Posted on 11/12/2010 8:08:52 PM PST by SunkenCiv
According to the head of the national archeological mission working at the site Thayer Yerta, carved panels and archeological findings dating back to the beginning of the agricultural revolution in the 10th Millennium B.C. were unearthed at Tel al-Abar 3 site, left bank of the Euphrates River, the panels are made from chlorites (green precious stone) with different engravings and figures.
He added that "one of these panels portrayed an eagle with wings spread wide and snake-form sculptures on the two sides. Another panel has an abstract sculpture of three eagle sculptures spreading their wings behind which the sun appears."
A building with decorated terrace was also uncovered inside a hole at a depth of 130 cm and a diameter of 750 cm.
The findings help shed light on two major practices of ancient people which are farming and fishing. They also provided us with a hint about the way of life those people used to have as well as their social and economic life.
A chlorite vessel of a bull was among the findings as well as a vessel for a man without head in squat position and hands spread wide holding a spear in his right hand.
A stone panel of two parts was discovered. There is a spike sculpture surrounded by two hands on the upper part while the lower contains a sculpture for a bull head with a snake beside it.
Yerta said that the sculptures on the panel indicate the first agricultural activity for inhabitants lived on the banks of Euphrates River.
|
· join list or digest · view topics · view or post blog · bookmark · post a topic · subscribe · |
|||
Antiquity Journal & archive Archaeologica Archaeology Archaeology Channel BAR Bronze Age Forum Discover Dogpile Eurekalert LiveScience Mirabilis.ca Nat Geographic PhysOrg Science Daily Science News Texas AM Yahoo Excerpt, or Link only? |
|
||
|
· Science topic · science keyword · Books/Literature topic · pages keyword · |
|||
WOW! What a find. Incredible that they are that old and I marvel at 1,000 old Indian rock carvings.
Oops.
“1,000 old”:
“1,000 year old”
Where’s the link?
Oops. Click the pic, it links to the story. Guess I neglected to paste it in, hard as that is to believe, I’m no rookie...
http://www.dp-news.com/pages/detail.aspx?l=2&articleId=62571
Excuse me, but doesn’t 10th millenium BC ecuate to approx. 10,000 BC? Wouldn’t this set known discoveries on its head? Or, is the article incorrect on its dates?
Good catch. I suspect they meant 10th century B.C.
Nope.. “agricultural revolution” was about 14k years ago.
Actually, new discoveries are being made frequently enough now that some of the older accepted dates are being discarded.
For example, we now know that much of the Persian Gulf was dry land 10,000 years ago. As the great ice sheets melted and sea levels world-wide rose, areas previously inhabited became flooded and peoples migrated inland. Some of those previously inhabited but now flooded abodes have been found, on the sea floor between England and France, and stone cities 35 km off the southern coasts of India.
Since the ice sheets actually began melting 15,000 years ago, this puts the beginnings of human civilization back quite a few millenia!
Wow. That’s quite a find. 10th millenium BC would make it 12,000 years old.
Thanks for clarifying that.
And won't it be a kicker when they find out a major point of origin was the Amazon basin.
Yes, there is that, and southern India and Indonesia.
Is this find identified with Sumer? Same general area. Sounds like in the region where Ur was/is to me.
The pre-Sumerian Ur is known as Ubaid; the Sumerians themselves said they’d come in from the Persian Gulf. This find is older, and not a precursor; from the Neolithic or New Stone Age. The article sez it dates from the dawn of agriculture, but a sample of multirow barley (which is a domesticated form, and requires irrigation) from (if memory serves) somewhere NE of this site, RC dated to 14,000 years ago.
Thanks all! While I had my lazy self in bed sleeping, all of you kept busy.
For more Syrian/Anatolian stuff (not quite as old), here’s a nice page:
http://www.metmuseum.org/toah/ht/?period=02®ion=wae
An early Obama bureaucrat.
The timeline at that site says "Pre-pottery neolithic, 10,000-7,000 B.C." and yet the article we are discussing in this thread is talking about finds from 10,000 B.C. and you show what appears to be a pottery vessel in your post.
Is this a conflict, or am I missing something (which would not be unusual where archaeology is concerned)?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
