gatherers.” ref

“From the Neolithic or early in the Chalcolithic, sedentary groups in which pastoralism played an important economic role developed in southwestern Siberia. The transition to the new economic system and to sedentarism was very smooth. Subsequently, it spread to the Baikal region, where the influence of northern China may also have played a role. All horse nomad cultures shared the burial of the dead in barrow graves which are known as kurgans.” ref

Bridging the Boreal Forest: Siberian Archaeology and the Emergence of Pottery among Prehistoric Hunter-Gatherers of Northern Eurasia

“The Dnieper–Donets culture complex (DDCC) (ca. 5th—4th millennium BCE) was a Mesolithic and later Neolithic culture which flourished north of the Black Sea ca. 5000-4200 BCE or 7,000 to 6,200 years ago. It has many parallels with the Samara culture, and was succeeded by the Sredny Stog culture. Striking similarities with the Khvalynsk culture have also been detected. The Dnieper–Donets culture was originally a hunter-gatherer culture. David Anthony (2007: 155) dated the beginning of the Dnieper–Donets culture as roughly between 5800/5200 BCE or 7,800/7,200 to 6,200 years ago. It quickly expanded in all directions, eventually absorbing all other local Neolithic groups. According to David W. Anthony, the Indo-European languages were initially spoken by EHGs living in Eastern Europe, such as the Dnieper-Donets people. The precise role of the culture and its language to the derivation of the Pontic-Caspian cultures, such as Sredny Stog and Yamnaya culture, is open to debate, but the display of recurrent traits points to longstanding mutual contacts or to underlying genetic relations.” ref

“The physical remains recovered from graves of the Dnieper–Donets culture have been classified as “Proto-Europoid“. The Dnieper–Donets culture produced no female figurines. By 5200 BCE or 7,200 years ago the Dnieper–Donets culture II followed, which ended between 4400/4200 BCE. From around 5200 BCE, the Dnieper-Donets people began keeping cattle, sheep, and goats. Other domestic animals kept included pigs, horses, and dogs. During the following centuries, domestic animals from the Dnieper further and further east towards the Volga–Ural steppes, where they appeared ca. 4700-4600 BCE. Some scholars suggest that from about 4200 BCE, the Dnieper–Donets culture adopted agriculture.” ref

“The first archaeogenetic analysis involving the Dnieper–Donets culture complex individuals from the Mykilske (Nikols’skoye in Russian) and Yasynuvatka (Yasinovatka) cemeteries held the haplogroups of west Eurasian (H, U3, U5a1a) and east Eurasian (C, C4a) descent have been identified. The authors linked the appearance of east Eurasian haplogroups with potential influence from the northern Lake Baikal area.” ref

“C4a – China (Guangdong, Han from Beijing)

C4a1 – Mongol from Chifeng and Hulunbuir, Tashkurgan (Kyrgyz, Sarikoli, Wakhi), Czech Republic, Denmark
- C4a1a – Korea, China, Uyghur, Buryat (South Siberia), Denmark, Sweden, France, Scotland, Canada.” ref

“Mathieson et al. (2018) analyzed 32 individuals from three Eneolithic cemeteries at Deriivka, Vilnyanka, and Vovnigi, which Anthony (2019a) ascribed to the Dnieper–Donets culture. These individuals belonged exclusively to the paternal haplogroups R and I (mostly R1b and I2), and almost exclusively to the maternal haplogroup U (mostly U5, U4, and U2). This suggests that the Dnieper-Donets people were “distinct, locally derived population” of mostly of Eastern Hunter-Gatherer (EHG) descent, with Western Hunter-Gatherer (WHG) admixture. The WHG admixture appears to have increased in the transition from the Mesolithic to the Neolithic. Unlike the Yamnaya culture, whose genetic cluster is known as Western Steppe Herder (WSH), in the Dnieper–Donets culture no Caucasian Hunter-Gatherer (CHG) or Early European Farmer (EEF) ancestry has been detected. At the same time, several Eneolithic individuals from the Deriivka I cemetery carried Anatolian Neolithic Farmer (ANF) – derived, as well as WSH ancestry. At the Vilnyanka cemetery, all the males belong to the paternal haplogroup I, which is common among WHGs. David W. Anthony suggests that this influx of WHG ancestry might be the result of EEFs pushing WHGs out of their territories to the east, where WHG males might have mated with EHG females.” ref

“Dnieper-Donets males and Yamnaya males carry the same paternal haplogroups (R1b and I2a), suggesting that the CHG and EEF admixture among the Yamnaya came through EHG and WHG males mixing with EEF and CHG females. According to Anthony, this suggests that the Indo-European languages were initially spoken by EHGs living in Eastern Europe.” ref

“The original homeland of the Indo Europeans’ ancestors in the Palaeolithic, the Northern and Eastern Siberian cultures did not have any agricultural introduction or even pastoralism in Siberia during the central European Neolithic. Its cultures are characterized by characteristic stone production techniques and the presence of pottery of Eastern origin via trade despite West Eurasian genetics. However, the Neolithic cultures of North Asia are distinguished from the preceding Mesolithic cultures and far more visible as a result of the introduction of pottery from Southwards. The Afanasevan population was a mix of people descended from a mother culture of Indo-Europeans in central Russia, and from people who migrated back c. 3700–3300 BCE across the Eurasian Steppe from the pre-Yamnaya Repin culture of the Don–Volga region. Such migrations including early Uralic Eastern migrations, into North Asia from Eurasia started and occurred during the mid-5th millennium.” ref

“Israeli Archaeologists Find Earliest Evidence of War in Southern Levant. Industrial production of aerodynamically efficient slingstones almost 8,000 years ago in what is today’s Israel wasn’t done to hunt animals. Almost 8,000 years ago, people in the Galilee and Sharon plain were preparing for war. This postulation is based on the mass production of shaped slingstones at four sites in Israel, starting in the Late Pottery Neolithic – though who they were attacking, or defending against, and why the production of these stone bullets ceased after about a thousand years is anybody’s guess. The current thinking is they were fighting against other local peoples, not invading hordes. That would come later.” ref

“The collections, most recently found at ‘En Esur and ‘En Tzippori but also at two other sites, are the earliest evidence of “formal” slingstones in the southern Levant, say Gil Haklay, Enno Bron, Dr. Dina Shalem, Dr. Ianir Milevski and Nimrod Getzov, archaeologists associated with the Israel Antiquities Authority, reporting in the journal ‘Atiqot. The slingstones were shaped to be biconical, meaning they were bullet-shaped if bullets had two tipped ends. Put otherwise, they look like very big olives, or eggs if there is something wrong with your bird. That double-cone shape is more aerodynamically efficient than just round stones, the archaeologists explain.” ref

“These weren’t the first slingstones in the world, just the earliest found in the southern Levant. Based on the archaeological evidence, the technique of shaping such projectiles emerged in Mesopotamia, spread to western Anatolia in today’s Turkey, from there to the Northern Levant and then to the southern Levant, Haklay explains to Haaretz by phone. Prehistoric contact between these regions has long been established, including through the discovery of obsidian from Turkey in Israel – including in a settlement by Jerusalem from 9,000 years ago.” ref

“In the southern Levant we find it with the Wadi Rabah culture from about 7,800 to 7,600 years ago, and it peaks 7,200 years ago. In the northern Levant we see the slingstones centuries before that – they look the same but they were made of clay,” Haklay says. Not burned ceramic clay but sun-dried clay, he adds. It was in the southern Levant that the stone slingstones appear. “Slingstones used pretty much everywhere in different periods were found throughout prehistory,” Haklay says. “People apparently reached the same solution independently because it’s the optimal way.” ref

“The Levantine biconical projectiles were quite uniform, averaging just over 5 centimeters (2 inches) in length and 60 grams (2 ounces) in weight. Made of local dolomite or limestone rock, or basalt, they are similar in shape to recognized slingstones from later times around the world. “Similar slingstones have been found at other sites in the country, mainly from the Hula Valley and the Galilee in the north to the northern Sharon, but this is the first time they have been found in excavations in such large concentrations,” the team said in a statement. This postulated evidence of warfare at ‘En Esur in the plain and ‘En Tzippori in the Lower Galilee is the earliest known in the whole of the southern Levant and certainly modern Israel, though not the world. The earliest known war zone is in Sudan and dates to about 13,000 years ago.” ref

“The biconical slingstones produced in the southern Levant starting about 7,800 years ago would remain in use for about a thousand years. Then such items abruptly disappeared from the archaeological record, the team says. The legend of David and Goliath from the Iron Age, and giant “flint spheroids” weighing a quarter-kilo apiece found in biblical Lachish, are all well and good. However, respectable “formalized” slingstones would only reappear in the local archaeological record in the Hellenistic period, the authors explain. Come the Late Roman period, the technique would be perfected by the manufacture of “whistling” slingstones, carved to shriek as they traveled, the better to unnerve the enemy. But we digress. Does that mean the locals stopped lobbing stones at one another? It does not.” ref

“The legend of David and Goliath from the Iron Age, and giant “flint spheroids” weighing a quarter-kilo apiece found in biblical Lachish, are all well and good. However, respectable “formalized” slingstones would only reappear in the local archaeological record in the Hellenistic period, the authors explain. Come the Late Roman period, the technique would be perfected by the manufacture of “whistling” slingstones, carved to shriek as they traveled, the better to unnerve the enemy. But we digress. The study discusses 424 slingstones found at ‘En Esur and ‘En Tzippori from the Late Neolithic-Early Chalcolithic. The logical inference of the amounts and circumstances support the thesis that these were weaponry, and the uniformity of the product suggests systematic production: formalization, standardization, and investment in the manufacture, the team explains.” ref

“Of the 424 slingstones, most were complete, some were chinked. The sheer effort invested in the industrial production of slingstones with smoothed surfaces suggests a communal effort to produce ammunition, the archaeologists posit – a transition from individual to large-scale production. Note they are not saying these two sites were the only places where such bullets were discovered from the period. Two other major collections of slingstones from the same period have also been found in the region, and smaller numbers of the shaped stones have been found throughout central and northern Israel. ‘En Esur seems to be the southern “border” of the region in which slingshots were systematically used. But for what?” ref

7,000 to 5,000 years ago because of violence genetics dropped to 1 man for every 17 women

“An abrupt population bottleneck specific to human males has been inferred across several Old World (Africa, Europe, Asia) populations 5000–7000 years ago. Previous studies also show trauma marks present on skulls clearly indicate the fighters used axes, clubs, and arrows to kill each other. Scientists from Stanford used mathematical models and computer simulations, in which men fought and died – allowing them to test their theory on the ‘Neolithic Y-chromosome bottleneck’. According to genetic patterns, researchers found the decline was only noticed in men – particularly on the Y chromosome, which is passed on from father to son. The war was so severe that it caused the male population to plummet to extremely low levels, reaching an astonishing one-twentieth of its original level. This results in the loss of Y chromosomes as they slowly deteriorate over time and eventually may get wiped out from the genome.” ref

“Once upon a time, 4,000 to 8,000 years after humanity invented agriculture, something very strange happened to human reproduction. Across the globe, for every 17 women who were reproducing, passing on genes that are still around today—only one man did the same. Another member of the research team, a biological anthropologist, hypothesizes that somehow, only a few men accumulated lots of wealth and power, leaving nothing for others. These men could then pass their wealth on to their sons, perpetuating this pattern of elitist reproductive success. Then, as more thousands of years passed, the numbers of men reproducing, compared to women, rose again. In more recent history, as a global average, about four or five women reproduced for every one man.” ref

“Violence in the ancient Middle East spiked with the formation of states and empires, battered skulls reveal.” ref

“The Mandate of Heaven (Chinese: 天命; pinyin: Tiānmìng; Wade–Giles: T’ien-ming; lit. ‘Heaven’s command’) is a Chinese political ideology that was used in ancient and imperial China to legitimize the rule of the King or Emperor of China. According to this doctrine, heaven (天, Tian) bestows its mandate on a virtuous ruler. This ruler, the Son of Heaven, was the supreme universal monarch, who ruled Tianxia (天下; “all under heaven”, the world). If a ruler was overthrown, this was interpreted as an indication that the ruler was unworthy and had lost the mandate. The Chinese concept of the legitimacy of rulers is similar to Western culture’s Divine right of kings.” ref

“In European Christianity, the divine right of kings, divine right, or God’s mandation, is a political and religious doctrine of political legitimacy of a monarchy. It is also known as the divine-right theory of kingship. Divine right has been a key element of the self-legitimisation of many absolute monarchies, connected with their authority and right to rule. Historically, many notions of rights have been authoritarian and hierarchical, with different people granted different rights and some having more rights than others. For instance, the right of a father to receive respect from his son did not indicate a right for the son to receive a return from that respect. Analogously, the divine right of kings, which permitted absolute power over subjects, provided few rights for the subjects themselves. The Imperial cult of ancient Rome identified Roman emperors and some members of their families with the “divinely sanctioned” authority (auctoritas) of the Roman State. The official offer of cultus to a living emperor acknowledged his office and rule as divinely approved and constitutional: his Principate should therefore demonstrate pious respect for traditional Republican deities and mores. Many of the rites, practices, and status distinctions that characterized the cult to emperors were perpetuated in the theology and politics of the Christianised Empire. The earliest references to kingship in Israel proclaim that “14 “When you come to the land that the Lord your God is giving you, and you possess it and dwell in it and then say, ‘I will set a king over me, like all the nations that are around me,’ 15 you may indeed set a king over you whom the Lord your God will choose. One from among your brothers you shall set as king over you. You may not put a foreigner over you, who is not your brother.” ref

Related concepts in other religions to the divine-right theory of kingship:

Mandate of Heaven and monarch as the Son of Heaven – Sinosphere
Madkhalism – Islam
Monarchs who are also deities:
- God emperors
- God kings
Sacred kings – the occupant of the monarchy gains religious significance or has support from a deity
- Cakravartin – South Asia ref

ref, ref, ref, ref

Kurgan Hypothesis

“The Kurgan hypothesis (also known as the Kurgan theory or Kurgan model) or Steppe theory is the most widely accepted proposal to identify the Proto-Indo-European homeland from which the Indo-European languages spread out throughout Europe and parts of Asia. It postulates that the people of a Kurgan culture in the Pontic steppe north of the Black Sea were the most likely speakers of the Proto-Indo-European language (PIE). The term is derived from the Russian kurgan (курга́н), meaning tumulus or burial mound. The Steppe theory was first formulated by Otto Schrader (1883) and V. Gordon Childe (1926), then systematized in the 1950s by Marija Gimbutas, who used the term to group various prehistoric cultures, including the Yamnaya (or Pit Grave) culture and its predecessors. In the 2000s, David Anthony instead used the core Yamnaya culture and its relationship with other cultures as a point of reference.” ref

“Gimbutas defined the Kurgan culture as composed of four successive periods, with the earliest (Kurgan I) including the Samara and Seroglazovo cultures of the Dnieper–Volga region in the Copper Age (early 4th millennium BCE). The people of these cultures were nomadic pastoralists, who, according to the model, by the early 3rd millennium BCE had expanded throughout the Pontic–Caspian steppe and into Eastern Europe. Recent genetics studies have demonstrated that populations bearing specific Y-DNA haplogroups and a distinct genetic signature expanded into Europe and South Asia from the Pontic-Caspian steppe during the third and second millennia BCE. These migrations provide a plausible explanation for the spread of at least some of the Indo-European languages, and suggest that the alternative Anatolian hypothesis, which places the Proto-Indo-European homeland in Neolithic Anatolia, is less likely to be correct.” ref

“Cultures that Gimbutas considered as part of the “Kurgan culture”:

Bug–Dniester (6th millennium)
Samara (5th millennium)
Khvalynsk (5th millennium)
Dnieper–Donets (5th to 4th millennia)
Sredny Stog (mid-5th to mid-4th millennia)
Maikop–Dereivka (mid-4th to mid-3rd millennia)
Yamnaya (Pit Grave): This is itself a varied cultural horizon, spanning the entire Pontic–Caspian steppe from the mid-4th to the 3rd millennium.
Usatovo culture (late 4th millennium)” ref

12,420-11,270 years ago Stone mace-head from Körtik Tepe 12,420-11,270 years ago ref, ref

11,520–10,520 years ago Stone mace heads – Two Hallan Cemi Turkey ref

10,320–8,020 years ago “in Mesopotamia, the earliest mace-heads can also be traced back to around this time, or equivalent to the PPN period (8300–6000 BCE). They are mostly ball-shaped or pear-shaped. Besides boulder and bronze materials, mace-heads were also made by chalcedony or glass, suggesting that they were in fact items of prestige goods. Some of the boulder mace-heads were carved with cuneiforms or figures and animal embossments on their surface.” ref “Mesopotamia occupies the area of present-day Iraq, and parts of Iran, Turkey, Syria, and Kuwait.” ref

9,020-8,020 years ago Calcite mace head Syria ref

8,520-7,720 years ago “Catal Hoyuk (starting more equalitarian, total occupation 9,120-7,720 years ago) signs of inequality begin to emerge. Skulls with depressed fractures in the head, dozens with similar wounds, all showing a consistent pattern of injury to the top back of the skull, but all of them were healed, not fatal injuries, perhaps to control members of the group, and/or to abduct outsiders as wives or slaves.” ref

“The skulls with this characteristic were found primarily in later levels of the site, when more independence and differentiation between households started to emerge. Speculations are that, with these inequalities potentially created new tensions among the community’s members, non-fatal violence may have been a means to keep everyone in check and prevent or diffuse full-fledged conflicts. “The head wounds, in a way, confirm the idea of a controlled society.” ref

8,020-7,020 years ago Can Hasan a copper mace-head ref, ref

“The mace head does not show any trace of having been used. That could indicate that it wasn’t so much a working weapon but a cult object or a status symbol.” ref

7,220 years ago – “Mersin, seaport, south-central Turkey, a planned and constructed fortress, steep mound crowned by a defensive wall, slit windows, and entered protected by flanking towers, containing evidence of military.” ref

6,520-4,920 years ago “stone macehead from a prehistoric site in northeastern Iran. Furthermore, the prehistoric pottery from this area, has close affinities with ceramic materials from Central Asia rather than with contemporary sites in Iran, meaning that in this period its inhabitants were likely culturally linked to their neighbors to the east. Indeed, a very similar stone mace head was excavated at Anau in Turkmenistan in 1904. Nishapur’s location on what later became known as the Great Khorasan Road suggests that it was part of the trade network that facilitated the import of precious stones such as lapis lazuli, carnelian, and turquoise from Central Asia to Mesopotamia.” ref

6,420-5,520 years ago “Earliest mace-heads from the Levant can also be traced back to around the PPN period.” ref

“The archaeological evidence available so far has revealed that the earliest mace-heads first appeared in the Near East about or before 10,000 years ago. along with the early development and spread of agriculture. After that mace-heads began to spread throughout the ancient world: southward to the Ancient Egypt Kingdom in North Africa, and northwest to Europe, and then to the Eurasian steppe of Central Asia and Siberia. Eventually, this movement gradually arrived at the Northwestern region of China. In China, mace-heads were found only in Xinjiang, Gansu, Qinghai, and Western Shaanxi in Northwestern Chine. In fact, the morphology of these objects is quite similar to those found outside China. The author assumes that maces, as they bear special and symbolic functions, are not the original or indigenous cultural trait of Chinese civilization. Instead, they are more likely to be exotic goods coming from outside. The author argues the reasons can be summarized as follow: first, mace-heads in the Near East significantly predate all counterparts in China. Second, the amounts of mace-heads found in China are relatively limited. Third, mace-head discoveries in China are concentrated only in the northwestern area, a pattern explicitly indicating the Western origin of this type of artifacts.” ref

The Chalcolithic Period (Copper Age)

“The transition from the Neolithic to the Chalcolithic phase of cultural evolution is thought to have taken place gradually in the late 7th millennium BCE. At most sites where its progress can be traced, no perceptible break occurs in the continuity of occupation, and there is little reason to assume any major ethnographic upheaval. Archaeologically, the most conspicuous innovation is the decoration of pottery with colored paint, a widespread development in western Anatolia. Late periods at Hacılar were characterized by the production of some of the most competently and attractively decorated pottery in prehistoric Anatolia, and in the subsequent middle phase of the Chalcolithic Period, polychrome wares were produced in south-central Anatolia and Cilicia. Village architecture of this period is undistinguished but provides evidence for the necessity of communal defense, which was accomplished by means of a circuit wall or—as in Hacılar—a continuous wall formed by the outside rear walls of contiguous houses. At Hacılar and Can Hasan, the heavy ground-floor chambers of these houses had no doorways and were evidently entered by ladders from a more fragile upper story. Improvements in architecture at this period, however, can be seen at Mersin, where one of its later phases is represented by a neatly planned and constructed fortress. The steeply revetted slope of the mound was crowned by a continuous defensive wall, pierced by slit windows, and entered through a gateway protected by flanking towers. Inside, there was formally arranged accommodation for the garrison and other evidence of military discipline as conceived in 5200 BCE.” ref

“Metallurgy was beginning to be understood, and copper was used for pins and simple implements. But there are occasional glimpses of a greater sophistication: a copper mace-head from Can Hasan, more developed tools and the first occurrence of silver at Beycesultan, and a stamp-seal in tin bronze at Mersin. Little is known about the late phase of the Chalcolithic Period; soundings into strata below settlements of the Early Bronze Age, which the period anticipates, indicate that in western and central Anatolia this late phase introduced simpler rectangular houses and dark burnished pottery with simple incised, jabbed, polished, or white-painted decoration.” ref

