Traditional assumptions associated with the origin and development of settlements
  From the previous discussion about the basic nature of survival for communities, it makes sense that the first permanent settlements of humans were alongside rivers with large regions of arable land.  
  Following on, it is the traditional assumption of historians and archeologists that the origin of models of permanent human settlement originated from Asia Minor (Iraq/Middle East) compared to Africa and other parts of the world. One hundred years ago, the general date for the first examples of sophisticated organized human settlement were around 4,000 BCE. Thanks to more recent work in this field, the generally accepted date for the first examples of sophisticated organized human community settlement is thought to have been around 10,000 BCE.  
  The assumptions associated with these dates that continue to shift further back into history is that settlements around the Tigris, Euphrates and Nile developed as humans adapted to domesticating animals as well as growing agricultural crops. It is assumed that this knowledge was somehow gained through either trial and error, or by sheer accident.  
  As these early settlers improved their survival chances, semi nomadic and nomadic tribes posed a threat to the settlement, so walls were erected to protect the inhabitants. In addition, it is a traditional assumption that as time required for food preparation changed and more time was available, these early settlers were able to devote themselves to more cerebral tasks such as searching for knowledge on the universe, mathematics and science.  
20.7.1 The dominant view of this theory  
  Today, the various theories that fundamentally assume the progression from "uncivilized" to civilized via some evolutionary path far outweighs any alternative theories. In fact, almost no society, nor education facility would seriously entertain any other alternative. This is in spite of glaring deficiencies in the popular theory of the natural evolution of human settlements.  
20.7.2 Anomaly #1- Evolution seems to have been selective on who understood building and who didn't  
  This first Anomaly (an still to this day one of the most controversial) is that for some reason only some races seemed to engage in settlement building compared to others. Caucasian, Sth American and Asian races seem to excel in the development of sophisticated settlements compared to North American indigenous cultures, Sth East Asia, and African races. In other words- "white" people seemed to possess some special gift for building societies compared to people of "dark" coloured skin.  
  Obviously there is no substantial genetic difference between people of Africa and people of Europe. They share common DNA. Nor is there any difference in the make up of their brains and capacity to comprehend. That is why any sensible person living today should abhor any theory that suggests a superiority between individual humans on the basis of their skin. Yet this Anomaly regarding city building exists.  
  In spite of all the explanations given, there still remains no credible explanation for this Anomaly No argument can be credibly given on the basis of climate, lack of building materials, time to evolve or any other kind of excuse. If anything, the indigenous cultures of these regions should have had much greater time to develop their city building skills than their near relatives.  
20.7.3 Anomaly #2- The evidence supporting ground zero- the first sophisticated settlements  
  We have discussed this Anomaly previously- the concept that all knowledge acquired through experience should be reflected in earlier prototypes. It is perhaps one of the most controversial understandings that when deliberate fabrications and false and misleading evidence is put to one side, there is categorically no evidence of experience in the lead up to the Olmec culture in Sth America, the Egyptian culture and the Sumerian cultures 8,000+ years ago.  
  If the theory of natural evolution of human settlements were sound, then evidence should exist of earlier prototypes for at least ten to twenty thousand years prior to the appearance of these sophisticated settlements.  
  In fact the opposite exists. For some reason these settlements disappeared almost overnight and their knowledge was lost for thousands of years. To put it bluntly- humans went from living in building with running water, lighting and better ergonomic design than what we live in today- to living in straw huts, hiding in the hills- a complete reversal- as if humanity in those regions suffered collective amnesia.  
  In the case of Egypt, for example, feeble attempts have been made by historians to reposition proven "newer" structures than the Great Pyramid by simply ignoring architectural and scientific testing data. Yet, even these attempts fail to provide sufficient depth to the necessary evidence of "prototypes" required to prove "build by experience".  
  Take the 20th century for example, in the creation of the personal computer, we see several trails of historical thought and technical development leading to the defining moment when personal computers appeared. Yet to look at ancient civilizations such as Sumer, Egypt and Sth America without adequate proof of "build by experience" is to accept that somehow these civilizations one day came up with the equivalent of the personal computer out of thin air.  
20.7.4 Anomaly #3- Global examples of sophisticated settlements- rather than one point of origin  
  If the oldest example of human existence were just in Asia Minor in terms of human settlement, then the argument of the "evidence" of the evolution of human settlements simply being lost could be explained away. But the fact is that sophisticated settlements dating back as far as 15,000 as in the case of Lake Tititaca in Sth America have now been proven.  
  Because there this is impossible if you adhere to the theory of natural social evolution of human community life, these facts remain largely ignored by most academics earning a living in this arena of debate.  
20.7.5 Natural evolution of human settlement is was not the first credible theory on the origin of human settlements and technology  
  It may not surprise you to hear that the theory of natural evolution of humans settlements is only a fairly recent theory- popularized over the past 100 years. Prior to this period, the most popular theories centered around quasi-religious and religious teachings that civilization was a gift from God.  
  In fact the civilizations of the Sumerians, Olmecs and Egyptians themselves were quite explicit in explaining their existence. Simply, they stated their existence was not the result of natural human experience, but a gift from gods- coming from another star system.  
  In arguably one of the most bizarre of circumstances- we have never had more evidence as to the ability to genetically engineer life, travel in space and alter brain patterns, yet we refuse to even consider the possibility that our original structures of society are not our own.  
<<Back       Continue>>

Copyright © 2009 UCADIA. All rights reserved.