Ghassulian

“Ghassulian refers to a culture and an archaeological stage dating to the Middle and Late Chalcolithic Period in the Southern Levant (c. 4400 – c. 3500 BCE or 6,420-5,520 years ago). Its type-site, Teleilat Ghassul (Teleilat el-Ghassul, Tulaylat al-Ghassul), is located in the eastern Jordan Valley near the northern edge of the Dead Sea, in modern Jordan. The Ghassulian stage was characterized by small hamlet settlements of mixed farming peoples, who had immigrated from the north and settled in the southern Levant – today’s Jordan, Israel, and Palestine. People of the Beersheba Culture (a Ghassulian subculture) lived in underground dwellings – a unique phenomenon in the archaeological history of the region – or in houses that were trapezoid-shaped and built of mud-brick.” ref

“Those were often built partially underground (on top of collapsed underground dwellings) and were covered with remarkable polychrome wall paintings. Their pottery was highly elaborate, including footed bowls and horn-shaped drinking goblets, indicating the cultivation of wine. Several samples display the use of sculptural decoration or of a reserved slip (a clay and water coating partially wiped away while still wet). The Ghassulians were a Chalcolithic culture as they used stone tools but also smelted copper. Funerary customs show evidence that they buried their dead in stone dolmens and also practiced secondary burial.” ref

“Settlements belonging to the Ghassulian culture have been identified at numerous other sites in what is today southern Israel, especially in the region of Beersheba, where elaborate underground dwellings have been excavated. The Ghassulian culture correlates closely with the Amratian of Egypt and also seems to have affinities (e.g., the distinctive churns, or “bird vases”) with early Minoan culture in Crete.” ref

“It should be understood that the mace-head is more than a weapon. It is a unique object that has a ritual role symbolizing one’s authority and prestige. In Dorak, near the Marmara Coast, two magnificent tombs have been unearthed, and one was the final resting place of a local king. A mace mounted with a wooden handle was placed in his arms. The other tomb was a joint burial for a king and his queen. In this case, too, a mace with
a wooden handle was placed above each individual’s arm. The two tombs clearly reflected elite status as they were stacked with luxurious burial articles and date to 4,553–4,539 years ago.” ref

The End of Old Europe and the Rise of the Steppe

“By 4300–4200 BCE Old Europe was at its peak. The Varna cemetery in eastern Bulgaria had the most ostentatious funerals in the world, richer than anything of the same age in the Near East. Among the 281 graves at Varna, 61 (22%) contained more than three thousand golden objects together weighing 6 kg (13.2 lb). Two thousand of these were found in just four graves (1, 4, 36, and 43). Grave 43, an adult male, had golden beads, armrings, and rings totaling 1,516 grams (3.37 lb), including a copper ax-adze with a gold-sheathed handle. Golden ornaments have also been found in tell settlements in the lower Danube valley, at Gumelniţa, Vidra, and at Hotnitsa (a 310-gm cache of golden ornaments). A few men in these communities played prominent social roles as chiefs or clan leaders, symbolized by the public display of shining gold ornaments and cast copper weapons.” ref

“Thousands of settlements with broadly similar ceramics, houses, and female figurines were occupied between about 4500 and 4100 BCE in eastern Bulgaria (Varna), the upland plains of Balkan Thrace (KaranovoVI), the upper part of the Lower Danube valley in western Bulgaria, and Romania (Krivodol-Sălcuta), and the broad riverine plains of the lower Danube valley (Gumelniţa). Beautifully painted ceramic vessels, some almost 1 m tall and fired at temperatures of over 800˚C, lined the walls of their two-storied houses. Conventions in ceramic design and ritual were shared over large regions. The crafts of metallurgy, ceramics, and even flint working became so refined that they must have required master craft specialists who were patronized and supported by chiefs. In spite of this, power was not obviously centralized in any one village. Perhaps, as John Chapman observed, it was a time when the restricted resources (gold, copper, Spondylus shell) were not critical, and the critical resources (land, timber, labor, marriage partners) were not seriously restricted. This could have prevented any one region or town from dominating others.” ref

Mace (bludgeon)

“A mace is a blunt weapon, a type of club or virge that uses a heavy head on the end of a handle to deliver powerful strikes. A mace typically consists of a strong, heavy, wooden or metal shaft, often reinforced with metal, featuring a head made of stone, bone, copper, bronze, iron, or steel.” ref

“The mace was developed during the Upper Paleolithic from the simple club, by adding sharp spikes of flint or obsidian. In Europe, an elaborately carved ceremonial flint mace head was one of the artifacts discovered in excavations of the Neolithic mound of Knowth in Ireland, and Bronze Age archaeology cites numerous finds of perforated mace heads.” ref

“In ancient Ukraine, stone mace heads were first used nearly eight millennia ago. The others known were disc maces with oddly formed stones mounted perpendicularly to their handle. The Narmer Palette shows a king swinging a mace. See the articles on the Narmer Macehead and the Scorpion Macehead for examples of decorated maces inscribed with the names of kings.” ref

“The problem with early maces was that their stone heads shattered easily and it was difficult to fix the head to the wooden handle reliably. The Egyptians attempted to give them a disk shape in the predynastic period (about 3850–3650 BCE) in order to increase their impact and even provide some cutting capabilities, but this seems to have been a short-lived improvement.” ref

“A rounded pear form of mace head known as a “piriform” replaced the disc mace in the Naqada II period of pre-dynastic Upper Egypt (3600–3250 BCE) and was used throughout the Naqada III period (3250–3100 BCE). Similar mace heads were also used in Mesopotamia around 2450–1900 BCE. On a Sumerian Clay tablet written by the scribe Gar. Ama, the title Lord of the Mace is listed in the year 3100 BCE or 5,120 years ago. The Assyrians used maces probably about nineteenth-century BC and in their campaigns; the maces were usually made of stone or marble and furnished with gold or other metals, but were rarely used in battle unless fighting heavily armored infantry.” ref

“An important, later development in mace heads was the use of metal for their composition. With the advent of copper mace heads, they no longer shattered and a better fit could be made to the wooden club by giving the eye of the mace head the shape of a cone and using a tapered handle.” ref

“The Shardanas or warriors from Sardinia who fought for Ramses II against the Hittites were armed with maces consisting of wooden sticks with bronze heads. Many bronze statuettes of the times show Sardinian warriors carrying swords, bows, and original maces.” ref

R12 (cemetery) Sudan

“R12 is a middle Neolithic cemetery located in the Northern Dongola Reach on the banks of the Seleim Nile palaeochannel of modern day Sudan. The site is dated to between 5000 and 4000 BCE or 7,020-6,020 years ago. Centro Veneto di Studi Classici e Orientali excavated the site, within the concession of the Sudan Archaeological Research Society and after an agreement with it, between 2000 and 2003 over three digging seasons. The first was in 2000 and 33 graves were discovered. The second was in 2001 and another 33 graves were discovered. The third was in 2003 and the last 100 graves were discovered. There are 166 graves total at the site. Contents of the graves include ceramics, animal bones, grinding stones, human skeletons, and plant remains.” ref

“The R12 cemetery is held within a mound-like formation spanning 1400m2. The mound is 2.9 meters above the surface of the plain. The cemetery within the mound has an area of about 650m2. The mound is a layer of Nile silt on top of an irregular sandy deposit. Underneath these two layers is a regularly deposited silt layer. Over the past 7000 years, wind and water have eroded the mound causing it to have the morphology that it did before excavation. Because some of this wind and water eroded the lower part of the mound, some skeletal remains and artifacts breached the body of the mound. These processes of erosion did not affect the graves in the top of the mound. This made them easily detectable as compared to the graves at the lower part.” ref

Grave contents

“Some of the graves have filled with gravel or stones from processes of erosion. The graves were dug through the upper silt layer. Mud was placed on the walls of the grave to prevent falling sand. After the person was placed in the grave, they filled the grave with silt or small pebbles. The people buried in the graves were usually placed on their left side. The direction of the body was aligned with the cardinal directions. It appears that when new graves were dug, they cut into older graves. The graves often contained pottery, tools, bone spatulas, mammal bone perforators. Bodies were adorned with ivory bracelets, stone and ivory bangles, stone necklaces, lip plugs, and stone pendants. Graves also contained pebbles, beads, and marine shells. Children were buried with furniture or distinctive signs of family. These children seem to have had the same treatment as adults. This is a sign that status is attributed at birth.” ref

Pottery

“Ninety-five percent of the graves at R12 contain pottery. There are between one and nine pottery vessels in any given grave. At least 220 pottery vessels were found in total. Most of the pottery is made from fine sand temper and fired in an earthen kiln. Sometimes, the fine sand temper pottery contains mica. Other materials that the pottery could be partially made from are chaff, limestone splinters, and shells. The pottery was decorated and then smoother and polished. Some of the pottery had stripes and was so polished that it gained a metallic brightness. Red or black spots were found on some of the pottery. This was caused by oxidation or reduction processes. There is evidence that the pottery was not made for only funerary purposes. Many of the pots show signs of prolonged use over fire which shows that it was used many times before being placed in the graves. When a grave has more than one pot, they have similar or identical decorations. It is possible that this signifies that a certain group of people or family is associated with a decorative motif.” ref

Bowls

“Most of the pottery found are bowls. These bowls were mainly hemispherical and were either restricted (47%) or unrestricted (32.5%). A distinctive type of bowl at R12 is a composite contour bowl with a carinated profile with the upper body going from straight to concave. The bowls ranged from a height of 2 cm to over 14 cm. The bowls found in Period 1 of R12 are composite with a sinuous profile. These bowls also have a complex decorated motif of dot impressions. Bowls with a rising lug handle, small bowls with depressions on the rim, and small colanders were only found in children’s graves.” ref

Jars

“Another form of pottery found are jars (12.5%). They range in shape from ovoid to globular. The jars ranged from a height of 10 cm to over 40 cm. A jar with covered with ochre powder and a complex dot decoration was found.” ref

Caliciform beakers

“A third form of pottery found at R12 are caliciform beakers (8%). Sixteen complete beakers were found along with several fragments. Four different types of caliciform beakers were found at R12. The first type is decorated with wide horizontal bands. These bands are either dotted or are incised lines separated by undecorated bands. The internal rims had chains of hatched triangles. These caliciform beakers were between 20.6 cm and 33 cm in height.[2] The second type is decorated with hatched, oblique, regularly spaced bands covering the entire beaker. The rims are rounded on the inside and slightly flared out. The rims are decorated with clusters of dotted parallel lines. The third group of beakers have the same geometric pattern, rounded rim, rim decoration, and are between 18.4 cm and 21.5 cm tall. The fourth group of beakers are generally squat in shape and have thin horizontal bands with hatched dotted lines and rounded rims. The surface of the beakers are purposely imprecise, making the beakers seem less elegant than the other groups of beakers.” ref

Jewelry

“Most of the jewelry found at R12 are bead bracelets, necklaces, and stone pendants. There are also a few examples of stone bracelets and ear or lip plugs. Jewelry is present in 21.69% of the graves at R12. Jewelry was found in 11 male graves, 9 female graves, and 14 child graves. Jewelry is absent in graves of people over the age of 50. This could suggest that jewelry was only available to a certain group within the population.” ref

“Grave 92 included a bead-belt. Grave 60 contained a person wearing headband made out of ostrich eggshell beads. Thirteen bead blanks were found inside a shell in Grave 38. They were made from agate and quartz flakes reduced to a cylindrical shape. After this, they were polished and perforated. Other beads were made from ochre, amazonite, or ostrich eggshells. Amazonite beads were made into a teardrop shape. It seems that all beads buried in R12 graves were constructed by the same people that utilized the cemetery. Ochre beads had the most specialized production because they are the most regular in measurement.” ref

Bracelets and necklaces

“Fifteen bracelets were found at R12 across a total of nine graves. Forty necklaces were found at R12 across a total of 39 graves. Similar necklaces have been found at other Neolithic cemeteries in Nubia and Sudan. These bracelets and necklaces were made from various types of beads.” ref

Stone jewelry

“Pendants, bangles, and lip/ear plugs are the common forms of stone jewelry found at R12. The stone pendants were made of small elongated pebbles of agate, carnelian, quartz, white and variegated stones. Sometimes the pendants were used as bracelets. Similar pendants are found in other Neolithic cemeteries in Sudan and Nubia. Stone bangles are made from a white stone that has not been identified. They were worn on the upper arm. There are no other objects like them found in any other Neolithic cemetery and there is no evidence for how they were made. Three lip plugs and one possible ear plug were found at R12. The three lip plugs are made of zeolite and are angular with a conical extremity. They were found in two separate graves. The third lip plug was found on the surface. Grave 18 possibly had an ear plug. In general, lip and ear plugs are common in other Neolithic cemeteries in Sudan and Nubia. There is no evidence for how the ear and lip plugs were made.” ref

Ritual and social context

“Because the differing tools found at R12 is smaller than the actual amount of tools created by the people of R12, archaeologists can only make hypotheses about what the people were doing. It is also hard to tell which tools the people of R12 created and which tools were accumulated through trade. Even though the pottery at R12 shows change over the 600 active site years, the lithic assemblage does not. Most of the lithics seem to have been created for burial as they do not show signs of wear. Male and female graves contained lithics at significant percentages. This could mean that there was a somewhat equal division of labor.” ref

“Grave 38 is considered the richest grave excavated at R12 and contained an adult male buried with the set of bead blanks discussed previously, bone tools, three large bowls, a small jar, and 87 lithic pieces, making this grave have the largest amount of lithics. He also was wearing a bracelet made from pebbles and a necklace made from carnelian, agate, amazonite, and shell beads. The presence of lithics and other artifacts in this grave could represent wealth in terms of quantity and variety of materials.” ref

Axes

“There were 48 stone axes found from a total of 26 graves. The axes could have been used as an adze, for butchering, or as weapons. The axes at R12 are highly variable in length, width, and thickness. Because axes were found in male, female, and child graves, it is hard to tell social context of the axes.” ref

Mace-heads

“There were eight mace-heads were found at R12 within a total of seven graves. They were made from granite and pumice. The mace-heads made of pumice are the first ever found in Sudan. Six of the maces had a biconical shape, one had an ovoid shape, and one was disk-shaped with rising edges around the central hole. Mace-heads usually are a symbol of power. At R12, they only found in male and child graves. This possibly means that mace-heads have a social context and may only be associated with men or children.” ref

Stone palettes

“There were 50 stone palettes found at R12 within a total of 27 graves. They were usually made from sandstone or granite. The red and yellow staining on the sandstone palettes indicates that they were probably used to grind red and yellow ochre to make pigments. Peoples of R12 most likely used these pigments on themselves and animals as well as on the surface of pottery. The granite palettes were used to grind malachite and amazonite which are assumed to be used as pigments. The three different classes of stone palettes are rectangular, ellipsoidal, and irregular. Stone palettes are evenly represented in male, female, and child graves.” ref

“The spatial distribution of R12 gives insight to the social structure of the people who created the cemetery. Within the cemetery, there is no segregation between males and females nor between adults and children. Because there is roughly and equal number of males and females it is possible that R12 was a non-polygamous society.” ref

“Based on the artifacts found in the graves, the population has been split into three categories. The first category is people buried with no or few grave goods. This category comprises 68% of the population. Forty-three individuals buried at R12 have no grave goods. However, it is possible that erosion and human disturbances affected these graves, inflating the number of graves with no goods. The second category is people buried with a larger amount of grave goods. The third category is people buried with an even larger number of grave goods. As the number of objects in the grave increases, there are less graves. The third category comprises 20% of the population. The three categories could potentially signify a difference of wealth or rank. The distribution of objects, classes of objects, and presence and number of pottery are relatively the same.” ref

“However, social status is explained more by amount of items rather than quality of items. This supports the idea that there were three segmented groups in the population based on wealth. Wealth seems to be distributed equally between males and females. Because children were found with grave goods, it is possible that status was ascribed and that there was family status. The children found with mace heads could signify a symbol of their family or lineage authority. Some grave goods such as animal remains, axes, and grinding stones could signify that the people of R12 were hunting. The lithic industry and plant remains could signify agricultural activities. Shells signify trade and contact with the Red Sea area. Cattle, sheep, and goat breeding were definitely a significant part of the society. This is known from animal remains and frequency of bucrania. Based on this evidence, it is likely that this was a pastoralist society that engaged in some hunting practices as well.” ref

Gebel Ramlah

“Gebel Ramlah is a Neolithic site that is located in Egypt. It is known for its six pastoral cemeteries including the world’s oldest known infant cemetery. Dental samples of people at Gebel Ramlah and people at R12 were compared to see if there was any biological relatedness between these two groups of people. Teeth from 59 individuals from Gebel Ramlah were examined. Teeth from 50 individuals from R12 were examined. Teeth from both sites ranged in quality from poor to fair. Each tooth was evaluated under 36 different traits. Based on the traits of the teeth, it was concluded that people from Gebel Ramlah and people from R12 were not closely biologically related.” ref

“Even though there was no biological relation between these groups, they did share many cultural similarities. Objects found in graves at each site include pottery, ground stone, lithics, personal adornments, pigments, and animal remains. Both sites had similar pottery in the form of beakers. Even though there were these cultural similarities, there were also cultural differences. Bodies at Gebel Ramlah were placed on their right side in a flexed position, while bodies at R12 were placed on their left side.” ref

Unusual Neolithic Burials Unearthed in Egypt

“At a cemetery in Gebel Ramlah, an area of Egypt’s Western Desert near the border of Sudan, archaeologists led by Jacek Kabaciński of the Polish Academy of Sciences unearthed the 6,500-year-old burials of 60 adults. One of the graves contained the remains of two individuals. Deliberate cuts on the femur, which have not been seen in other Neolithic burials in North Africa, were found on one of these skeletons. Another unusual grave had been lined with stone slabs, and in a third burial, the team found the remains of a man whose body had been covered with pottery fragments, stones, and lumps of red dye. A fragment of a Dorcas gazelle skull with horns found near his head may have been a ceremonial headdress. This skeleton also showed signs of abnormal bone adhesions and fractures. According to a report in Science & Scholarship in Poland, Kabaciński and his team think this man may have performed rites associated with hunting. To read more about this period, go to “The Neolithic Toolkit.” ref

Who were the mysterious Neolithic people that enabled the rise of ancient Egypt?

“To many, ancient Egypt is synonymous with the pharaohs and pyramids of the Dynastic period starting about 3,100BCE. Yet long before that, about 9,300-4,000BCE, enigmatic Neolithic peoples flourished. Indeed, it was the lifestyles and cultural innovations of these peoples that provided the very foundation for the advanced civilizations to come.” ref

“Though not lush, the Neolithic was wetter than today, which allowed these ancient herders to populate what is now the middle of nowhere. We focus on the Final Neolithic (4,600-4,000BCE), which was built on the success of the Late Neolithic (5,500-4,650BCE) with domesticated cattle and goats, wild plant processing, and cattle burials. These people also made apparent megaliths, shrines, and even calendar circles—which look a bit like a mini Stonehenge.” ref

“During the final part of the Neolithic period, people started burying the dead in formal cemeteries. Skeletons provide critical information because they are from once-living people who interacted with the cultural and physical environments. Health, relationships, diet, and even psychological experiences can leave telltale signs on teeth and bone.” ref

“Three cemeteries from this era—the first in the western desert—where we uncovered and studied 68 skeletons. The graves were full of artifacts, with ornamental pottery, seashells, stone, and ostrich eggshell jewelry. We also discovered carved mica (a silicate mineral) and animal remains, as well as elaborate cosmetic tools for women and stone weapons for men. These people enjoyed low childhood mortality, tall stature, and long life. Men averaged 170cm, while women were about 160cm. Most men and women lived beyond 40 years, with some into their 50s—a long time in those days.” ref

“Strangely, in two more cemeteries, things were very different. After analyzing another 130 skeletons, we discovered that few artifacts accompanied them, and that they suffered from higher childhood mortality as well as shorter lives and stature. We’re talking several centimeters shorter and perhaps ten years younger for adults of both sexes. Astonishingly, the largest of these two cemeteries had a separate burial area for children under three years of age, but mostly infants including late-term fetuses. Three women buried with infants were also found, so perhaps they died in childbirth. In fact, this is the world’s earliest known infant cemetery.” ref

Interpreting the findings

“So what can this tell us about these peoples, let alone their descendants? As it turns out, a lot. We can use the findings to make interpretations about gender, life-stage, well-being, status, and other things. For example, why were there such differences between the two gravesites? They could have been separate populations, but it is unlikely based on overall physical similarities.” ref

“So perhaps they imply variation by status—with one graveyard being for the elite and the other for workers. This is the earliest such evidence in Egypt. The sites also shed light on the family structures of the time. The overall sex ratio across all cemeteries is three women to each man, which may indicate polygamy. However, the total number of burials and a lack of reference to individual houses suggests these were extended family cemeteries.” ref

“Also, believe that attainment of “personhood”—the age children are socialized into being “people” – was from three years, given their inclusion in adult cemeteries. There is also clear evidence of respect for previously buried people by later mourners reusing the graves to bury their dead. When coming across old skeletons, they often carefully repositioned the bones of these ancestors. In some interesting cases, they even made attempts to “reconstruct” the skeletons by replacing teeth that had fallen out back into the skeleton—and not always correctly (see lead image).” ref

“These behavioral indicators, together with the seemingly innovative technological and ceremonial architecture mentioned earlier, such as the calendar circles and shrines, imply a level of sophistication well beyond that of simple herders. Taken together, the findings provide a glimpse of things yet to come in Ancient Egypt.” ref

“Archaeologists at Gebel Ramlah refer to its Final Neolithic inhabitants as part of the Bunat El Asnan culture, individuals especially well known for their megalith constructions throughout the period. It is thought that the Bunat El Asnan people of the Gebel Ramlah region were trans-huming pastoralists. During the wet season they traveled to uplands where they could graze their cattle, while during the dry season they lived in permanent settlements on the paleo-lake. These individuals were some of the last to inhabit the Western Desert before drought and desertification finally intensified enough to drive them out. Some traveled up the Nile into northern Africa, potentially setting the stage for Ancient Egyptian civilizations. There are cultural elements found in the Final Neolithic of Gebel Ramlah which overlap with or are potential precursors for Ancient Egyptian elements, such as astronomical knowledge and the production of amulets. Additionally, it has been argued that the evidence for passive burial conservation in Gebel Ramlah cemeteries could be a precursor for Ancient Egyptian mummification, perhaps being based in similar protective beliefs.” ref

“Archaeology throughout in the Western Desert shows a wide span of Neolithic occupation, such as in Nabta Playa where early occupation dates back to 7500 BCE. Nabta Playa is just 20 kilometers northwest of Gebel Ramlah, and findings from the two regions are often compared. At Gebel Ramlah, the earliest known burials have been dated to the late Early Neolithic, around 6500 BCE. Burials dated to the Middle and Late Neolithic are scattered throughout the area as well. These are individual burials or sometimes burial clusters, predating the use of large-scale cemeteries in the region.” ref

“With its large and unusual cemetery sites, Gebel Ramlah is beneficial to archaeologists in understanding the use of funerary pottery within the Neolithic Western Desert region. However, some limitations are found in the relatively small amount of pottery excavated from the burial sites. An analysis of Gebel Ramlah’s pottery assemblage was done by Maria C. Gatto.” ref

“It appears that temper wasn’t intentionally added to the clay, which was also common practice in early Nubian and Egyptian ceramics. The high quality of local clay made temper unnecessary. Small sand particles and occasional shale fragments were likely already in the clay when it was collected. Clay is present within some nearby hills (including Gebel Ramlah itself), as are sand and shale similar to those found in the ceramics. Thus, Gatto hypothesizes that the pottery was made within or nearby Gebel Ramlah. Considering the consistent water supply needed for pottery work, this is potentially significant. During the Final Neolithic when this production was occurring, we know that the Gebel Ramlah paleo-lake was drying up and water was most likely becoming more limited.” ref

“Erosion on the pottery made certain analyses of shaping and design difficult, but comparative study has led archaeologists to believe that coiling and pinching techniques were used to form the vessels found at Gebel Ramlah, with potential paddle and anvil methods as well. The works were typically either smoothed or burnished. Some seem to have been coated with a thin layer of clay around the rim after being shaped, creating a black-topped outer layer once the vessel was fired.” ref

“The most elaborate vessels found at Gebel Ramlah’s burial sites are large, tulip-shaped (or caliciform) beakers, with wide flared rims. The beakers are typically decorated with geometric patterns, such as curved bands, triangles, and diamonds. Ripple and zigzag textures are commonly seen within these shapes. The caliciform beakers, as well as the black-topped ware discussed previously, are specifically characteristic of the later Egyptian Badarian culture, possibly indicating a connection. However, similar caliciform beakers have been discovered throughout Egypt and from various Neolithic phases.” ref

“Only around a fourth of the vessels found within Gebel Ramlah burial sites were caliciform beakers, produced specifically as funerary pieces. The rest were offerings that originally had a utilitarian purpose (mend holes indicate their previous use). These vessels include pots, bowls, jars, and cups. Many were medium-sized bowls- often more simply constructed than the elaborate funerary beakers. Notably, over half of the pre-used vessels were still decorated, typically with a ripple pattern. Gatto hypothesizes that perhaps decorated vessels held a greater significance and were more likely to be selected as funerary offerings. In different Gebel Ramlah cemetery sites, however, the percentages of funerary pieces, pre-used pieces, and decorated pieces differ.” ref

“Some of the intricate shapes and designs of Final Neolithic pottery at Gebel Ramlah differ greatly from even Late Neolithic productions of the region just before. In fact, pieces like the ripple-decorated caliciform beakers most closely resemble Nubian pottery. Gatto hypothesizes that, perhaps, individuals from farther out in the Nubian Nile valley were moving toward Gebel Ramlah and surrounding regions (where water sources were slightly more reliable) as water dwindled during the Final Neolithic. If true, these individuals may have introduced Gebel Ramlah populations to their own pottery styles and techniques (and vice versa).” ref

“Comparison with better studied Late and Final Neolithic sites in Nubia and Upper Egypt also helps to supplement for the minimal testing done on Gebel Ramlah Pottery. The analysis of pottery from sites such as Nabta Playa helped to form hypotheses concerning the impacts of different firing temperatures on the unique local clay used in these ceramics, as well as the formation of features such as the previously described black-topped layer.” ref

“Excavation at Gangu’ya Cemetery of Jiuquan, Gansu, found one boulder mace-head was uncovered in burial 44. These important discoveries attracted my attention and drew me to further investigate this question. Similar mace-heads had been discovered in earlier years before: Huoshaogou Cemetery of Yumen, Gansu; Ningjiazhuang site of Xihe County; Dadiwan site of Qin’an County; Qijiaping site of Guanghe County; Maojiaping site of Gangu County, Gansu Province; burial no. 13 at Zhu’yuan’gou, Baoji city; Bodong tomb of Fufeng County, Shaanxi. The material of these maceheads includes ceramic, jade, stone, and bronze. These items date the Yangshao Culture, which is equivalent to 5000 years ago, to the subsequent Majiayao Culturу (3000–2000 BCE), Qijia Culture (2300–1600 BCE), Siba Culture (1950–1550 BCE), Shajing Culture (1000–500 BCE) and up until the Zhou dynastic period (the first millennium BCE).” ref

“To the west of the Gansu Province in the Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region, there mace-heads are more commonly found. These sites include the Erdaogou site of Hami city, Xiaohe Cemetery of Ruoqiang County, Hongqijiqichang site of Qitai County, Sa’nsayi Cemetery of Urumchi, Ni’ya site of Minfeng County etc. The material of these mace-heads also includes jade, stone, and bronze, all dating to the Neolithic and Bronze Age (or possibly later).” ref

“One point must be clarified here. In scholarship, some Chinese scholars have mistaken mace-heads as daily-use tools or common weapons. But my analysis below demonstrates the function of mace-heads is not this case. But where did these Chinese mace head examples come from?” ref

“This is indeed a question of great importance and is worthwhile further investigation. The earliest mace head examples come from the Near East during the PPNA period. An early example is the stone mace head from the site of Hallan Cemi in Antolia, Turkey, dated to 9500–8500 BCE. Another contemporary example is the stone mace-head from Körtik Tepe. At Can Hasan a copper mace-head was unearthed dating to 5000 BCE – the earliest known metal mace-head discovered to date.” ref

“In Mesopotamia, some of the boulder mace-heads were carved with cuneiforms or figures and animal embossments on their surface. One white mace-head from the third Kingdom of Ur (2500 BCE) with cuneiforms on the surface saying ‘Consecrated to Goddess Shara’. Stylistically, this mace-head is quite similar to the one found in tomb no.44 at the Ganguya cemetery in Gansu, although the latter does not include any inscriptions.” ref

“The earliest mace-heads from the Levant can also be traced back to around the PPN period. A remarkable hoard was found in the cave of Nahal Mishmar to the west of the Dead Sea. The collection contained more than 400 metal objects, of which a fairly large amount was scepters and mace-heads. Some of these artifacts had handles, and some had crosses or figures of animal decorations made with the lost-wax casting technique. The casting of such objects required a high level of skill since the bronze was rich in arsenic and antimony-elements, according to scientific analysis. These artifacts date to the 4000 BCE.” ref

“As alluded to before, the mace-head is more than a weapon. It is a unique object that has a ritual role symbolizing one’s authority and prestige. In Dorak, near the Marmara Coast, two magnificent tombs have been unearthed, and one was the final resting place of a local king. A mace mounted with a wooden handle was placed in his arms. The other tomb was a joint burial for a king and his queen. In this case, too, a mace with a wooden handle was placed above each individual’s arm. The two tombs clearly reflected elite status as they were stacked with luxurious burial articles and date to 2553–2539 BCE.” ref

“At around 1000 BCE, the making and using of mace-heads had gradually become prevalent in the Near East, yet the bronze mace-heads still remained highly significant in the demonstration and legitimation of elite status and authority. The scene of kings and elites using mace was a common motif in Near Eastern and Mesopotamian art. Kings, aristocracy, and warriors are frequently found holding maces Akkadian, Assyrian, Babylonian, and Hittite stone artwork. The undefeatable image of these iconographies is so clear and prominent that the political propaganda message behind these artworks can be easily identified even though our modern eyes.” ref

“One of the areas where the largest number of maces has been discovered is the Ancient Egyptian Kingdom in Northern Africa. In the Nubian kingdom in the Upper Nile, mace-heads have been found dating to the Late Neolithic period (4000 BCE), and are probably the first North Africa mace-head example. As early as the Pre-dynastic period (before 3050 BCE), maces were already quite widespread. There were three different types
of mace-heads in ancient Egypt: 1) shuttle-shaped with two points; 2) circle slice-shaped, wider on the top but dwindled at the bottom 3) and pear-shaped or ball-shaped (same as which were found in China).” ref

“All mace-head types in ancient Egypt could be mounted through a hole in their center. Several mace-heads were carved with enlaced decorative designs of relief and papilla on their surface, and all were made with fine and scarce materials. It is important to point out that these three types of mace-heads were all found in the Levant before they are known in Egypt.” ref

“Mace-heads are prominently displayed in Egyptian artwork and their use is clearly depicted in paintings, sculptures, and other artworks. The earliest case is found on the wall-painted tomb in Hierakonpolis during the Pre-dynastic period, in which a warrior (identified as the King) waving a mace at a trussed captive was depicted. This theme – depicting conquerors striking bound captives with a mace – then became a common motif in Egyptian artwork and can be found on painted murals, stone carvings, and ceramic labels. Perhaps the most famous example of these depictions is the one found on the Narmer Palette, which was also unearthed at Hierakonpolis. It is 63 centimeters high with double-faced anaglyphs.” ref

“The palette commemorates King Narmer’s victory against northern foes and marks, for many, the beginning of First Egyptian Kingdom. One side of the palette shows King Narmer, wearing the white crown of Upper Egypt and holding a mace about to strike a captive kneeling on the ground. The other is separated into three parts: two huge monstrous animals intertwined with each other in the middle part and the conquering images both in the upper and lower columns. The upper column shows King Narmer, wearing the red crown of Lower Egypt and holding a mace inspecting two lines of beheaded and bound captives as he is accompanied by his subordinates.” ref

“In the famous tomb of Pharaoh Tutankhamun, two luxuriant gold-plated statues measuring 190 centimeters in length with a golden mace in their hands were unearthed. Some scholars have suggested that these statues depict the King Tutankhamun himself.” ref

“Mace-heads are less known in Europe since much fewer examples have been unearthed. Between the Dnepr River and Don River, at the North bank of the Azov Sea, a number of mace-heads have been found in burial contexts belonging to the Skelya Culture (4550–3000 BCE). These are probably the earliest mace-head examples in Europe identified so far. A white stone mace-head is exhibited in the European section at the Anthropology Museum of Cambridge University of England. This mace-head dates to the second millennium BCE, and is from the Tisza Valley which stretches from Hungary to Yugoslavia.” ref

“A number of bronze mace-heads from the Tli burial ground located at the south piedmont of Caucasia Mountains have been found as well. The mace-heads were round or elliptical: some were cast, and there are four to five strumae-like or spiral shell-shaped protruding nubs on the surface, an element not only for decoration but also for enhancing attacking ability; some carved with horses, fish, snakes, birds and tiger-eating-people designs. The design of these artifacts demonstrates an extraordinary artistic style.” ref

“One mace-head of this type with five strumae-shaped nubs is morphologically close to the one with four goat heads unearthed at the Huoshaogou Cemetery of Yumen, Gansu, and the one from burial no.13 of Zhuyuangou, Baoji city, China. Similar mace-heads were also discovered at Borodino hoard of Moldavia and the tomb of King Dorak, near the Marmara Coast, dating from about the same time.” ref

Central Asian mace-head examples are mostly dated to the Bronze Age period. At the Bactrian-Margiana Culture (2000–1800 BCE) of Uzbekistan, boulder or bronze mace-heads were unearthed (Sarianidi 1981). In the Sintashta Valley of South Ural, archaeologists from the former Soviet Union have excavated one site belonging to the Sintashta-Petrovka Culture. At this site a passel of boulder mace-head was unearthed, which was mainly round and elliptical and quite similar to the counterpart in Northwestern China. Dating to roughly 2000 BCE they are contemporary to the Chinese early examples as well.” ref

“The archaeological evidence available so far has revealed that the earliest mace-heads first appeared in the Near East about 10000 years ago. along with the early development and spread of agriculture. After that mace-heads began to spread throughout the ancient world: southward to the Ancient Egypt Kingdom in North Africa, and northwest to Europe, and then to the Eurasian steppe of Central Asia and Siberia. Eventually, this movement gradually arrived at the Northwestern region of China.” ref

“Mace-heads were a special artifact for the display of status and symbolized authority limited to noble and elite warrior classes. The discoveries in Dorak showed that only the kings were qualified to use maces. In Ancient Egypt and the Near East, a large number of carvings representing mace-head holders have confirmed the unique functions of maces. One can argue that this tradition persisted and last even today and was illustrated by British beefeaters as well as Ukrainian and Argentinian president guards.” ref

“This unique social function of mace heads was maintained when they were introduced to China. For example, of the 167 excavated tombs at Xiaohei in Xinjiang, only one mace head was uncovered in the largest tomb in the cemetery. Similarly, among the 107 tombs excavated in Gangu’ya Cemetery of Jiuquan, Gansu, there was only one contained mace-head. Also, the burial articles in this tomb were more prestige than those in the whole cemetery. Similarly, among the 306 tombs excavated in Huoshaogou Cemetery, only 10 mace-heads were unearthed.” ref

“In China, mace-heads were found only in Xinjiang, Gansu, Qinghai, and Western Shaanxi in Northwestern China. In fact, the morphology of these objects is quite similar to those found outside China. Thus we can assume that maces, as they bear special and symbolic functions, are not the original or indigenous cultural trait of Chinese civilization. Instead, they are more likely to be exotic goods coming from outside. As I argued before, the reasons can be summarized as follow: first, mace-heads in the Near East significantly predate all counterparts in China. Second, the amounts of mace-heads found in China are relatively limited. Third, mace-head discoveries in China are concentrated only in the northwestern area, a pattern explicitly indicating the western origin of this type of artifact.” ref

“Right upon its arrival, mace-heads seemed to generate a deep impact in northwest China along the Great Wall. From an archaeological perspective, however, the Central Plains, or known as the core-zone of ancient Chinese civilization, did not accept this exotic cultural trait at all, which was clearly demonstrated by the sporadic discoveries in Shaanxi and western Henan. Instead, the core-zone of ancient Chinese civilization had developed a system using fu and yue axes as symbols of authority and power from its very beginning. More importantly, this case study shows that for a given ethnic group or community, the acceptance and adoption of certain exotic cultural practices will be highly selective and within certain limitation. The understanding of this issue can not only shed insight on history but also disclose an essential aspect in social reality.” ref

“The introduction of mace-heads in China also provides important lines of information on cultural interaction and exchange between the East and West. First, it provides inarguable evidence documenting some of the earliest interactions before 5000 years ago. In fact, the mace-heads is just one of the many artifacts in the package from the West that were adopted in China during this period (e.g., sheep goat metallurgy, wheat, etc.). The impacts that each element had imposed on different parts of Western China through cultural contact varied widely in term of the scale and scope. In addition, the fact that the most frequent interaction through mace-heads took place in China around the second millennium BCE – the period overlapped with the rise of the royal dynasty of ancient China – should be seen as more than merely a coincidence. Perhaps there are some deep historical factors that made this interaction inevitable. Indeed, more research and scholarship on this matter is necessary.” ref

“History also proves that regional interaction played a dynamic role in stimulating the early development of different human societies, cultures, cities, and states. In addition, the continued investigation of newly excavated archaeological materials will significantly benefit the development of a deeper understanding of the processes by which ancient civilizations have evolved.” ref

Varna culture

“The Varna culture belongs to the later Neolithic of northeastern Bulgaria, dated ca. 4400-4100 BCE. It is contemporary and closely related with Gumelnița in southern Romania, often considered as local variants. It is characterized by polychrome pottery and rich cemeteries, the most famous of which are Varna Necropolis, the eponymous site, and the Durankulak complex, which comprises the largest prehistoric cemetery in southeastern Europe, with an adjoining coeval Neolithic settlement (published) and an unpublished and incompletely excavated Chalcolithic settlement.” ref

“294 graves have been found in the necropolis, many containing sophisticated examples of copper and gold metallurgy, pottery (about 600 pieces, including gold-painted ones), high-quality flint and obsidian blades, beads, and shells. The site was accidentally discovered in October 1972 by excavator operator Raycho Marinov. Research excavation was under the direction of Mihail Lazarov and Ivan Ivanov. About 30% of the estimated necropolis area is still not excavated.” ref

“The findings showed that the Varna culture had trade relations with distant lands, possibly including the lower Volga region and the Cyclades, perhaps exporting metal goods and salt from the Provadiya rock salt mine. The copper ore used in the artifacts originated from a Sredna Gora mine near Stara Zagora, and Mediterranean spondylus shells found in the graves may have served as primitive currency.” ref

“Burials at Varna have the oldest human-modified gold artifacts in history jewelry. There are crouched and extended inhumations. Some graves do not contain a skeleton, but grave gifts (cenotaphs). The symbolic (empty) graves are the richest in gold artifacts. 3000 gold artifacts were found, with a weight of approximately 6 kilograms. Grave 43 contained more gold than has been found in the entire rest of the world for that epoch. Three symbolic graves contained masks of unfired clay.” ref

“The weight and the number of gold finds in the Varna cemetery exceeds by several times the combined weight and number of all of the gold artifacts found in all excavated sites of the same millenium, 5000-4000 BC, from all over the world, including Mesopotamia and Egypt.” ref

“The culture had sophisticated religious beliefs about the afterlife and developed hierarchical status differences: it constitutes the oldest known burial evidence of an elite male. The end of the fifth millennium BC is the time that Marija Gimbutas, founder of the Kurgan hypothesis claims the transition to male dominance began in Europe. The high-status male was buried with remarkable amounts of gold, held a war ax or mace, and wore a gold penis sheath. The bull-shaped gold platelets perhaps also venerated virility, instinctive force, and warfare. Gimbutas holds that the artifacts were made largely by local craftspeople.” ref

“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, desertification, or epidemics. 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 Indo-European cultural traits.” ref

Western Steppe Herders

(Proto-Indo-Europeans)

“In archaeogenetics, the term Western Steppe Herders (WSH), or Western Steppe Pastoralists, is the name given to a distinct ancestral component first identified in individuals from the Eneolithic steppe around the turn of the 5th millennium BCE, subsequently detected in several genetically similar or directly related ancient populations including the Khvalynsk, Sredny Stog, and Yamnaya cultures, and found in substantial levels in contemporary European and South Asian populations. This ancestry is often referred to as Yamnaya Ancestry, Yamnaya-Related Ancestry, Steppe Ancestry, or Steppe-Related Ancestry.” ref

“Western Steppe Herders are considered descended from Eastern Hunter-Gatherers (EHGs) who reproduced with Caucasus Hunter-Gatherers (CHGs), and the WSH component is analyzed as an admixture of EHG and CHG ancestral components in roughly equal proportions, with the majority of the Y-DNA haplogroup contribution from EHG males. The Y-DNA haplogroups of Western Steppe Herder males are not uniform, with the Yamnaya culture individuals mainly belonging to R1b-Z2103 with a minority of I2a2, the earlier Khvalynsk culture also with mainly R1b but also some R1a, Q1a, J, and I2a2, and the later, high WSH ancestry Corded Ware culture individuals mainly belonging to haplogroup R1b in the earliest samples, with R1a-M417 becoming predominant over time.” ref

“Around 3,000 BCE, people of the Yamnaya culture or a closely related group, who had high levels of WSH ancestry with some 10-18% Early European Farmer (EEF) admixture, embarked on a massive expansion throughout Eurasia, which is considered to be associated with the dispersal of at least some of the Indo-European languages by most contemporary linguists, archaeologists, and geneticists. WSH ancestry from this period is often referred to as Steppe Early and Middle Bronze Age (Steppe EMBA) ancestry. The modern population of Europe can largely be modeled as a mixture of WHG (Western Hunter-Gatherer), EEF, and WSH. In Europe, WSH ancestry peaks among Norwegians (ca. 50%) according to Haak et al. (2015), while in South Asia it peaks among the Kalash people (ca. 50%) according to Lazaridis et al. (2016). Narasimhan et al. (2019), however, found it at a lower level (ca. 30%) among the Kalash.” ref

“This migration is linked to the origin of both the Corded Ware culture, whose members were of about 75% WSH ancestry, and the Bell Beaker (“Eastern group”), who were around 50% WSH ancestry, though the exact relationships between these groups remains uncertain. The expansion of WSHs resulted in the virtual disappearance of the Y-DNA of Early European Farmers (EEFs) from the European gene pool, significantly altering the cultural and genetic landscape of Europe. During the Bronze Age, Corded Ware people with admixture from Central Europe remigrated onto the steppe, forming the Sintashta culture and a type of WSH ancestry often referred to as Steppe Middle and Late Bronze Age (Steppe MLBA) or Sintashta-Related ancestry. Through the Andronovo culture and Srubnaya culture, Steppe MLBA was carried into Central Asia and South Asia along with Indo-Iranian languages, leaving a long-lasting cultural and genetic legacy.” ref

ref

Damien Marie AtHope’s Art

ref, ref, ref, ref, ref

ref

Research Shows Indo-European Languages Originated in Turkey (2012)

“The Indo-European languages belong to one of the widest spread language families of the world. For the last two millennia, many of these languages have been written, and their history is relatively clear. But controversy remains about the time and place of the origins of the family. The majority view in historical linguistics is that the homeland of Indo-European is located in the Pontic steppes – present-day Ukraine – around 6,000 years ago. The evidence for this comes from linguistic paleontology: in particular, certain words to do with the technology of wheeled vehicles are arguably present across all the branches of the Indo-European family; and archaeology tells us that wheeled vehicles arose no earlier than this date. The minority view links the origins of Indo-European with the spread of farming from Anatolia 8,000-9,500 years ago. The team’s innovative Bayesian phylogeographic analysis of Indo-European linguistic and spatial data, including basic vocabulary data from 103 ancient and contemporary Indo-European languages, decisively supports this theory. The linguists report their results in a paper in the journal Science.” ref

ref

ref

Damien Marie AtHope’s Art

ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref

Dnieper–Donets culture

“The Dnieper–Donets culture (ca. 5th—4th millennium BCE) was a Mesolithic and later Neolithic culture which flourished north of the Black Sea ca. 5000-4200 BCE. It has many parallels with the Samara culture, and was succeeded by the Sredny Stog culture. There are parallels with the contemporaneous Samara culture to the north. Striking similarities with the Khvalynsk culture and the Sredny Stog culture have also been detected. A much larger horizon from the upper Vistula to the lower half of Dnieper to the mid-to-lower Volga has therefore been drawn. Influences from the Dnieper–Donets culture and the Sredny Stog culture on the Funnelbeaker culture have been detected. An origin of the Funnelbeaker culture from the Dnieper–Donets culture has been suggested, but this is very controversial. The Dnieper–Donets culture was contemporary with the Bug–Dniester culture. It is clearly distinct from the Cucuteni–Trypillia culture.” ref

“From around 5200 BCE, the Dnieper-Donets people began keeping cattle, sheep, and goats. Other domestic animals kept included pigs, horses, and dogs. During the following centuries, domestic animals from the Dnieper further and further east towards the Volga–Ural steppes, where they appeared ca. 4700-4600 BCE. From about 4200 BCE, the Dnieper–Donets culture adopted agriculture. Domestic plants that have been recovered include millet, wheat, and pea. Evidence from skeletal remains suggest that plants were consumed. The presence of exotic goods in Dnieper-Donets graves indicates exchange relationships with the Caucasus. In later times the deceased in the Dnieper–Donets culture were sometimes buried individually. This shift has been suggested as evidence of a shift towards increasing individualism. Dnieper–Donets burials have been found near the settlement of Deriivka, which is associated with the Sredny Stog culture.” ref

“Certain Dnieper-Donets burials are accompanied with copper, crystal or porphyry ornaments, shell beads, bird-stone tubes, polished stone maces or ornamental plaques made of boar’s tusk. The items, along with the presence of animal bones and sophisticated burial methods, appear to have been a symbol of power. Certain deceased children were buried with such items, which indicates that wealth was inherited in Dnieper-Donets society. Very similar boar-tusk plaques and copper ornament have been found at contemporary graves of the Samara culture in the middle Volga area. Maces of a different type than those of Dnieper-Donets have also been found. The wide adoption of such a status symbol attests to a change in the politics of power. The physical remains recovered from graves of the Dnieper–Donets culture have been classified as “Proto-Europoid“, with large and more massive features than the gracile Mediterranean peoples of the Balkan Neolithic. Males averaged 172 cm in height, which is much taller than contemporary Neolithic populations. Its rugged physical traits are thought to have genetically influenced later Indo-European peoples.” ref

“Dnieper-Donets pottery was initially pointed-based, but in later phases flat-based wares emerge. Their pottery is completely different from those made by the nearby Cucuteni–Trypillia culture. The importance of pottery appears to have increased throughout the existence of the Dnieper–Donets culture, which implies a more sedentary lifestyle. The early use of typical point base pottery interrelates with other Mesolithic cultures that are peripheral to the expanse of the Neolithic farmer cultures. The special shape of this pottery has been related to transport by logboat in wetland areas. Especially related are Swifterbant in the Netherlands, Ellerbek and Ertebølle in Northern Germany and Scandinavia, “Ceramic Mesolithic” pottery of Belgium and Northern France (including non-Linear pottery such as La Hoguette, Bliquy, Villeneuve-Saint-Germain), the Roucadour culture in Southwest France and the river and lake areas of Northern Poland and Russia.” ref

“In accordance with the Kurgan hypothesis, J. Mallory (1997) suggested that the Dnieper-Donets people were Pre–Indo-European-speakers who were absorbed by Proto-Indo-Europeans expanding westwards from steppe-lands further east. David Anthony (2007) believes that the Dnieper-Donets people almost certainly spoke a different language from the people of the Cucuteni–Trypillia culture. The areas of the upper Dniester in which the Dnieper–Donets culture was situated have mostly Baltic river names. That and the close relationship between the Dnieper–Donets culture and contemporary cultures of northeast Europe have caused the Dnieper–Donets culture to be identified with the later Balts. The precise role of the culture and its language to the derivation of the Pontic-Caspian cultures, such as Sredny Stog and Yamnaya culture, is open to debate, but the display of recurrent traits points to longstanding mutual contacts or to underlying genetic relations.” ref

DNA of Bronze Age Proto-Indo-Europeans

“The so-called Kurgan hypothesis, which postulates that the Proto-Indo-European (PIE) language arose in the Pontic steppe. During the Yamna period, one of the world’s first Bronze Age cultures, Proto-Indo-European speakers migrated west towards Europe and east towards Central Asia, then South Asia, spreading with them the Indo-European languages spoken today in most of Europe, Iran, and a big part of the Indian subcontinent. The Kurgan model is the most widely accepted scenario of Indo-European origins. Most linguists agree that PIE may have been spoken as a single language (before divergence began) around 3500 BCE, which coincides with the beginning of the Yamna culture in the Pontic-Caspian steppe, and of the related Maykop culture in the northwest Caucasus. .” ref

“There is now compelling genetic evidence that haplogroups R1a and R1b, the most common paternal lineages in Europe, Central Asia, and parts of South Asia, were mainly propagated by the Indo-European migrations during the Bronze Age. A sizeable part of European maternal lineages also seem to be of Indo-European origin, although the proportion varies a lot across Europe, but generally correlating to a large extent with the proportion of Y-haplogroups R1a and R1b. Other paternal lineages, such as G2a3b, J2b2, and T1a, are thought to have spread the Copper Age from the Balkans to modern Ukraine, then to have been absorbed by the expansion of R1a and R1b people respectively from central Russia (Volga basin) and southern Russia (Kuban, northwest Caucasus).” ref

“The first PIE expansion into Europe was the Corded Ware culture, which so far have yielded only R1a samples. R1b is thought to have invaded the Balkans, then followed the Danube until Germany, from where it spread to western Europe and Scandinavia. The Asian branch originated around the Volga basin, then expanded across the Urals with the Sintashta culture, then over most of Central Asia and southern Siberia.” ref

“In the Chalcolithic (5,022-4,022 years ago), a series of complex cultures developed that would give rise to the peninsula’s first civilizations and to extensive exchange networks reaching to the Baltic, Middle East, and North Africa. Around 4,822 – 4,722 years ago, the Beaker culture, which produced the Maritime Bell Beaker, probably originated in the vibrant copper-using communities of the Tagus estuary in Portugal and spread from there to many parts of western Europe.” ref

“R1b is the most common haplogroup in Western Europe, reaching over 80% of the population in Ireland, the Scottish Highlands, western Wales, the Atlantic fringe of France, the Basque country, and Catalonia. It is also common in Anatolia and around the Caucasus, in parts of Russia, and in Central and South Asia. Besides the Atlantic and North Sea coast of Europe, hotspots include the Po valley in north-central Italy (over 70%), Armenia (35%), the Bashkirs of the Urals region of Russia (50%), Turkmenistan (over 35%), the Hazara people of Afghanistan (35%), the Uyghurs of North-West China (20%) and the Newars of Nepal (11%). R1b-V88, a subclade specific to sub-Saharan Africa, is found in 60 to 95% of men in northern Cameroon.” ref

“The oldest forms of R1b (M343, P25, L389) are found dispersed at very low frequencies from Western Europe to India, a vast region where could have roamed the nomadic R1b hunter-gatherers during the Ice Age. The three main branches of R1b1 (R1b1a, R1b1b, R1b1c) all seem to have stemmed from the Middle East. The southern branch, R1b1c (V88), is found mostly in the Levant and Africa. The northern branch, R1b1a (P297), seems to have originated around the Caucasus, eastern Anatolia, or northern Mesopotamia, then to have crossed over the Caucasus, from where they would have invaded Europe and Central Asia. R1b1b (M335) has only been found in Anatolia/Turkey.” ref

Neolithic cattle herders

“It has been hypothesized that R1b people (perhaps alongside neighboring J2 tribes) were the first to domesticate cattle in northern Mesopotamia some 10,500 years ago. R1b tribes descended from mammoth hunters, and when mammoths went extinct, they started hunting other large game such as bisons and aurochs. With the increase of the human population in the Fertile Crescent from the beginning of the Neolithic (starting 12,000 years ago), selective hunting and culling of herds started replacing indiscriminate killing of wild animals. The increased involvement of humans in the life of aurochs, wild boars, and goats led to their progressive taming. Cattle herders probably maintained a nomadic or semi-nomadic existence, while other people in the Fertile Crescent (presumably represented by haplogroups E1b1b, G and T) settled down to cultivate the land or keep smaller domesticates.” ref

“The analysis of bovine DNA has revealed that all the taurine cattle (Bos taurus) alive today descend from a population of only 80 aurochs. The earliest evidence of cattle domestication dates from circa 8,500 BCE in the Pre-Pottery Neolithic cultures in the Taurus Mountains. The Taurus Mountains (Turkish: Toros Dağları), are a mountain complex in southern Turkey, separating the Mediterranean coastal region of southern Turkey from the central Anatolian Plateau. The two oldest archaeological sites showing signs of cattle domestication are the villages of Çayönü Tepesi in southeastern Turkey and Dja’de el-Mughara in northern Iraq, two sites only 250 km away from each others. This is presumably the area from which R1b lineages started expanding – or in other words the “original homeland” of R1b.” ref, ref

“The early R1b cattle herders would have split in at least three groups. One branch (M335) remained in Anatolia, but judging from its extreme rarity today wasn’t very successful, perhaps due to the heavy competition with other Neolithic populations in Anatolia, or to the scarcity of pastures in this mountainous environment. A second branch migrated south to the Levant, where it became the V88 branch. Some of them searched for new lands south in Africa, first in Egypt, then colonizing most of northern Africa, from the Mediterranean coast to the Sahel. The third branch (P297), crossed the Caucasus into the vast Pontic-Caspian Steppe, which provided ideal grazing grounds for cattle. They split into two factions: R1b1a1 (M73), which went east along the Caspian Sea to Central Asia, and R1b1a2 (M269), which at first remained in the North Caucasus and the Pontic Steppe between the Dnieper and the Volga. It is not yet clear whether M73 actually migrated across the Caucasus and reached Central Asia via Kazakhstan, or if it went south through Iran and Turkmenistan.” ref

“In any case, M73 would be a pre-Indo-European branch of R1b, just like V88 and M335. R1b-M269 (the most common form in Europe) is closely associated with the diffusion of Indo-European languages, as attested by its presence in all regions of the world where Indo-European languages were spoken in ancient times, from the Atlantic coast of Europe to the Indian subcontinent, which comprised almost all Europe (except Finland, Sardinia, and Bosnia-Herzegovina), Anatolia, Armenia, European Russia, southern Siberia, many pockets around Central Asia (notably in Xinjiang, Turkmenistan, Tajikistan, and Afghanistan), without forgetting Iran, Pakistan, northern India, and Nepal. The history of R1b and R1a are intricately connected to each others.” ref

The British Isles’ introduction of Farming around 7,000 years ago began Radical Change

“The British Isles have been populated by human beings for hundreds of thousands of years, but it was the introduction of farming around 7,000 years ago that began a process of radical change. Over the millennia there were phases of extreme cold, when large areas of Britain were covered in ice, followed by warmer times. Around 10,000 years ago, the latest ice age came to an end. Sea levels rose as the ice sheets melted, and Britain became separated from the European mainland shortly before 8,000 years ago. The people living on the new islands of Britain were descendants of the first modern humans, or Homo sapiens, who arrived in northern Europe around 30,000 – 40,000 years ago. Like their early ancestors, they lived by hunting and gathering. The introduction of farming, when people learned how to produce rather than acquire their food, is widely regarded as one of the biggest changes in human history. This change happened at various times in several different places around the world. The concept of farming that reached Britain between about 7,000 – 6,500 years ago had spread across Europe from origins in Syria and Iraq between about 13,000 -11,000 years ago.” ref

“So the majority of early farmers were probably Mesolithic people who adopted the new way of life and took it with them to other parts of Britain. This was not a rapid change – farming took about 2,000 years to spread across all parts of the British Isles. The ‘Neolithic revolution according to radiocarbon dates, shows that the transition from hunter-gatherer to farmer was relatively gradual. We know, for example, that hunters in the Mesolithic ‘managed’ or tended their quarry. They would make clearings in woodland around sources of drinking water, and probably made efforts to see that the herds of deer and other animals they hunted were not over-exploited.” ref

“The switch from managed hunting to pastoral farming was not a big change. The first farmers brought the ancestors of cattle, sheep, and goats with them from the continent. Domestic pigs were bred from wild boars, which lived in the woods of Britain. Neolithic farmers also kept domesticated dogs, which were bred from wolves. It is probable that the earliest domesticated livestock were allowed to wander, and may be tended by a few herders. Sheep, goats, and cattle are fond of leaves and bark, and pigs snuffle around roots. These domestic animals may have played a major role in clearing away the huge areas of dense forest that covered most of lowland Britain.” ref

The Dnieper–Donets culture between 7,800/7,200 to 6,400/6,200 years ago, steppe and forest-steppe areas north of the Black Sea

5th—4th millennium BCE Dnieper–Donets culture and East Eurasian lineages (of C haplogroup, like C4a related to Tungusic peoples of Siberia) in ancient mtDNA from the North Pontic Region

Damien Marie AtHope’s Art

ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref

Damien Marie AtHope’s Art

ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref

Trialetian culture (16,000–8000 years ago) the Caucasus, Iran, and Turkey, likely involved in Göbekli Tepe. Migration 1?

Haplogroup R possible time of origin about 27,000 years in Central Asia, South Asia, or Siberia:

Mal’ta–Buret’ culture (24,000-15,000 years ago)
Afontova Gora culture (21,000-12,000 years ago)
Trialetian culture (16,000–8000 years ago)
Samara culture (7,000-6,500 years ago)
Khvalynsk culture (7,000-6,500 years ago)
Afanasievo culture (5,300-4,500 years ago)
Yamna/Yamnaya Culture (5,300-4,500 years ago)
Andronovo culture (4,000–2,900 years ago) ref

Trialetian sites

Caucasus and Transcaucasia:

Edzani (Georgia)
Chokh (Azerbaijan), layers E-C200
Kotias Klde, layer B” ref

Eastern Anatolia:

Hallan Çemi (from ca. 8.6-8.5k BC to 7.6-7.5k BCE)
Nevali Çori shows some Trialetian admixture in a PPNB context” ref

Trialetian influences can also be found in:

Cafer Höyük
Boy Tepe” ref

Southeast of the Caspian Sea:

Hotu (Iran)
Ali Tepe (Iran) (from cal. 10,500 to 8,870 BCE)
Belt Cave (Iran), layers 28-11 (the last remains date from ca. 6,000 BCE)
Dam-Dam-Cheshme II (Turkmenistan), layers7,000-3,000 BCE)” ref

Damien Marie AtHope’s Art

ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref

Damien Marie AtHope’s Art

ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref

Damien Marie AtHope’s Art

ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref

Damien Marie AtHope’s Art

ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref

Fertile Crescent

Anatolia and the Levant

“There is no perceptible break in cultural continuity between the beginning and the end of the Anatolian Chalcolithic. However, certain gaps and discontinuities observed in many regions and periods, usually attributed to lack of adequate research, coupled with relevant changes in local cultures, point to a shift of the previous east–west influence to (at least partially) a west–east direction of innovations in certain Anatolian sites.” ref

“In general, this period of the 6^th millennium BCE shows thus the existence of wide communication systems, with continuity of previous traditions but with the introduction of foreign decoration techniques. Shortly before 5500 BCE, a number of changes can already be seen in the Fikirtepe groups around the Bosporus (mainly settled on its eastern part), which point to a connection with the Vinča culture in the Southern Balkan region. In the Lake District, ‘vinčoid’ pottery is observed postdating the Fikirtepe tradition: it belongs to the dark-faced monochrome group, but there is some decoration with motifs in the stab-and-drag technique. Similar material is found in neighbouring regions.” ref

“During the 5^th millennium BCE, in the Middle Chalcolithic, a period of significant cultural development emerges. Near the western coast, Ubaid influence is noticed in urban plans and in pottery typical of the Halaf/Ubaid transitional period. In the Cappadocian margin of the Anatolian Plateau, which showed monochrome pottery decorated with different techniques in the Early Chalcolithic, the site of Gelvery-Güzelyurt shows pottery with swirling designs, executed in a stab-and-drag technique, which represents Balkan influences in the 4^th millennium BCE.” ref

“To the north, Late Chalcolithic İkiztepe (ca. 4500–4000 BCE) shows striking parallels with early to middle 4^th millennium BCE assemblages from the southern Balkans. This culture shows increasingly strong typological connections with materials further inland. While pottery traits point to continuity of traditions, notable innovations in shapes and decoration point to a koiné that encompasses most of Anatolia, the northern Aegean, and the southern Balkans. This period, since the early 5^th millennium BCE, coincides with the evidence of the production and consumption of metals, either simple metal artefacts (flat axes, pins, awls) or as crucibles or slag.” ref

“In south-east Anatolia, the Halafian ‘heartland’ developed since the 6^th millennium BCE, from its previous small or very small communities to large settlements which represented regional centres in a two- or three-tiered settlement hierarchies, with sedentary farming as the main subsistence economy, although cattle maintained its relevance for this originally semi-nomadic culture based on pastoral herding.” ref

“Close contacts and interaction between Halaf and Ubaid from Southern Mesopotamia had already been ongoing for a millennium, and possibly a crisis caused by its demographic and geographical expansion led the culture to a different organisation system. From about 4700 BCE, though, Ubaid influence is increased in northern Mesopotamia, across a broad east–west arc. Southern Mesopotamian communities seem to have moved northwards, given the sudden social and cultural change in certain sites, first in the northern border, then in the Upper Euphrates.” ref

“A transformation began which eventually led to the disappearance of the way of life of the Halaf communities: new material culture, with new types of domestic architecture, village arrangements, public buildings, pottery, and other daily life objects; new economy, with less varied and more agriculturally-orientated production system; and a new social structure with sedentary population, a society that ceased to be egalitarian, family and not clan as the basic social unit, and emerging elites. The hybridisation of the two cultures produced innovations that spread in a southern direction, too.” ref

“Farther south, the Levant Late Chalcolithic shows burial customs, artefacts and motifs with an origin in earlier Neolithic traditions in Anatolia and northern Mesopotamia. Characteristic of this culture are the secondary burials in ossuaries with iconographic and geometric designs. Artistic expressions have been related to northern regions related to finds, ideas, and later religious concepts, such as the gods Inanna and Dumuzu. The knowledge and resources required to produce metallurgical artefacts in the Levant have also been hypothesised to come from the north.” ref

Caucasus and Mesopotamia

“The Chalcolithic in the Caucasus begins with foreign contacts from eastern Anatolia and Mesopotamia through the Taurus Mountains, giving rise to a new social and economic network ranging from the south-eastern Caucasus to the Kuban region in the steppe. The Maikop culture is thus the dominant northern Caucasian tradition, known from its extremely wealthy tomb assemblages, and probably born out of an indigenous group with distant economic connections to the south. The pre-Maikop phase appears in sites like Nal’chik and Meshoko in the late 5^th and early 4^th millennium BCE.” ref

“Characteristic features of the Maikop culture include the adoption of barrow burials, shifting settlements on elevated positions—on foothills overlooking a river valley, but avoiding rugged highlands—with short occupations, abundance of metalwork, and widespread connections with the Near East and Europe. The greatest concentration of settlements occurs in the north-west, around the Kuban River system. The eastern half of the northern Caucasus, judging by the hundreds of Pit-Grave burials, belonged to the steppe cultures. The spread of the Pit-Grave building tradition in pre-Maikop is likely related to the expansion of Khvalynsk settlers into the neighbouring region (see §IV.2.3. Kurgans), but the southern burials—including small, mud-brick burial chambers, possibly reflecting an idealised house—have also been linked to central Asian and northern Iranian influence, which would have been added to the exotic imports of turquoise, silver, gold, carnelian, lapis lazuli, and cotton.” ref

“The southern Caucasus Chalcolithic groups are distinguished from Neolithic cultures by a more flexible lifestyle, reflected in varying modes of occupation (from permanent villages to seasonal camps, from open plains to caves); a capacity to benefit from resources across a wide range of environmental zones, including at higher altitudes; diverse subsistence strategies, incorporating wine-making; external networks, based on a flow of commodities; and advancement of metallurgy.” ref

“The Chaff-Faced Ware horizon forms part of a tradition that reached from the north Syrian and Mesopotamian plains through the middle part of the Araxes Valley and Azerbaijan to north-western Iran, known in the Fertile Crescent as Amuq F. It is found in the first half of the 4^th millennium BCE, with Azerbaijan showing slightly earlier dates. This is a homogeneous culture that reflects standardisation and technological simplification. In the later periods of the culture (as well as in north-west Iran), the influence of the Ubaid tradition of Upper Mesopotamia can be seen in ornamentation.” ref

“Connections with the Neolithic, evident in the earlier period with circular dwellings furnished with a central hearth, disappear later on (after ca. 4300 BCE) as small, multi-roomed rectangular structures appear, with an evolving social structure, heavy exploitation of tree fruits, and more complex wine production industry. Single or multiple pit–graves with barrow burials are the standard, with the deceased in a flexed position with no preference as to side, showing the start of the ‘sacrificial’ metals in assemblages, possibly to strengthen the kinship-related social status.” ref

“The Sioni horizon is a local, imprecisely defined culture based on ceramics found in south-eastern Caucasus and on the Iranian side of the middle Araxes Valley, as well as in easternmost Anatolia. Its early phase is dated ca. 4800–4000 BCE, and its late stage ca. 4000–3200 BCE. Sites are characterised by flat settlements with variable building tradition. It probably emerged as local communities moved away from the alluvial plain into the foothills, as they were able to exploit a wider range of resources and pastures. Pottery has relatively few forms and a limited range of ornamentation, and their lithic technology is difficult to reconstruct.” ref

Late Middle Easterners

“Chalcolithic peoples from Hajji Firuz in north-western Iran (ca. 6000–5700 BCE) and from Seh Gabi in eastern Iran (ca. 4800–3800 BCE) can be modelled as a mixture of western Iran Neolithic with significant contributions from a CHG-like population (ca. 63%) and the Levant (ca. 20%), becoming thus more ‘western’, consistent with their shift in the PCA. In Anatolia, the low genetic diversity of early Middle Eastern farmers during the early Neolithic was broken by a wave of ‘eastern’ ancestry from Iran Chalcolithic (ca. 33%), which eventually reached south-eastern Europe before at least ca. 3800 BCE. These migrants brought also J-M304 lineages—typical of Caucasus and eastern Iranian populations—to the late Neolithic central and western Anatolia.” ref

“This ‘eastern’ ancestry may have been caused by interactions between central Anatolia and the Fertile Crescent in the late Pre-Pottery Neolithic B, a migration related to other interregional exchanges, or admixture among local populations. The Tepecik-Çiftlik site’s presumed role as an obsidian hub, and its cultural links with the Levant, might have started already before the Pottery Neolithic.” ref

“Although traditionally associated with an east–west movement of peoples, it could well represent the opposite direction, thus including expanding Anatolian-speaking peoples through northern Anatolia, from the west to the central part. Later samples from Bronze Age south-western Anatolia (ca. 2800–1800 BCE) show this ‘eastern’ contribution of CHG-related ancestry, but lacking steppe-related EHG and WHG ancestry.” ref

“The Chalcolithic population from Areni in modern Armenia (ca. 4350–3500 BCE) also shows similar components to neighbouring Anatolian and Iranian Chalcolithic samples, but with a different distribution: Anatolia Neolithic (ca. 52%), Iran Neolithic (ca. 30%) and EHG (c. 18%). This, coupled with the different haplogroup found, L1a1-M27 (formed ca. 15000 BCE, TMRCA ca. 6100 BCE), points to a different population in the southern Caucasus Piedmont. The appearance of mtDNA hg. H2a1 and U4a (more typical of the Pontic–Caspian steppes) among these samples, as well as their position closer to steppe populations, speaks in favour of female exogamy.” ref

“Before the emergence of the classical Maikop culture, the three sampled Caucasus Eneolithic individuals of Darkveti-Meshoko from Unakozovskaya, in the north-west Caucasus Piedmont (ca. 4600–4300 BCE), present a genetic profile similar to Iranian Chalcolithic samples, with predominant haplogroup J2a-M410, possibly both J2a1a1a2b2a3b1a-Y11200 (formed ca. 5900 BCE, TMRCA ca. 5800 BCE). This increased assimilation of Chalcolithic individuals from Iran, Anatolia, and Armenia is in accordance with the Neolithisation of the Caucasus, which started in the floodplains of the great rivers of the southern Caucasus in the 6^th millennium BCE, from where it spread to the western and north-western Caucasus during the 5^th millennium BCE.” ref

“Haplogroup J2a2-L581⁺(formed ca. 14100 BCE, TMRCA 13100 BCE) also appears in one sample from Seh Gabi (ca. 4700 BCE), and hg. J2b-M12 in two samples from Hajji Firuz (ca. 6050–5850 BCE), with hg. G2a1a-Z6553 (ca. 5750 BCE) and G1a1b-GG313⁺ (ca. 3900 BCE) in Seh Gabi pointing to a mixture of these haplogroups since the sampled Iran Neolithic individuals, compatible with a migration wave of J2a2-L581 lineages connecting the northern and southern Caucasus regions ca. 5500–4500 BCE. This haplogroup is also found later in Anatolian Bronze Age samples and in Old Hittites.” ref

“Samples of the Late Chalcolithic in the southern Levant, from the Peqi’in Cave (ca. 4500–3900 BCE), attributed to the Ghassulian period (Figure), can be modelled as deriving ancestry from local Levant Neolithic peoples (ca. 57%), Iran Chalcolithic (ca. 26%), and Anatolian Neolithic (ca. 26%), suggesting the spread of Iranian agriculturalists into the Levant. They overlap in the PCA with a cluster containing Neolithic Levantine samples, shifted slightly toward Levant Bronze Age samples. Their prevalent Y-DNA haplogroup, probably in twelve of thirteen samples reported, is T1a1a1b2-CTS2214 (formed ca. 6700 BCE, TMRCA ca. 6700 BCE), with only one sample of E1b1b1b2-Z830 subclade, also suggesting an important population replacement in the region.” ref

Damien Marie AtHope’s Art

ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref

Damien Marie AtHope’s Art

ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref

Damien Marie AtHope’s Art

ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref

Damien Marie AtHope’s Art

ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref

ref

Damien Marie AtHope’s Art

ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref

By day the LORD went ahead of them in a pillar of cloud to guide them on their way and by night in a pillar of fire to give them light, so that they could travel by day or night.

By day the “Bible God” was in a cloud pillar.
By night the “Bible God” was in a fire pillar.

107958435_880793549110806_2433665730960652836_o

Damien Marie AtHope’s Art

ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref

Damien Marie AtHope’s Art

ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref

Damien Marie AtHope’s Art

ref, ref, ref, ref

Damien Marie AtHope’s Art

ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref

Proto-Indo-European mythology

Sumerian religion/ Mesopotamian mythology

Egyptian mythology

Greek mythology

Hindu mythology

Buddhist mythology

Horses in warfare

“The first evidence of horses in warfare dates from Eurasia between 4000 and 3000 BCE or around 5,000 years ago. Horses were well suited to the warfare tactics of the nomadic cultures from the steppes of Eastern Europe and Central Asia. Several cultures in East Asia made extensive use of cavalry and chariots. A Sumerian illustration of warfare from 2500 BCE or around 4,500 years ago depicts some type of equine pulling wagons. By 1600 BCE or around 3,600 years ago, improved harness and chariot designs made chariot warfare common throughout the Ancient Near East, and the earliest written training manual for war horses was a guide for training chariot horses written about 1350 BCE or around 3,350 years ago. As formal cavalry tactics replaced the chariot, so did new training methods, and by 360 BCE or around 2,360 years ago, the Greek cavalry officer Xenophon had written an extensive treatise on horsemanship. The effectiveness of horses in battle was also revolutionized by improvements in technology, such as the invention of the saddle, the stirrup, and the horse collar.” ref

“A chariot is a type of cart driven by a charioteer, usually using horses to provide rapid motive power. The oldest known chariots have been found in burials of the Sintashta culture in modern-day Chelyabinsk Oblast, Russia, dated to c. 1950–1880 BCE or around 3,950 to 3,880 years ago, and are depicted on cylinder seals from Central Anatolia in Kültepe dated to c. 1900 BCE or around 3,900 years ago. The critical invention that allowed the construction of light, horse-drawn chariots was the spoked wheel. The chariot was a fast, light, open, two-wheeled conveyance drawn by two or more equids (usually horses) that were hitched side by side, and was little more than a floor with a waist-high guard at the front and sides. It was initially used for ancient warfare during the Bronze and Iron Ages, but after its military capabilities had been superseded by light and heavy cavalries, chariots continued to be used for travel and transport, in processions, for games, and in races. There is a vase showing a warrior riding a chariot pulled by a horse, from southeastern Iran, c. 2000–1800 BCE or around 4,000 to 3,800 years ago.” ref

“The invention of the wheel used in transportation most likely took place in the European Pontic Steppes of modern-day Russia, Ukraine, Romania, and Bulgaria. Evidence of wheeled vehicles appears from the mid 4th millennium BC near-simultaneously in the Northern Caucasus (Maykop culture), and in Central Europe. These earliest vehicles may have been ox carts. A necessary precursor to the invention of the chariot is the domestication of animals, and specifically domestication of horses – a major step in the development of civilization. Despite the large impact horse domestication has had in transport and communication, tracing its origins has been challenging. Evidence supports horses having been domesticated in the Eurasian Steppes, with studies suggesting the Botai culture in modern-day Kazakhstan were the first, about 3500 BCE or around 5,500 years ago. Others say horses were domesticated earlier than 3500 BCE in Eastern Europe (modern Ukraine and Western Kazkhstan), 6000 years ago.” ref

“The spread of spoke-wheeled chariots has been closely associated with early Indo-Iranian migrations. The earliest known chariots have been found in Sintashta culture burial sites, and the culture is considered a strong candidate for the origin of the technology, which spread throughout the Old World and played an important role in ancient warfare. It is also strongly associated with the ancestors of modern domestic horses, the DOM2 population (DOM2 horses originated from the Western Eurasia steppes, especially the lower Volga-Don, but not in Anatolia, during the late fourth and early third millennia BCE. Their genes may show selection for easier domestication and stronger backs). These Aryan people migrated southward into South Asia, ushering in the Vedic period around 1750 BCE or around 3,750 years ago. Shortly after this, about 1700 BCE, evidence of chariots appears in Turkey/Asia-Minor.” ref

“The earliest fully developed spoke-wheeled horse chariots are from the chariot burials of the Andronovo (Timber-Grave) sites of the Sintashta-Petrovka Proto-Indo-Iranian culture in modern Russia and Kazakhstan from around 2000 BCE or around 4,000 years ago. This culture is at least partially derived from the earlier Yamna culture. It built heavily fortified settlements, engaged in bronze metallurgy on an industrial scale, and practiced complex burial rituals reminiscent of Hindu rituals known from the Rigveda and the Avesta. Over the next few centuries, the Andronovo culture spread across the steppes from the Urals to the Tien Shan, likely corresponding to the time of early Indo-Iranian cultures.” ref

“Chariots figure prominently in Indo-Iranian mythology. Chariots are also an important part of both Hindu and Persian mythology, with most of the gods in their pantheon portrayed as riding them. The Sanskrit word for a chariot is rátha- (m.), which is cognate with Avestan raθa- (also m.), and in origin a substantiation of the adjective Proto-Indo-European *rot-h₂-ó- meaning “having wheels”, with the characteristic accent shift found in Indo-Iranian substantivisations. This adjective is in turn derived from the collective noun *rot-eh₂- “wheels”, continued in Latin rota, which belongs to the noun *rót-o- for “wheel” (from *ret- “to run”) that is also found in Germanic, Celtic and Baltic (Old High German rad n., Old Irish roth m., Lithuanian rãtas m.). Nomadic tribes of the Pontic steppes, like Scythians such as Hamaxobii, would travel in wagons, carts, and chariots during their migrations.” ref

“The oldest testimony of chariot warfare in the ancient Near East is the Old Hittite Anitta text (18th century BCE), which mentions 40 teams of horses (in the original cuneiform spelling: 40 ṢÍ-IM-TI ANŠE.KUR.RA^ḪI.A) at the siege of Salatiwara. Since the text mentions teams rather than chariots, the existence of chariots in the 18th century BCE is uncertain. The first certain attestation of chariots in the Hittite empire dates to the late 17th century BCE (Hattusili I). A Hittite horse-training text is attributed to Kikkuli the Mitanni (15th century BCE).” ref

“The Hittites (in Turkey) were renowned charioteers. They developed a new chariot design that had lighter wheels, with four spokes rather than eight, and that held three rather than two warriors. It could hold three warriors because the wheel was placed in the middle of the chariot and not at the back as in Egyptian chariots. Typically one Hittite warrior steered the chariot while the second man was usually the main archer; the third warrior would either wield a spear or sword when charging at enemies or hold up a large shield to protect himself and the others from enemy arrows.” ref

“Hittite prosperity largely depended on their control of trade routes and natural resources, specifically metals. As the Hittites gained dominion over Mesopotamia, tensions flared among the neighboring Assyrians, Hurrians, and Egyptians. Under Suppiluliuma I, the Hittites conquered Kadesh and, eventually, the whole of Syria. The Battle of Kadesh in 1274 BCE or around 3,274 years ago is likely to have been the largest chariot battle ever fought, involving over 5,000 chariots. Models of single-axled, solid wheeled, ox-drawn vehicles, have been found at several mature Indus Valley cites, such as Chanhudaro, Daimabad, Harappa, and Nausharo, and are depicted in second millennium BCE Chalcolithic rock art, of the region.” ref

“Spoked-wheeled, horse drawn, chariots, often carrying an armed passenger, are depicted in second millennium BCE Chalcolithic period rock paintings. Examples are known from Chibbar Nulla, Chhatur Bhoj Nath Nulla, and Kathotia. There are some depictions of chariots among the petroglyphs in the sandstone of the Vindhya range. Two depictions of chariots are found in Morhana Pahar, Mirzapur district. One depicts a biga and the head of the driver. The second depicts a quadriga, with six-spoked wheels, and a driver standing up in a large chariot box. This chariot is being attacked. One figure, who is armed with a shield and a mace, stands in the chariot’s path; another figure, who is armed with a bow and arrow, threatens the right flank. It has been suggested (speculated) that the drawings record a story, most probably dating to the early centuries BCE, from some center in the area of the Ganges–Yamuna plain into the territory of still Neolithic hunting tribes. The very realistic chariots carved into the Sanchi stupas are dated to roughly the 1st century.” ref

“Bronze Age solid-disk wheel carts were found in 2018 at Sinauli, which were interpreted by some as horse-pulled “chariots,” predating the arrival of the horse-centered Indo-Aryans. They were ascribed by Sanjay Manjul, director of the excavations, to the Ochre Coloured Pottery culture (OCP)/Copper Hoard Culture, which was contemporaneous with the Late Harappan culture, and interpreted by him as horse-pulled chariots. Majul further noted that “the rituals relating to the Sanauli burials showed close affinity with Vedic rituals, and stated that “the dating of the Mahabharata is around 1750 BCE.” According to Asko Parpola these finds were ox-pulled carts, indicating that these burials are related to an early Aryan migration of Proto-Indo-Iranian speaking people into the Indian subcontinent, “forming then the ruling elite of a major Late Harappan settlement.” ref

Chariot Introduction in religion

“Horse-drawn chariots, as well as their cult and associated rituals, were spread by the Indo-Iranians, and horses and horse-drawn chariots were introduced in India by the Indo-Aryans. In Rigveda, Indra is described as strong willed, armed with a thunderbolt, riding a chariot:

May the strong Heaven make thee the Strong wax stronger: Strong, for thou art borne by thy two strong Bay Horses. So, fair of cheek, with mighty chariot, mighty, uphold us, strong-willed, thunder armed, in battle. — RigVeda, Book 5, Hymn XXXVI: Griffith” ref

“Among Rigvedic deities, notably the Vedic Sun God Surya rides on a one spoked chariot driven by his charioteer Aruṇa. Ushas (the dawn) rides in a chariot, as well as Agni in his function as a messenger between gods and men. The Jain Bhagavi Sutra states that Indian troops used a chariot with a club or mace attached to it during the war against the Licchavis during the reign of Ajatashatru of Magadha.” ref

Chariot Introduction in the Near East

“Chariots were introduced in the Near East in the 17(18)th–16th centuries BCE. Some scholars argue that the horse chariot was most likely a product of the ancient Near East early in the 2nd millennium BCE. Archaeologist Joost Crouwel writes that “Chariots were not sudden inventions, but developed out of earlier vehicles that were mounted on disk or cross-bar wheels. This development can best be traced in the Near East, where spoke-wheeled and horse-drawn chariots are first attested in the earlier part of the second millennium BC…” and were illustrated on a Syrian cylinder seal dated to either the 18th or 17th century BCE.” ref

“Maykop culture: “Starokorsunskaya kurgan in the Kuban region of Russia contains a wagon grave (or chariot burial) of the Maikop Culture (which also had horses). The two solid wooden wheels from this kurgan have been dated to the second half of the fourth millennium. Soon thereafter the number of such burials in this Northern Caucasus region multiplied.” According to Christoph Baumer, the earliest discoveries of wheels in Mesopotamia come from the first half of the third millennium BCE – more than half a millennium later than the first finds from the Kuban region. At the same time, in Mesopotamia, some intriguing early pictograms of a sled that rests on wooden rollers or wheels have been found. They date from about the same time as the early wheel discoveries in Europe and may indicate knowledge of the wheel.” ref

“The earliest depiction of vehicles in the context of warfare is on the Standard of Ur in southern Mesopotamia, c. 2500 BCE. These are more properly called wagons which were double-axled and pulled by oxen or a hybrid of a donkey and a female onager, named Kunga in the city of Nagar which was famous for breeding them. The hybrids were used by the Eblaite, early Sumerian, Akkadian, and Ur III armies. Although sometimes carrying a spearman with the charioteer (driver), such heavy wagons, borne on solid wooden wheels and covered with skins, may have been part of the baggage train (e.g., during royal funeral processions) rather than vehicles of battle in themselves. The Sumerians had a lighter, two-wheeled type of cart, pulled by four asses, and with solid wheels. The spoked wheel did not appear in Mesopotamia until the mid second millennium BCE.” ref

Chariot Introduction in Ancient Canaan and Israel

“Chariots are frequently mentioned in the Hebrew Tanakh and the Greek Old Testament, respectively, particularly by the prophets, as instruments of war or as symbols of power or glory. First mentioned in the story of Joseph (Genesis 50:9), “Iron chariots” are mentioned also in Joshua (17:16, 18) and Judges (1:19,4:3, 13) as weapons of the Canaanites and Israelites. 1 Samuel 13:5 mentions chariots of the Philistines, who are sometimes identified with the Sea Peoples or early Greeks.” ref

“Examples from The Jewish Study Bible of the Tanakh (Jewish Bible) include:

Isaiah 2:7 Their land is full of silver and gold, there is no limit to their treasures; their land is full of horses, there is no limit to their chariots.
Jeremiah 4:13 Lo, he [I.e., the invader of v. 7.] ascends like clouds, his chariots are like a whirlwind, his horses are swifter than eagles. Woe to us, we are ruined!
Ezekiel 26:10 From the cloud raised by his horses dust shall cover you; from the clatter of horsemen and wheels and chariots, your walls shall shake−when he enters your gates as men enter a breached city.
Psalms 20:8 They [call] on chariots, they [call] on horses, but we call on the name of the LORD our God.
Song of Songs 1:9 I have likened you, my darling, to a mare in Pharaoh’s chariots.” ref

“Examples from the King James Version of the Christian Bible include:

2 Chronicles 1:14 And Solomon gathered chariots and horsemen: and he had a thousand and four hundred chariots, and twelve thousand horsemen, which he placed in the chariot cities, and with the king at Jerusalem.
Judges 1:19 And the LORD was with Judah; and he drave out the inhabitants of the mountain; but could not drive out the inhabitants of the valley, because they had chariots of iron.
Acts 8:37–38 Then Philip said, “If you believe with all your heart, you may.” And he answered and said, “I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God.” So he commanded the chariot to stand still. And both Philip and the eunuch went down into the water, and he baptized him.” ref

“Small domestic horses may have been present in the northern Negev before 3000 BCE or around 5,000 years ago. Jezreel (city) has been identified as the chariot base of King Ahab. And a decorated bronze tablet thought to be the head of a lynchpin of a Canaanite chariot was found at a site that may be Sisera‘s fortress Harosheth Haggoyim.” ref

Chariot Introduction in Egypt

Chariot use made its way into Egypt around 1650 BCE or around 3,650 years ago during the Hyksos invasion of Egypt and establishment of the fourteenth dynasty. In 1659 BCE the Indo-European Hittites sacked Babylon, which demonstrated the superiority of chariots in antiquity. The chariot and horse were used extensively in Egypt by the Hyksos invaders from the 16th century BCE onwards, though discoveries announced in 2013 potentially place the earliest chariot use as early as Egypt’s Old Kingdom (c. 2686–2181 BCE). In the remains of Egyptian and Assyrian art, there are numerous representations of chariots, which display rich ornamentation. The chariots of the Egyptians and Assyrians, with whom the bow was the principal arm of attack, were richly mounted with quivers full of arrows. The Egyptians invented the yoke saddle for their chariot horses in c. 1500 BCE or around 3,500 years ago. As a general rule, the Egyptians used chariots as mobile archery platforms; chariots always had two men, with the driver steering the chariot with his reins while the main archer aimed his bow and arrow at any targets within range. The best-preserved examples of Egyptian chariots are the four specimens from the tomb of Tutankhamun. Chariots can be pulled by two or more horses.” ref

“As David W. Anthony writes in his book The Horse, the Wheel, and Language, in Eastern Europe, the earliest well-dated depiction of a wheeled vehicle (a wagon with two axles and four wheels) is on the Bronocice pot (c. 3500 BCE or around 5,500 years ago). It is a clay pot excavated in a Funnelbeaker settlement in Swietokrzyskie Voivodeship in Poland. The oldest securely dated real wheel-axle combination in Eastern Europe is the Ljubljana Marshes Wheel (c. 3150 BCE or around 5,150 years ago). The Trundholm sun chariot is dated to c. 1400 BCE or around 3,400 years ago (see: Nordic Bronze Age). The horse drawing the solar disk runs on four wheels, and the Sun itself on two. All wheels have four spokes. The “chariot” comprises the solar disk, the axle, and the wheels, and it is unclear whether the sun is depicted as the chariot or as the passenger. Nevertheless, the presence of a model of a horse-drawn vehicle on two spoked wheels in Northern Europe at such an early time is astonishing. In addition to the Trundholm chariot, there are numerous petroglyphs from the Nordic Bronze Age that depict chariots. One petroglyph, drawn on a stone slab in a double burial from c. 1000 BCE or around 3,000 years ago, depicts a biga with two four-spoked wheels. The use of the composite bow in chariot warfare is not attested in northern Europe.” ref

Chariot Introduction in Greece

“The later Greeks of the first millennium BCE had a (still not very effective) cavalry arm (indeed, it has been argued that these early horseback riding soldiers may have given rise to the development of the later, heavily armed foot-soldiers known as hoplites), and the rocky terrain of the Greek mainland was unsuited for wheeled vehicles. The chariot was heavily used by the Mycenaean Greeks, most probably adopted from the Hittites, around 1600 BCE or around 3,600 years ago. Linear B tablets from Mycenaean palaces record large inventories of chariots, sometimes with specific details as to how many chariots were assembled or not (i.e. stored in modular form).On a gravestone from the royal Shaft-grave V in Mycenae dated LH II (about 1500 BCE or around 3,500 years ago), there is one of the earliest depictions of the chariot in Achaean art. This sculpture shows a single man driving a two-wheeled small box chariot. Later the vehicles were used in games and processions, notably for races at the Olympic and Panathenaic Games and other public festivals in ancient Greece, in hippodromes, and in contests called agons. They were also used in ceremonial functions, as when a paranymph, or friend of a bridegroom, went with him in a chariot to fetch the bride home.” ref

“Herodotus (Histories, 5. 9) Reports that chariots were widely used in the Pontic–Caspian steppe by the Sigynnae. Greek chariots were made to be drawn by two horses attached to a central pole. If two additional horses were added, they were attached on each side of the main pair by a single bar or trace fastened to the front or prow of the chariot, as may be seen on two prize vases in the British Museum from the Panathenaic Games at Athens, Greece, in which the driver is seated with feet resting on a board hanging down in front close to the legs of the horses. The biga itself consists of a seat resting on the axle, with a rail at each side to protect the driver from the wheels. Greek chariots appear to have lacked any other attachment for the horses, which would have made turning difficult.” ref

“The body or basket of the chariot rested directly on the axle (called beam) connecting the two wheels. There was no suspension, making this an uncomfortable form of transport. At the front and sides of the basket was a semicircular guard about 3 ft (1 m) high, to give some protection from enemy attack. At the back the basket was open, making it easy to mount and dismount. There was no seat, and generally only enough room for the driver and one passenger. The reins were mostly the same as those in use in the 19th century, and were made of leather and ornamented with studs of ivory or metal. The reins were passed through rings attached to the collar bands or yoke, and were long enough to be tied around the waist of the charioteer to allow for defense.” ref

“The wheels and basket of the chariot were usually of wood, strengthened in places with bronze or iron. The wheels had from four to eight spokes and tires of bronze or iron. Due to the widely spaced spokes, the rim of the chariot wheel was held in tension over comparatively large spans. Whilst this provided a small measure of shock absorption, it also necessitated the removal of the wheels when the chariot was not in use, to prevent warping from continued weight bearing. Most other nations of this time had chariots of similar design to the Greeks, the chief differences being the mountings. According to Greek mythology, the chariot was invented by Erichthonius of Athens to conceal his feet, which were those of a dragon.” ref

“The most notable appearance of the chariot in Greek mythology occurs when Phaëton, the son of Helios, in an attempt to drive the chariot of the sun, managed to set the earth on fire. This story led to the archaic meaning of a phaeton as one who drives a chariot or coach, especially at a reckless or dangerous speed. Plato, in his Chariot Allegory, depicted a chariot drawn by two horses, one well behaved and the other troublesome, representing opposite impulses of human nature; the task of the charioteer, representing reason, was to stop the horses from going different ways and to guide them towards enlightenment. The Greek word for chariot, ἅρμα, hárma, is also used nowadays to denote a tank, properly called άρμα μάχης, árma mákhēs, literally a “combat chariot.” ref

Chariot Introduction in Western Europe and the British Isles

“The Celts were famous for their chariots and modern English words like car, carriage, and carry are ultimately derived from the native Brythonic language (Modern Welsh: Cerbyd). The word chariot itself is derived from the Norman French charriote and shares a Celtic root (Gaulish: karros). Some 20 iron-aged chariot burials have been excavated in Britain, roughly dating from between 500 to 100 BCE or 2,500 to 2,100 years ago. Virtually all of them were found in East Yorkshire – the exception was a find in 2001 in Newbridge, 10 km west of Edinburgh. The Celtic chariot, which may have been called karbantos in Gaulish (compare Latin carpentum), was a biga that measured approximately 2 m (6 ft 6+3⁄4 in) in width and 4 m (13 ft 1+1⁄2 in) in length. Chariots play an important role in Irish mythology surrounding the hero Cú Chulainn.” ref

“British chariots were open in front. Julius Caesar provides the only significant eyewitness report of British chariot warfare:

Their mode of fighting with their chariots is this: firstly, they drive about in all directions and throw their weapons and generally break the ranks of the enemy with the very dread of their horses and the noise of their wheels; and when they have worked themselves in between the troops of horse, leap from their chariots and engage on foot. The charioteers in the meantime withdraw some little distance from the battle, and so place themselves with the chariots that, if their masters are overpowered by the number of the enemy, they may have a ready retreat to their own troops. Thus they display in battle the speed of horse, [together with] the firmness of infantry; and by daily practice and exercise attain to such expertness that they are accustomed, even on a declining and steep place, to check their horses at full speed, and manage and turn them in an instant and run along the pole, and stand on the yoke, and thence betake themselves with the greatest celerity to their chariots again.” ref

“Chariots could also be used for ceremonial purposes. According to Tacitus (Annals 14.35), Boudica, queen of the Iceni and a number of other tribes in a formidable uprising against the occupying Roman forces, addressed her troops from a chariot in 61:

“Boudicca curru filias prae se vehens, ut quamque nationem accesserat, solitum quidem Britannis feminarum ductu bellare testabatur”

“Boudicca, with her daughters before her in a chariot, went up to tribe after tribe, protesting that it was indeed usual for Britons to fight under the leadership of women.” ref

“The last mention of chariot use in battle seems to be at the Battle of Mons Graupius, somewhere in modern Scotland, in 84 CE. From Tacitus (Agricola 1.35–36) “The plain between resounded with the noise and with the rapid movements of chariots and cavalry.” The chariots did not win even their initial engagement with the Roman auxiliaries: “Meantime the enemy’s cavalry had fled, and the charioteers had mingled in the engagement of the infantry.” Later through the centuries, the chariot was replaced by the “war wagon“. The “war wagon” was a medieval development used to attack rebel or enemy forces on battlefields. The wagon was given slits for archers to shoot enemy targets, supported by infantry using pikes and flails and later for the invention of gunfire by hand-gunners; side walls were used for protection against archers, crossbowmen, the early use of gunpowder and cannon fire.” ref

“It was especially useful during the Hussite Wars, c. 1420, by Hussite forces rebelling in Bohemia. Groups of them could form defensive works, but they also were used as hardpoints for Hussite formations or as firepower in pincer movements. This early use of gunpowder and innovative tactics helped a largely peasant infantry stave off attacks by the Holy Roman Empire‘s larger forces of mounted knights. The only intact Etruscan chariot dates to c. 530 BCE or around 2,530 years ago and was uncovered as part of a chariot burial at Monteleone di Spoleto. Currently in the collection of the Metropolitan Museum of Art, it is decorated with bronze plates decorated with detailed low-relief scenes, commonly interpreted as depicting episodes from the life of Achilles.” ref

Chariot Introduction in Rome

“In the Roman Empire, chariots were not used for warfare, but for chariot racing, especially in circuses, or for triumphal processions, when they could be pulled by as many as ten horses or even by dogs, tigers, or ostriches. There were four divisions, or factiones, of charioteers, distinguished by the color of their costumes: the red, blue, green, and white teams. The main center of chariot racing was the Circus Maximus, situated in the valley between the Palatine and Aventine Hills in Rome. The track could hold 12 chariots, and the two sides of the track were separated by a raised median termed the spina. Chariot races continued to enjoy great popularity in Byzantine times, in the Hippodrome of Constantinople, even after the Olympic Games had been disbanded, until their decline after the Nika riots in the 6th century. The starting gates were known as the Carceres.” ref

“An ancient Roman car or a chariot pulled by four horses abreast together with the horses pulling it was called a Quadriga, from the Latin quadriugi (of a team of four). The term sometimes meant instead the four horses without the chariot or the chariot alone. A three-horse chariot, or the three-horse team pulling it, was a triga, from triugi (of a team of three). A two-horse chariot, or the two-horse team pulling it, was a biga, from biugi. A popular legend that has been around since at least 1937 traces the origin of the 4 ft 8+1⁄2 in standard railroad gauge to Roman times, suggesting that it was based on the distance between the ruts of rutted roads marked by chariot wheels dating from the Roman Empire.” ref

Chariot Introduction in Ancient China

“The earliest archaeological evidence of chariots in China, a chariot burial site discovered in 1933 at Hougang, Anyang in Henan province, dates to the rule of King Wu Ding of the late Shang dynasty (c. 1250 BCE). Oracle bone inscriptions suggest that the western enemies of the Shang used limited numbers of chariots in battle, but the Shang themselves used them only as mobile command-vehicles and in royal hunts. During the Shang dynasty, members of the royal family were buried with a complete household and servants, including a chariot, horses, and a charioteer. A Shang chariot was often drawn by two horses, but four-horse variants are occasionally found in burials.” ref

“Jacques Gernet claims that the Zhou dynasty, which conquered the Shang ca. 1046 BCE, made more use of the chariot than did the Shang and “invented a new kind of harness with four horses abreast”. The crew consisted of an archer, a driver, and sometimes a third warrior who was armed with a spear or dagger-axe. From the 8th to 5th centuries BCE the Chinese use of chariots reached its peak. Although chariots appeared in greater numbers, infantry often defeated charioteers in battle. Massed-chariot warfare became all but obsolete after the Warring-States period (476–221 BCE or around 2,476 to 2,221 years ago). The main reasons were increased use of the crossbow, use of long halberds up to 18 feet (5.49 m) long and pikes up to 22 feet (6.71 m) long, and the adoption of standard cavalry units, and the adaptation of mounted archery from nomadic cavalry, which were more effective.” ref

“Chariots would continue to serve as command posts for officers during the Qin dynasty (221–206 BCE or around 2,221 to 2,206 years ago) and the Han dynasty (206 BCE–220 CE), while armored chariots were also used during the Han dynasty against the Xiongnu Confederation in the Han–Xiongnu War (133 BC to 89 CE), specifically at the Battle of Mobei (119 BCE). Before the Han dynasty, the power of Chinese states and dynasties was often measured by the number of chariots they were known to have. A country of a thousand chariots ranked as a medium country, and a country of ten thousand chariots ranked as a huge and powerful country.” ref

Damien Marie AtHope’s Art

People don’t commonly teach religious history, even that of their own claimed religion. No, rather they teach a limited “pro their religion” history of their religion from a religious perspective favorable to the religion of choice.

Damien Marie AtHope’s Art

Do you truly think “Religious Belief” is only a matter of some personal choice?

Do you not see how coercive one’s world of choice is limited to the obvious hereditary belief, in most religious choices available to the child of religious parents or caregivers? Religion is more commonly like a family, culture, society, etc. available belief that limits the belief choices of the child and that is when “Religious Belief” is not only a matter of some personal choice and when it becomes hereditary faith, not because of the quality of its alleged facts or proposed truths but because everyone else important to the child believes similarly so they do as well simply mimicking authority beliefs handed to them. Because children are raised in religion rather than being presented all possible choices but rather one limited dogmatic brand of “Religious Belief” where children only have a choice of following the belief as instructed, and then personally claim the faith hereditary belief seen in the confirming to the belief they have held themselves all their lives. This is obvious in statements asked and answered by children claiming a faith they barely understand but they do understand that their family believes “this or that” faith, so they feel obligated to believe it too. While I do agree that “Religious Belief” should only be a matter of some personal choice, it rarely is… End Hereditary Religion!

Opposition to Imposed Hereditary Religion

Damien Marie AtHope’s Art

ref, ref, ref, ref

Animism: Respecting the Living World by Graham Harvey

“How have human cultures engaged with and thought about animals, plants, rocks, clouds, and other elements in their natural surroundings? Do animals and other natural objects have a spirit or soul? What is their relationship to humans? In this new study, Graham Harvey explores current and past animistic beliefs and practices of Native Americans, Maori, Aboriginal Australians, and eco-pagans. He considers the varieties of animism found in these cultures as well as their shared desire to live respectfully within larger natural communities. Drawing on his extensive casework, Harvey also considers the linguistic, performative, ecological, and activist implications of these different animisms.” ref

19488647_1862983437362257_8462055973712447109_o-1-1024x685-LAPTOP-KIB0FGT7

Damien Marie AtHope’s Art

We are like believing machines we vacuum up ideas, like Velcro sticks to almost everything. We accumulate beliefs that we allow to negatively influence our lives, often without realizing it. Our willingness must be to alter skewed beliefs that impend our balance or reason, which allows us to achieve new positive thinking and accurate outcomes.

Damien Marie AtHope’s Art

My thoughts on Religion Evolution with external links for more info:

(Pre-Animism Africa mainly, but also Europe, and Asia at least 300,000 years ago), (Pre-Animism – Oxford Dictionaries)
(Animism Africa around 100,000 years ago), (Animism – Britannica.com)
(Totemism Europe around 50,000 years ago), (Totemism – Anthropology)
(Shamanism Siberia around 30,000 years ago), (Shamanism – Britannica.com)
(Paganism Turkey around 12,000 years ago), (Paganism – BBC Religion)
(Progressed Organized Religion “Institutional Religion” Egypt around 5,000 years ago), (Ancient Egyptian Religion – Britannica.com)
(CURRENT “World” RELIGIONS after 4,000 years ago) (Origin of Major Religions – Sacred Texts)
(Early Atheistic Doubting at least by 2,600 years ago) (History of Atheism – Wikipedia)

“Religion is an Evolved Product” and Yes, Religion is Like Fear Given Wings…

Atheists talk about gods and religions for the same reason doctors talk about cancer, they are looking for a cure, or a firefighter talks about fires because they burn people and they care to stop them. We atheists too often feel a need to help the victims of mental slavery, held in the bondage that is the false beliefs of gods and the conspiracy theories of reality found in religions.

“Understanding Religion Evolution: Animism, Totemism, Shamanism, Paganism & Progressed organized religion”

Understanding Religion Evolution:

Pre-Animism (at least 300,000 years ago)
Animism (Africa: 100,000 years ago)
Totemism (Europe: 50,000 years ago)
Shamanism (Siberia: 30,000 years ago)
Paganism (Turkey: 12,000 years ago)
Progressed organized religion (Egypt: 5,000 years ago), (Egypt, the First Dynasty 5,150 years ago)
CURRENT “World” RELIGIONS (after 4,000 years ago)
Early Atheistic Doubting (at least by 2,600 years ago)

“An Archaeological/Anthropological Understanding of Religion Evolution”

It seems ancient peoples had to survived amazing threats in a “dangerous universe (by superstition perceived as good and evil),” and human “immorality or imperfection of the soul” which was thought to affect the still living, leading to ancestor worship. This ancestor worship presumably led to the belief in supernatural beings, and then some of these were turned into the belief in gods. This feeble myth called gods were just a human conceived “made from nothing into something over and over, changing, again and again, taking on more as they evolve, all the while they are thought to be special,” but it is just supernatural animistic spirit-belief perceived as sacred.

Quick Evolution of Religion?

Pre-Animism (at least 300,000 years ago) pre-religion is a beginning that evolves into later Animism. So, Religion as we think of it, to me, all starts in a general way with Animism (Africa: 100,000 years ago) (theoretical belief in supernatural powers/spirits), then this is physically expressed in or with Totemism (Europe: 50,000 years ago) (theoretical belief in mythical relationship with powers/spirits through a totem item), which then enlists a full-time specific person to do this worship and believed interacting Shamanism (Siberia/Russia: 30,000 years ago) (theoretical belief in access and influence with spirits through ritual), and then there is the further employment of myths and gods added to all the above giving you Paganism (Turkey: 12,000 years ago) (often a lot more nature-based than most current top world religions, thus hinting to their close link to more ancient religious thinking it stems from). My hypothesis is expressed with an explanation of the building of a theatrical house (modern religions development). Progressed organized religion (Egypt: 5,000 years ago) with CURRENT “World” RELIGIONS (after 4,000 years ago).

Historically, in large city-state societies (such as Egypt or Iraq) starting around 5,000 years ago culminated to make religion something kind of new, a sociocultural-governmental-religious monarchy, where all or at least many of the people of such large city-state societies seem familiar with and committed to the existence of “religion” as the integrated life identity package of control dynamics with a fixed closed magical doctrine, but this juggernaut integrated religion identity package of Dogmatic-Propaganda certainly did not exist or if developed to an extent it was highly limited in most smaller prehistoric societies as they seem to lack most of the strong control dynamics with a fixed closed magical doctrine (magical beliefs could be at times be added or removed). Many people just want to see developed religious dynamics everywhere even if it is not. Instead, all that is found is largely fragments until the domestication of religion.

Religions, as we think of them today, are a new fad, even if they go back to around 6,000 years in the timeline of human existence, this amounts to almost nothing when seen in the long slow evolution of religion at least around 70,000 years ago with one of the oldest ritual worship. Stone Snake of South Africa: “first human worship” 70,000 years ago. This message of how religion and gods among them are clearly a man-made thing that was developed slowly as it was invented and then implemented peace by peace discrediting them all. Which seems to be a simple point some are just not grasping how devastating to any claims of truth when we can see the lie clearly in the archeological sites.

I wish people fought as hard for the actual values as they fight for the group/clan names political or otherwise they think support values. Every amount spent on war is theft to children in need of food or the homeless kept from shelter.

Here are several of my blog posts on history:

I am not an academic. I am a revolutionary that teaches in public, in places like social media, and in the streets. I am not a leader by some title given but from my commanding leadership style of simply to start teaching everywhere to everyone, all manner of positive education.

Damien Marie AtHope’s Art

religion-evolution-Copy-7-Copy-Copy-Copy-Copy-Copy-Copy-Copy-Copy-Copy-Copy-Copy-Copy-Copy-Copy-1024x553

Damien Marie AtHope’s Art

Damien Marie AtHope’s Art

To me, Animism starts in Southern Africa, then to West Europe, and becomes Totemism. Another split goes near the Russia and Siberia border becoming Shamanism, which heads into Central Europe meeting up with Totemism, which also had moved there, mixing the two which then heads to Lake Baikal in Siberia. From there this Shamanism-Totemism heads to Turkey where it becomes Paganism.

My thoughts on the Evolution of Religion: from Animism to Paganism

Philosophy to the Rescue: explaining Reason, Logic, Evidence, Truth, Certainty, Reality, and Science

Talking about “Religion and Deity Evolution” on Twitter (X) Questions and Answers

You can’t change people, by reason and evidence. WRONG, I do it all the time.

Damien Marie AtHope’s Art

10478231_563991313709259_1355822719308044717_n

Damien Marie AtHope’s Art

Damien Marie AtHope’s Art

Damien Marie AtHope’s Art

Damien Marie AtHope’s Art

ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref

Not all “Religions” or “Religious Persuasions” have a god(s) but

All can be said to believe in some imaginary beings or imaginary things like spirits, afterlives, etc.

Animism, Totemism, Shamanism, and Paganism

Damien Marie AtHope’s Art

ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref

Paganism? Siberian Shamanism migrated to Turkey and then emerged as Paganism because of Agriculture.

Paganism 12,000-4,000 years old

12,000-7,000 years old: related to (Pre-Capitalism)

7,000-5,000 years old: related to (Capitalism) (World War 0) Elite and their slaves!

5,000 years old: related to (Kings and the Rise of the State)

4,000 years old: related to (First Moralistic gods, then the Origin time of Monotheism)

Damien Marie AtHope’s Art

ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref

Low Gods “Earth” or Tutelary deity and High Gods “Sky” or Supreme deity

“An Earth goddess is a deification of the Earth. Earth goddesses are often associated with the “chthonic” deities of the underworld. Ki and Ninhursag are Mesopotamian earth goddesses. In Greek mythology, the Earth is personified as Gaia, corresponding to Roman Terra, Indic Prithvi/Bhūmi, etc. traced to an “Earth Mother” complementary to the “Sky Father” in Proto-Indo-European religion. Egyptian mythology exceptionally has a sky goddess and an Earth god.” ref

“A mother goddess is a goddess who represents or is a personification of nature, motherhood, fertility, creation, destruction or who embodies the bounty of the Earth. When equated with the Earth or the natural world, such goddesses are sometimes referred to as Mother Earth or as the Earth Mother. In some religious traditions or movements, Heavenly Mother (also referred to as Mother in Heaven or Sky Mother) is the wife or feminine counterpart of the Sky father or God the Father.” ref

“Any masculine sky god is often also king of the gods, taking the position of patriarch within a pantheon. Such king gods are collectively categorized as “sky father” deities, with a polarity between sky and earth often being expressed by pairing a “sky father” god with an “earth mother” goddess (pairings of a sky mother with an earth father are less frequent). A main sky goddess is often the queen of the gods and may be an air/sky goddess in her own right, though she usually has other functions as well with “sky” not being her main. In antiquity, several sky goddesses in ancient Egypt, Mesopotamia, and the Near East were called Queen of Heaven. Neopagans often apply it with impunity to sky goddesses from other regions who were never associated with the term historically. The sky often has important religious significance. Many religions, both polytheistic and monotheistic, have deities associated with the sky.” ref

“In comparative mythology, sky father is a term for a recurring concept in polytheistic religions of a sky god who is addressed as a “father”, often the father of a pantheon and is often either a reigning or former King of the Gods. The concept of “sky father” may also be taken to include Sun gods with similar characteristics, such as Ra. The concept is complementary to an “earth mother“. “Sky Father” is a direct translation of the Vedic Dyaus Pita, etymologically descended from the same Proto-Indo-European deity name as the Greek Zeûs Pater and Roman Jupiter and Germanic Týr, Tir or Tiwaz, all of which are reflexes of the same Proto-Indo-European deity’s name, *Dyēus Ph₂tḗr. While there are numerous parallels adduced from outside of Indo-European mythology, there are exceptions (e.g. In Egyptian mythology, Nut is the sky mother and Geb is the earth father).” ref

Tutelary deity

“A tutelary (also tutelar) is a deity or spirit who is a guardian, patron, or protector of a particular place, geographic feature, person, lineage, nation, culture, or occupation. The etymology of “tutelary” expresses the concept of safety and thus of guardianship. In late Greek and Roman religion, one type of tutelary deity, the genius, functions as the personal deity or daimon of an individual from birth to death. Another form of personal tutelary spirit is the familiar spirit of European folklore.” ref

“A tutelary (also tutelar) in Korean shamanism, jangseung and sotdae were placed at the edge of villages to frighten off demons. They were also worshiped as deities. Seonangshin is the patron deity of the village in Korean tradition and was believed to embody the Seonangdang. In Philippine animism, Diwata or Lambana are deities or spirits that inhabit sacred places like mountains and mounds and serve as guardians. Such as: Maria Makiling is the deity who guards Mt. Makiling and Maria Cacao and Maria Sinukuan. In Shinto, the spirits, or kami, which give life to human bodies come from nature and return to it after death. Ancestors are therefore themselves tutelaries to be worshiped. And similarly, Native American beliefs such as Tonás, tutelary animal spirit among the Zapotec and Totems, familial or clan spirits among the Ojibwe, can be animals.” ref

“A tutelary (also tutelar) in Austronesian beliefs such as: Atua (gods and spirits of the Polynesian peoples such as the Māori or the Hawaiians), Hanitu (Bunun of Taiwan‘s term for spirit), Hyang (Kawi, Sundanese, Javanese, and Balinese Supreme Being, in ancient Java and Bali mythology and this spiritual entity, can be either divine or ancestral), Kaitiaki (New Zealand Māori term used for the concept of guardianship, for the sky, the sea, and the land), Kawas (mythology) (divided into 6 groups: gods, ancestors, souls of the living, spirits of living things, spirits of lifeless objects, and ghosts), Tiki (Māori mythology, Tiki is the first man created by either Tūmatauenga or Tāne and represents deified ancestors found in most Polynesian cultures). ” ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref

Mesopotamian Tutelary Deities can be seen as ones related to City-States

“Historical city-states included Sumerian cities such as Uruk and Ur; Ancient Egyptian city-states, such as Thebes and Memphis; the Phoenician cities (such as Tyre and Sidon); the five Philistine city-states; the Berber city-states of the Garamantes; the city-states of ancient Greece (the poleis such as Athens, Sparta, Thebes, and Corinth); the Roman Republic (which grew from a city-state into a vast empire); the Italian city-states from the Middle Ages to the early modern period, such as Florence, Siena, Ferrara, Milan (which as they grew in power began to dominate neighboring cities) and Genoa and Venice, which became powerful thalassocracies; the Mayan and other cultures of pre-Columbian Mesoamerica (including cities such as Chichen Itza, Tikal, Copán and Monte Albán); the central Asian cities along the Silk Road; the city-states of the Swahili coast; Ragusa; states of the medieval Russian lands such as Novgorod and Pskov; and many others.” ref

“The Uruk period (ca. 4000 to 3100 BCE; also known as Protoliterate period) of Mesopotamia, named after the Sumerian city of Uruk, this period saw the emergence of urban life in Mesopotamia and the Sumerian civilization. City-States like Uruk and others had a patron tutelary City Deity along with a Priest-King.” ref

“Chinese folk religion, both past, and present, includes myriad tutelary deities. Exceptional individuals, highly cultivated sages, and prominent ancestors can be deified and honored after death. Lord Guan is the patron of military personnel and police, while Mazu is the patron of fishermen and sailors. Such as Tu Di Gong (Earth Deity) is the tutelary deity of a locality, and each individual locality has its own Earth Deity and Cheng Huang Gong (City God) is the guardian deity of an individual city, worshipped by local officials and locals since imperial times.” ref

“A tutelary (also tutelar) in Hinduism, personal tutelary deities are known as ishta-devata, while family tutelary deities are known as Kuladevata. Gramadevata are guardian deities of villages. Devas can also be seen as tutelary. Shiva is the patron of yogis and renunciants. City goddesses include: Mumbadevi (Mumbai), Sachchika (Osian); Kuladevis include: Ambika (Porwad), and Mahalakshmi. In NorthEast India Meitei mythology and religion (Sanamahism) of Manipur, there are various types of tutelary deities, among which Lam Lais are the most predominant ones. Tibetan Buddhism has Yidam as a tutelary deity. Dakini is the patron of those who seek knowledge.” ref

“A tutelary (also tutelar) The Greeks also thought deities guarded specific places: for instance, Athena was the patron goddess of the city of Athens. Socrates spoke of hearing the voice of his personal spirit or daimonion:

You have often heard me speak of an oracle or sign which comes to me … . This sign I have had ever since I was a child. The sign is a voice which comes to me and always forbids me to do something which I am going to do, but never commands me to do anything, and this is what stands in the way of my being a politician.” ref

“Tutelary deities who guard and preserve a place or a person are fundamental to ancient Roman religion. The tutelary deity of a man was his Genius, that of a woman her Juno. In the Imperial era, the Genius of the Emperor was a focus of Imperial cult. An emperor might also adopt a major deity as his personal patron or tutelary, as Augustus did Apollo. Precedents for claiming the personal protection of a deity were established in the Republican era, when for instance the Roman dictator Sulla advertised the goddess Victory as his tutelary by holding public games (ludi) in her honor.” ref

“Each town or city had one or more tutelary deities, whose protection was considered particularly vital in time of war and siege. Rome itself was protected by a goddess whose name was to be kept ritually secret on pain of death (for a supposed case, see Quintus Valerius Soranus). The Capitoline Triad of Juno, Jupiter, and Minerva were also tutelaries of Rome. The Italic towns had their own tutelary deities. Juno often had this function, as at the Latin town of Lanuvium and the Etruscan city of Veii, and was often housed in an especially grand temple on the arx (citadel) or other prominent or central location. The tutelary deity of Praeneste was Fortuna, whose oracle was renowned.” ref

“The Roman ritual of evocatio was premised on the belief that a town could be made vulnerable to military defeat if the power of its tutelary deity were diverted outside the city, perhaps by the offer of superior cult at Rome. The depiction of some goddesses such as the Magna Mater (Great Mother, or Cybele) as “tower-crowned” represents their capacity to preserve the city. A town in the provinces might adopt a deity from within the Roman religious sphere to serve as its guardian, or syncretize its own tutelary with such; for instance, a community within the civitas of the Remi in Gaul adopted Apollo as its tutelary, and at the capital of the Remi (present-day Rheims), the tutelary was Mars Camulus.” ref

Household deity (a kind of or related to a Tutelary deity)

“A household deity is a deity or spirit that protects the home, looking after the entire household or certain key members. It has been a common belief in paganism as well as in folklore across many parts of the world. Household deities fit into two types; firstly, a specific deity – typically a goddess – often referred to as a hearth goddess or domestic goddess who is associated with the home and hearth, such as the ancient Greek Hestia.” ref

“The second type of household deities are those that are not one singular deity, but a type, or species of animistic deity, who usually have lesser powers than major deities. This type was common in the religions of antiquity, such as the Lares of ancient Roman religion, the Gashin of Korean shamanism, and Cofgodas of Anglo-Saxon paganism. These survived Christianisation as fairy-like creatures existing in folklore, such as the Anglo-Scottish Brownie and Slavic Domovoy.” ref

“Household deities were usually worshipped not in temples but in the home, where they would be represented by small idols (such as the teraphim of the Bible, often translated as “household gods” in Genesis 31:19 for example), amulets, paintings, or reliefs. They could also be found on domestic objects, such as cosmetic articles in the case of Tawaret. The more prosperous houses might have a small shrine to the household god(s); the lararium served this purpose in the case of the Romans. The gods would be treated as members of the family and invited to join in meals, or be given offerings of food and drink.” ref

“In many religions, both ancient and modern, a god would preside over the home. Certain species, or types, of household deities, existed. An example of this was the Roman Lares. Many European cultures retained house spirits into the modern period. Some examples of these include:

Brownie (Scotland and England) or Hob (England) / Kobold (Germany) / Goblin / Hobgoblin
Domovoy (Slavic)
Nisse (Norwegian or Danish) / Tomte (Swedish) / Tonttu (Finnish)
Húsvættir (Norse)” ref

“Although the cosmic status of household deities was not as lofty as that of the Twelve Olympians or the Aesir, they were also jealous of their dignity and also had to be appeased with shrines and offerings, however humble. Because of their immediacy they had arguably more influence on the day-to-day affairs of men than the remote gods did. Vestiges of their worship persisted long after Christianity and other major religions extirpated nearly every trace of the major pagan pantheons. Elements of the practice can be seen even today, with Christian accretions, where statues to various saints (such as St. Francis) protect gardens and grottos. Even the gargoyles found on older churches, could be viewed as guardians partitioning a sacred space.” ref

“For centuries, Christianity fought a mop-up war against these lingering minor pagan deities, but they proved tenacious. For example, Martin Luther‘s Tischreden have numerous – quite serious – references to dealing with kobolds. Eventually, rationalism and the Industrial Revolution threatened to erase most of these minor deities, until the advent of romantic nationalism rehabilitated them and embellished them into objects of literary curiosity in the 19th century. Since the 20th century this literature has been mined for characters for role-playing games, video games, and other fantasy personae, not infrequently invested with invented traits and hierarchies somewhat different from their mythological and folkloric roots.” ref

“In contradistinction to both Herbert Spencer and Edward Burnett Tylor, who defended theories of animistic origins of ancestor worship, Émile Durkheim saw its origin in totemism. In reality, this distinction is somewhat academic, since totemism may be regarded as a particularized manifestation of animism, and something of a synthesis of the two positions was attempted by Sigmund Freud. In Freud’s Totem and Taboo, both totem and taboo are outward expressions or manifestations of the same psychological tendency, a concept which is complementary to, or which rather reconciles, the apparent conflict. Freud preferred to emphasize the psychoanalytic implications of the reification of metaphysical forces, but with particular emphasis on its familial nature. This emphasis underscores, rather than weakens, the ancestral component.” ref

“William Edward Hearn, a noted classicist, and jurist, traced the origin of domestic deities from the earliest stages as an expression of animism, a belief system thought to have existed also in the neolithic, and the forerunner of Indo-European religion. In his analysis of the Indo-European household, in Chapter II “The House Spirit”, Section 1, he states:

The belief which guided the conduct of our forefathers was … the spirit rule of dead ancestors.” ref

“In Section 2 he proceeds to elaborate:

It is thus certain that the worship of deceased ancestors is a vera causa, and not a mere hypothesis. …

In the other European nations, the Slavs, the Teutons, and the Kelts, the House Spirit appears with no less distinctness. … [T]he existence of that worship does not admit of doubt. … The House Spirits had a multitude of other names which it is needless here to enumerate, but all of which are more or less expressive of their friendly relations with man. … In [England] … [h]e is the Brownie. … In Scotland this same Brownie is well known. He is usually described as attached to particular families, with whom he has been known to reside for centuries, threshing the corn, cleaning the house, and performing similar household tasks. His favorite gratification was milk and honey.” ref

Damien Marie AtHope’s Art

ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref

“These ideas are my speculations from the evidence.”

I am still researching the “god‘s origins” all over the world. So you know, it is very complicated but I am smart and willing to look, DEEP, if necessary, which going very deep does seem to be needed here, when trying to actually understand the evolution of gods and goddesses. I am sure of a few things and less sure of others, but even in stuff I am not fully grasping I still am slowly figuring it out, to explain it to others. But as I research more I am understanding things a little better, though I am still working on understanding it all or something close and thus always figuring out more.

Sky Father/Sky God?

“Egyptian: (Nut) Sky Mother and (Geb) Earth Father” (Egypt is different but similar)

Turkic/Mongolic: (Tengri/Tenger Etseg) Sky Father and (Eje/Gazar Eej) Earth Mother *Transeurasian*

Hawaiian: (Wākea) Sky Father and (Papahānaumoku) Earth Mother *Austronesian*

New Zealand/ Māori: (Ranginui) Sky Father and (Papatūānuku) Earth Mother *Austronesian*

Proto-Indo-European: (Dyḗus/Dyḗus ph₂tḗr) Sky Father and (Dʰéǵʰōm/Pleth₂wih₁) Earth Mother

Indo-Aryan: (Dyaus Pita) Sky Father and (Prithvi Mata) Earth Mother *Indo-European*

Italic: (Jupiter) Sky Father and (Juno) Sky Mother *Indo-European*

Etruscan: (Tinia) Sky Father and (Uni) Sky Mother *Tyrsenian/Italy Pre–Indo-European*

Hellenic/Greek: (Zeus) Sky Father and (Hera) Sky Mother who started as an “Earth Goddess” *Indo-European*

Nordic: (Dagr) Sky Father and (Nótt) Sky Mother *Indo-European*

Slavic: (Perun) Sky Father and (Mokosh) Earth Mother *Indo-European*

Illyrian: (Deipaturos) Sky Father and (Messapic Damatura’s “earth-mother” maybe) Earth Mother *Indo-European*

Albanian: (Zojz) Sky Father and (?) *Indo-European*

Baltic: (Perkūnas) Sky Father and (Saulė) Sky Mother *Indo-European*

Germanic: (Týr) Sky Father and (?) *Indo-European*

Colombian-Muisca: (Bochica) Sky Father and (Huythaca) Sky Mother *Chibchan*

Aztec: (Quetzalcoatl) Sky Father and (Xochiquetzal) Sky Mother *Uto-Aztecan*

Incan: (Viracocha) Sky Father and (Mama Runtucaya) Sky Mother *Quechuan*

China: (Tian/Shangdi) Sky Father and (Dì) Earth Mother *Sino-Tibetan*

Sumerian, Assyrian and Babylonian: (An/Anu) Sky Father and (Ki) Earth Mother

Finnish: (Ukko) Sky Father and (Akka) Earth Mother *Finno-Ugric*

Sami: (Horagalles) Sky Father and (Ravdna) Earth Mother *Finno-Ugric*

Puebloan-Zuni: (Ápoyan Ta’chu) Sky Father and (Áwitelin Tsíta) Earth Mother

Puebloan-Hopi: (Tawa) Sky Father and (Kokyangwuti/Spider Woman/Grandmother) Earth Mother *Uto-Aztecan*

Puebloan-Navajo: (Tsohanoai) Sky Father and (Estsanatlehi) Earth Mother *Na-Dene*

ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref

Sky Father/Sky Mother “High Gods” or similar gods/goddesses of the sky more loosely connected, seeming arcane mythology across the earth seen in Siberia, China, Europe, Native Americans/First Nations People and Mesopotamia, etc.

Damien Marie AtHope’s Art

ref, ref

Hinduism around 3,700 to 3,500 years old. ref

Judaism around 3,450 or 3,250 years old. (The first writing in the bible was “Paleo-Hebrew” dated to around 3,000 years ago Khirbet Qeiyafa is the site of an ancient fortress city overlooking the Elah Valley. And many believe the religious Jewish texts were completed around 2,500) ref, ref

Judaism is around 3,450 or 3,250 years old. (“Paleo-Hebrew” 3,000 years ago and Torah 2,500 years ago)

“Judaism is an Abrahamic, its roots as an organized religion in the Middle East during the Bronze Age. Some scholars argue that modern Judaism evolved from Yahwism, the religion of ancient Israel and Judah, by the late 6th century BCE, and is thus considered to be one of the oldest monotheistic religions.” ref

“Yahwism is the name given by modern scholars to the religion of ancient Israel, essentially polytheistic, with a plethora of gods and goddesses. Heading the pantheon was Yahweh, the national god of the Israelite kingdoms of Israel and Judah, with his consort, the goddess Asherah; below them were second-tier gods and goddesses such as Baal, Shamash, Yarikh, Mot, and Astarte, all of whom had their own priests and prophets and numbered royalty among their devotees, and a third and fourth tier of minor divine beings, including the mal’ak, the messengers of the higher gods, who in later times became the angels of Judaism, Christianity and Islam. Yahweh, however, was not the ‘original’ god of Israel “Isra-El”; it is El, the head of the Canaanite pantheon, whose name forms the basis of the name “Israel”, and none of the Old Testament patriarchs, the tribes of Israel, the Judges, or the earliest monarchs, have a Yahwistic theophoric name (i.e., one incorporating the name of Yahweh).” ref

“El is a Northwest Semitic word meaning “god” or “deity“, or referring (as a proper name) to any one of multiple major ancient Near Eastern deities. A rarer form, ‘ila, represents the predicate form in Old Akkadian and in Amorite. The word is derived from the Proto-Semitic *ʔil-, meaning “god”. Specific deities known as ‘El or ‘Il include the supreme god of the ancient Canaanite religion and the supreme god of East Semitic speakers in Mesopotamia’s Early Dynastic Period. ʼĒl is listed at the head of many pantheons. In some Canaanite and Ugaritic sources, ʼĒl played a role as father of the gods, of creation, or both. For example, in the Ugaritic texts, ʾil mlk is understood to mean “ʼĒl the King” but ʾil hd as “the god Hadad“. The Semitic root ʾlh (Arabic ʾilāh, Aramaic ʾAlāh, ʾElāh, Hebrew ʾelōah) may be ʾl with a parasitic h, and ʾl may be an abbreviated form of ʾlh. In Ugaritic the plural form meaning “gods” is ʾilhm, equivalent to Hebrew ʾelōhîm “powers”. In the Hebrew texts this word is interpreted as being semantically singular for “god” by biblical commentators. However the documentary hypothesis for the Old Testament (corresponds to the Jewish Torah) developed originally in the 1870s, identifies these that different authors – the Jahwist, Elohist, Deuteronomist, and the Priestly source – were responsible for editing stories from a polytheistic religion into those of a monotheistic religion. Inconsistencies that arise between monotheism and polytheism in the texts are reflective of this hypothesis.” ref

Jainism around 2,599 – 2,527 years old. ref

Confucianism around 2,600 – 2,551 years old. ref

Buddhism around 2,563/2,480 – 2,483/2,400 years old. ref

Christianity around 2,o00 years old. ref

Shinto around 1,305 years old. ref

Islam around 1407–1385 years old. ref

Sikhism around 548–478 years old. ref

Bahá’í around 200–125 years old. ref

10351831_556859917755732_4316427804670144270_n

Damien Marie AtHope’s Art

ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref

Knowledge to Ponder:

Stars/Astrology:

Possibly, around 30,000 years ago (in simpler form) to 6,000 years ago, Stars/Astrology are connected to Ancestors, Spirit Animals, and Deities.
The star also seems to be a possible proto-star for Star of Ishtar, Star of Inanna, or Star of Venus.
Around 7,000 to 6,000 years ago, Star Constellations/Astrology have connections to the “Kurgan phenomenon” of below-ground “mound” stone/wood burial structures and “Dolmen phenomenon” of above-ground stone burial structures.
Around 6,500–5,800 years ago, The Northern Levant migrations into Jordon and Israel in the Southern Levant brought new cultural and religious transfer from Turkey and Iran.
“The Ghassulian Star,” a mysterious 6,000-year-old mural from Jordan may have connections to the European paganstic kurgan/dolmens phenomenon.

“Astrology is a range of divinatory practices, recognized as pseudoscientific since the 18th century, that claim to discern information about human affairs and terrestrial events by studying the apparent positions of celestial objects. Different cultures have employed forms of astrology since at least the 2nd millennium BCE, these practices having originated in calendrical systems used to predict seasonal shifts and to interpret celestial cycles as signs of divine communications. Most, if not all, cultures have attached importance to what they observed in the sky, and some—such as the Hindus, Chinese, and the Maya—developed elaborate systems for predicting terrestrial events from celestial observations. Western astrology, one of the oldest astrological systems still in use, can trace its roots to 19th–17th century BCE Mesopotamia, from where it spread to Ancient Greece, Rome, the Islamicate world and eventually Central and Western Europe. Contemporary Western astrology is often associated with systems of horoscopes that purport to explain aspects of a person’s personality and predict significant events in their lives based on the positions of celestial objects; the majority of professional astrologers rely on such systems.” ref

Around 5,500 years ago, Science evolves, The first evidence of science was 5,500 years ago and was demonstrated by a body of empirical, theoretical, and practical knowledge about the natural world. ref

Around 5,000 years ago, Origin of Logics is a Naturalistic Observation (principles of valid reasoning, inference, & demonstration) ref

Around 4,150 to 4,000 years ago: The earliest surviving versions of the Sumerian Epic of Gilgamesh, which was originally titled “He who Saw the Deep” (Sha naqba īmuru) or “Surpassing All Other Kings” (Shūtur eli sharrī) were written. ref

Hinduism:

3,700 years ago or so, the oldest of the Hindu Vedas (scriptures), the Rig Veda was composed.
3,500 years ago or so, the Vedic Age began in India after the collapse of the Indus Valley Civilization.

Judaism:

around 3,000 years ago, the first writing in the bible was “Paleo-Hebrew”
around 2,500 years ago, many believe the religious Jewish texts were completed

Myths: The bible inspired religion is not just one religion or one myth but a grouping of several religions and myths

Around 3,450 or 3,250 years ago, according to legend, is the traditionally accepted period in which the Israelite lawgiver, Moses, provided the Ten Commandments.
Around 2,500 to 2,400 years ago, a collection of ancient religious writings by the Israelites based primarily upon the Hebrew Bible, Tanakh, or Old Testament is the first part of Christianity’s bible.
Around 2,400 years ago, the most accepted hypothesis is that the canon was formed in stages, first the Pentateuch (Torah).
Around 2,140 to 2,116 years ago, the Prophets was written during the Hasmonean dynasty, and finally the remaining books.
Christians traditionally divide the Old Testament into four sections:
The first five books or Pentateuch (Torah).
The proposed history books telling the history of the Israelites from their conquest of Canaan to their defeat and exile in Babylon.
The poetic and proposed “Wisdom books” dealing, in various forms, with questions of good and evil in the world.
The books of the biblical prophets, warning of the consequences of turning away from God:
Henotheism:
Exodus 20:23 “You shall not make other gods besides Me (not saying there are no other gods just not to worship them); gods of silver or gods of gold, you shall not make for yourselves.”
Polytheism:
Judges 10:6 “Then the sons of Israel again did evil in the sight of the LORD, served the Baals and the Ashtaroth, the gods of Aram, the gods of Sidon, the gods of Moab, the gods of the sons of Ammon, and the gods of the Philistines; thus they forsook the LORD and did not serve Him.”
1 Corinthians 8:5 “For even if there are so-called gods whether in heaven or on earth, as indeed there are many gods and many lords.”
Monotheism:
Isaiah 43:10 “You are my witnesses,” declares the LORD, “and my servant whom I have chosen, so that you may know and believe me and understand that I am he. Before me no god was formed, nor will there be one after me.

Around 2,570 to 2,270 Years Ago, there is a confirmation of atheistic doubting as well as atheistic thinking, mainly by Greek philosophers. However, doubting gods is likely as old as the invention of gods and should destroy the thinking that belief in god(s) is the “default belief”. The Greek word is apistos (a “not” and pistos “faithful,”), thus not faithful or faithless because one is unpersuaded and unconvinced by a god(s) claim. Short Definition: unbelieving, unbeliever, or unbelief.

Damien Marie AtHope’s Art

Expressions of Atheistic Thinking:

Around 2,600 years ago, Ajita Kesakambali, ancient Indian philosopher, who is the first known proponent of Indian materialism. ref
Around 2,535 to 2,475 years ago, Heraclitus, Greek pre-Socratic philosopher, a native of the Greek city Ephesus, Ionia, on the coast of Anatolia, also known as Asia Minor or modern Turkey. ref
Around 2,500 to 2,400 years ago, according to The Story of Civilization book series certain African pygmy tribes have no identifiable gods, spirits, or religious beliefs or rituals, and even what burials accrue are without ceremony. ref
Around 2,490 to 2,430 years ago, Empedocles, Greek pre-Socratic philosopher and a citizen of Agrigentum, a Greek city in Sicily. ref
Around 2,460 to 2,370 years ago, Democritus, Greek pre-Socratic philosopher considered to be the “father of modern science” possibly had some disbelief amounting to atheism. ref
Around 2,399 years ago or so, Socrates, a famous Greek philosopher was tried for sinfulness by teaching doubt of state gods. ref
Around 2,341 to 2,270 years ago, Epicurus, a Greek philosopher known for composing atheistic critics and famously stated, “Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him god?” ref

This last expression by Epicurus, seems to be an expression of Axiological Atheism. To understand and utilize value or actually possess “Value Conscious/Consciousness” to both give a strong moral “axiological” argument (the problem of evil) as well as use it to fortify humanism and positive ethical persuasion of human helping and care responsibilities. Because value-blindness gives rise to sociopathic/psychopathic evil.

Damien Marie AtHope’s Art

ref, ref, ref

“Theists, there has to be a god, as something can not come from nothing.”

Well, thus something (unknown) happened and then there was something. This does not tell us what the something that may have been involved with something coming from nothing. A supposed first cause, thus something (unknown) happened and then there was something is not an open invitation to claim it as known, neither is it justified to call or label such an unknown as anything, especially an unsubstantiated magical thinking belief born of mythology and religious storytelling.

How do they even know if there was nothing as a start outside our universe, could there not be other universes outside our own?

For all, we know there may have always been something past the supposed Big Bang we can’t see beyond, like our universe as one part of a mega system.

Damien Marie AtHope’s Art

Advocating Anarchism: Morality, Non-coercion, Anti-hierarchy, Solidarity, Internationalism, Mutualism, Cooperationism, Empowermentism, etc.

50626195_2231791236887767_8408273929398910976_n

Damien Marie AtHope’s Art

While hallucinogens are associated with shamanism, it is alcohol that is associated with paganism.

The Atheist-Humanist-Leftist Revolutionaries Shows in the prehistory series:

Show one: Prehistory: related to “Anarchism and Socialism” the division of labor, power, rights, and recourses.

Show two: Pre-animism 300,000 years old and animism 100,000 years old: related to “Anarchism and Socialism”

Show tree: Totemism 50,000 years old: related to “Anarchism and Socialism”

Show four: Shamanism 30,000 years old: related to “Anarchism and Socialism”

Show five: Paganism 12,000 years old: related to “Anarchism and Socialism”

Show six: Emergence of hierarchy, sexism, slavery, and the new male god dominance: Paganism 7,000-5,000 years old: related to “Anarchism and Socialism” (Capitalism) (World War 0) Elite and their slaves!

Show seven: Paganism 5,000 years old: progressed organized religion and the state: related to “Anarchism and Socialism” (Kings and the Rise of the State)

Show eight: Paganism 4,000 years old: Moralistic gods after the rise of Statism and often support Statism/Kings: related to “Anarchism and Socialism” (First Moralistic gods, then the Origin time of Monotheism)

Prehistory: related to “Anarchism and Socialism” the division of labor, power, rights, and recourses: VIDEO

Pre-animism 300,000 years old and animism 100,000 years old: related to “Anarchism and Socialism”: VIDEO

Totemism 50,000 years old: related to “Anarchism and Socialism”: VIDEO

Shamanism 30,000 years old: related to “Anarchism and Socialism”: VIDEO

Paganism 12,000 years old: related to “Anarchism and Socialism” (Pre-Capitalism): VIDEO

Paganism 7,000-5,000 years old: related to “Anarchism and Socialism” (Capitalism) (World War 0) Elite and their slaves: VIEDO

Paganism 5,000 years old: progressed organized religion and the state: related to “Anarchism and Socialism” (Kings and the Rise of the State): VIEDO

Paganism 4,000 years old: related to “Anarchism and Socialism” (First Moralistic gods, then the Origin time of Monotheism): VIEDO

I do not hate simply because I challenge and expose myths or lies any more than others being thought of as loving simply because of the protection and hiding from challenge their favored myths or lies.

The truth is best championed in the sunlight of challenge.

An archaeologist once said to me “Damien religion and culture are very different”

My response, So are you saying that was always that way, such as would you say Native Americans’ cultures are separate from their religions? And do you think it always was the way you believe?

I had said that religion was a cultural product. That is still how I see it and there are other archaeologists that think close to me as well. Gods too are the myths of cultures that did not understand science or the world around them, seeing magic/supernatural everywhere.

I personally think there is a goddess and not enough evidence to support a male god at Çatalhöyük but if there was both a male and female god and goddess then I know the kind of gods they were like Proto-Indo-European mythology.

This series idea was addressed in, Anarchist Teaching as Free Public Education or Free Education in the Public: VIDEO

Our 12 video series: Organized Oppression: Mesopotamian State Force and the Politics of power (9,000-4,000 years ago), is adapted from: The Complete and Concise History of the Sumerians and Early Bronze Age Mesopotamia (7000-2000 BC): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=szFjxmY7jQA by “History with Cy“

Show #1: Mesopotamian State Force and the Politics of Power (Samarra, Halaf, Ubaid)

Show #2: Mesopotamian State Force and the Politics of Power (Eridu: First City of Power)

Show #3: Mesopotamian State Force and the Politics of Power (Uruk and the First Cities)

Show #4: Mesopotamian State Force and the Politics of Power (First Kings)

Show #5: Mesopotamian State Force and the Politics of Power (Early Dynastic Period)

Show #6: Mesopotamian State Force and the Politics of Power (King Lugalzagesi and the First Empire)

Show #7: Mesopotamian State Force and the Politics of Power (Sargon and Akkadian Rule)

Show #8: Mesopotamian State Force and the Politics of Power (Naram-Sin, Post-Akkadian Rule, and the Gutians)

Show #9: Mesopotamian State Force and the Politics of Power (Gudea of Lagash and Utu-hegal)

Show #10: Mesopotamian State Force and the Politics of Power (Third Dynasty of Ur / Neo-Sumerian Empire)

Show #11: Mesopotamian State Force and the Politics of Power (Amorites, Elamites, and the End of an Era)

Show #12: Mesopotamian State Force and the Politics of Power (Aftermath and Legacy of Sumer)

Damien Marie AtHope’s Art

The “Atheist-Humanist-Leftist Revolutionaries”

Cory Johnston ☭ Ⓐ Atheist Leftist @Skepticallefty & I (Damien Marie AtHope) @AthopeMarie (my YouTube & related blog) are working jointly in atheist, antitheist, antireligionist, antifascist, anarchist, socialist, and humanist endeavors in our videos together, generally, every other Saturday.

Why Does Power Bring Responsibility?

Think, how often is it the powerless that start wars, oppress others, or commit genocide? So, I guess the question is to us all, to ask, how can power not carry responsibility in a humanity concept? I know I see the deep ethical responsibility that if there is power their must be a humanistic responsibility of ethical and empathic stewardship of that power. Will I be brave enough to be kind? Will I possess enough courage to be compassionate? Will my valor reach its height of empathy? I as everyone, earns our justified respect by our actions, that are good, ethical, just, protecting, and kind. Do I have enough self-respect to put my love for humanity’s flushing, over being brought down by some of its bad actors? May we all be the ones doing good actions in the world, to help human flourishing.

I create the world I want to live in, striving for flourishing. Which is not a place but a positive potential involvement and promotion; a life of humanist goal precision. To master oneself, also means mastering positive prosocial behaviors needed for human flourishing. I may have lost a god myth as an atheist, but I am happy to tell you, my friend, it is exactly because of that, leaving the mental terrorizer, god belief, that I truly regained my connected ethical as well as kind humanity.

Cory and I will talk about prehistory and theism, addressing the relevance to atheism, anarchism, and socialism.

At the same time as the rise of the male god, 7,000 years ago, there was also the very time there was the rise of violence, war, and clans to kingdoms, then empires, then states. It is all connected back to 7,000 years ago, and it moved across the world.

Cory Johnston: https://damienmarieathope.com/2021/04/cory-johnston-mind-of-a-skeptical-leftist/?v=32aec8db952d

The Mind of a Skeptical Leftist (YouTube)

Cory Johnston: Mind of a Skeptical Leftist @Skepticallefty

The Mind of a Skeptical Leftist By Cory Johnston: “Promoting critical thinking, social justice, and left-wing politics by covering current events and talking to a variety of people. Cory Johnston has been thoughtfully talking to people and attempting to promote critical thinking, social justice, and left-wing politics.” http://anchor.fm/skepticalleft

Cory needs our support. We rise by helping each other.

Cory Johnston ☭ Ⓐ @Skepticallefty Evidence-based atheist leftist (he/him) Producer, host, and co-host of 4 podcasts @skeptarchy @skpoliticspod and @AthopeMarie

Damien Marie AtHope (“At Hope”) Axiological Atheist, Anti-theist, Anti-religionist, Secular Humanist. Rationalist, Writer, Artist, Poet, Philosopher, Advocate, Activist, Psychology, and Armchair Archaeology/Anthropology/Historian.

Damien is interested in: Freedom, Liberty, Justice, Equality, Ethics, Humanism, Science, Atheism, Antiteism, Antireligionism, Ignosticism, Left-Libertarianism, Anarchism, Socialism, Mutualism, Axiology, Metaphysics, LGBTQI, Philosophy, Advocacy, Activism, Mental Health, Psychology, Archaeology, Social Work, Sexual Rights, Marriage Rights, Woman’s Rights, Gender Rights, Child Rights, Secular Rights, Race Equality, Ageism/Disability Equality, Etc. And a far-leftist, “Anarcho-Humanist.”

I am not a good fit in the atheist movement that is mostly pro-capitalist, I am anti-capitalist. Mostly pro-skeptic, I am a rationalist not valuing skepticism. Mostly pro-agnostic, I am anti-agnostic. Mostly limited to anti-Abrahamic religions, I am an anti-religionist.

To me, the “male god” seems to have either emerged or become prominent around 7,000 years ago, whereas the now favored monotheism “male god” is more like 4,000 years ago or so. To me, the “female goddess” seems to have either emerged or become prominent around 11,000-10,000 years ago or so, losing the majority of its once prominence around 2,000 years ago due largely to the now favored monotheism “male god” that grow in prominence after 4,000 years ago or so.

My Thought on the Evolution of Gods?

Animal protector deities from old totems/spirit animal beliefs come first to me, 13,000/12,000 years ago, then women as deities 11,000/10,000 years ago, then male gods around 7,000/8,000 years ago. Moralistic gods around 5,000/4,000 years ago, and monotheistic gods around 4,000/3,000 years ago.

To me, animal gods were likely first related to totemism animals around 13,000 to 12,000 years ago or older. Female as goddesses was next to me, 11,000 to 10,000 years ago or so with the emergence of agriculture. Then male gods come about 8,000 to 7,000 years ago with clan wars. Many monotheism-themed religions started in henotheism, emerging out of polytheism/paganism.

Gods?

“Animism” is needed to begin supernatural thinking.

“Totemism” is needed for supernatural thinking connecting human actions & related to clan/tribe.

“Shamanism” is needed for supernatural thinking to be controllable/changeable by special persons.

Together = Gods/paganism

Damien Marie AtHope’s Art

11406234_754565204651868_2328529661034816546_o-LAPTOP-KIB0FGT7

Damien Marie AtHope’s Art

Damien Marie AtHope (Said as “At” “Hope”)/(Autodidact Polymath but not good at math):

Axiological Atheist, Anti-theist, Anti-religionist, Secular Humanist, Rationalist, Writer, Artist, Jeweler, Poet, “autodidact” Philosopher, schooled in Psychology, and “autodidact” Armchair Archaeology/Anthropology/Pre-Historian (Knowledgeable in the range of: 1 million to 5,000/4,000 years ago). I am an anarchist socialist politically. Reasons for or Types of Atheism

My Website, My Blog, & Short-writing or Quotes, My YouTube, Twitter: @AthopeMarie, and My Email: damien.marie.athope@gmail.com

The Rise of Power and the 6000-year-old Shared Idea of the Solid Wheel as well as the Spoked Wheel-Shaped Ritual Motif

Indo-European Wheel Words

*roteh2-, “wheel” (n)

*ak’s– or *h2eks-, “axle” (n)

*h2ih3s-, “thill” or “shaft” (n)

*wéĝh-, “convey in a vehicle” (v)

*h1wŗgis, “wheel” or “having circular form” (n)

*h3nebh-, “nave” or “hub” (n)

*iugó-, “yoke” (v)

*kwékwlo-, “wheel” (n)

Old Indic cakra, meaning “wheel’

English wheel, meaning “wheel”

Ancient Greek kuklos, meaning “circle” or “wheel”

Lithuanian kãklas, meaning “neck”

Tocharian kukäl (A) & kokale (B), meaning “chariot” or “wagon”

The significance of *kwekwlo-

Discussion – who did have wheels?

1. 6,000-year-old Mehrgarh Spoked Wheel Amulet

Mehrgarh Period VIII

Lifestyle and technology

2. A partially reconstructed, wheeled toy from the Cucuteni Tripolye B2 culture

3. Mesopotamian currently the Oldest Wheel

Primitive wheel form

4. Wheel with axle and the Bronocice pot’s Pottery art

5. Clay model of a wheeled cart Hungary

6. A toy chariot dating back 5,000 years ago Turkey

8. Khafajah Chariot art on pottery

9. Sumerian Drawn cart

10. Indus Valley Culture Wheeled Toy Chariot

Cities

Arts and crafts

Human statuettes

Seals

Trade and transportation

Agriculture

Food

Language

Possible writing system

Religion

Ratha Indo-Iranian spoked-wheel

Kurgan Hypothesis

Western Steppe Herders

Fertile Crescent

Anatolia and the Levant

Caucasus and Mesopotamia

Late Middle Easterners

Paganism 12,000-4,000 years old

The Atheist-Humanist-Leftist Revolutionaries Shows in the prehistory series:

Damien Marie AtHope (Said as “At” “Hope”)/(Autodidact Polymath but not good at math):

Recent Posts

Archives

Categories

Pages

Meta

Advertisement

Pin It on Pinterest

**roteh2*-, “wheel” (n)

**ak’s*– or **h2eks-*, “axle” (n)

**h2ih3s*-, “thill” or “shaft” (n)

**wéĝh*-, “convey in a vehicle” (v)

**h1wŗgis*, “wheel” or “having circular form” (n)

**h3nebh-*, “nave” or “hub” (n)

**iugó-*, “yoke” (v)

**kwékwlo-*, “wheel” (n)

The significance of **kwekwlo-*