Write something
Pinned
12h •
Civilisation Is Not 5,000 Years Old. It Is the Visible Surface of Something Far Older.
The conventional story of civilisation is elegant in its clarity and reassuring in its simplicity. For the vast majority of our species’ existence, we are told, Homo sapiens lived in small, mobile bands, operating within the ecological constraints of hunting and gathering, until the Neolithic transition, beginning roughly 10,000 to 12,000 years ago, introduced agriculture, sedentism, and eventually urban life. From this agricultural foundation emerged cities, writing, statecraft, and the recognisable forms of “civilisation” that appear in Mesopotamia around 3,500 BCE and subsequently in Egypt, the Indus Valley, and northern China. This model is not incorrect. However, it is increasingly apparent that it is incomplete. What recent decades of archaeological, palaeoenvironmental, and genetic research have revealed is not a dramatic overthrow of chronology, nor evidence of some forgotten technological super-culture, but rather something more subtle and, in many respects, more profound: that the social, symbolic, and organisational foundations upon which civilisation rests extend far deeper into prehistory than the emergence of cities and writing would suggest. If civilisation is understood not merely as urban density or bureaucratic administration but as sustained, large-scale symbolic cooperation across extended networks of communities, then its origins are not five millennia old. They are tens of millennia deep. The Cognitive Foundations: Symbol Before Stone Any serious reconsideration of civilisation’s origins must begin not with architecture but with cognition, because no monument, however large, can exist without shared systems of meaning capable of organising human effort across time. At Blombos Cave in South Africa, engraved ochre fragments dated to approximately 75,000 BCE exhibit deliberate cross-hatched patterns that cannot be explained as incidental markings. These engravings represent abstraction, and abstraction implies a capacity to encode meaning beyond immediate survival needs. Symbolic thought of this sophistication requires shared conventions, transmission across generations, and social continuity.
Pinned
12h •
A 640-Year-Old Castle Found Beneath a Private Mansion. What Does That Tell Us About Europe?
A 640-Year-Old Castle Found Beneath a Private Mansion. What Does That Tell Us About Europe? During excavation work in Vannes, in Brittany, archaeologists uncovered the remains of the 14th-century Château de l’Hermine beneath a private mansion. This was not a loose foundation stone or a decorative arch. It was a substantial medieval structure, once associated with the Dukes of Brittany, now sitting buried beneath later layers of private wealth. Pause on that for a moment. A seat of feudal authority.Buried beneath a modern residence.Not destroyed. Not erased. Simply layered over. Europe does not tend to erase its past. It accumulates it. The Château de l’Hermine was originally constructed in the late fourteenth century as a ducal fortress and residence. Over time, political systems changed, regimes shifted, and architectural tastes evolved. But the land remained. Power changed form, not location. This discovery raises several important questions. First, continuity of land control. How often has land remained in elite hands across centuries, simply adapting to new political systems? When we talk about revolutions and reforms, how much truly changes at ground level? Second, ownership of buried history.When medieval architecture is discovered beneath private property, who owns it?The landowner?The state?The public as collective inheritors of cultural memory? European heritage law often protects archaeological remains, but enforcement, preservation, and public access vary widely. Third, urban stratigraphy as memory.Cities such as Rome, Paris, London, and Istanbul are layered vertically. Every regime builds over the last. Yet we rarely think about the psychological effect of living above buried authority structures. Are we walking across forgotten centres of power every day? Finally, archaeology as interruption.Modern development assumes forward momentum. Archaeology interrupts that narrative. Every excavation reminds us that progress sits on foundations we did not build and rarely fully understand.
Pinned
5d •
How Old Are the Pyramids and the Sphinx? A Radical Claim and the Evidence Behind Every Theory
Most people are taught a simple answer to one of history’s biggest questions: the Great Pyramid of Giza was built around 4,500 years ago as the tomb of Pharaoh Khufu, and the Sphinx belongs to the same Old Kingdom building programme. That explanation isn’t invented and it isn’t weak, but it also isn’t the only one that exists. The article below makes a much more radical claim. It suggests that the Great Pyramid may be vastly older than the accepted timeline, possibly tens of thousands of years old, based not on texts or archaeology, but on erosion analysis. Whether that claim turns out to be right or wrong is almost secondary. What matters is that it forces a better question: How do we actually know how old the pyramids and the Sphinx are, and what evidence are different theories really relying on? This post uses the article as a conversation starter, then expands outward to look at every major theory about the age of the pyramids and the Sphinx, from orthodox Egyptology to the most extreme alternatives, and the strengths and weaknesses of each. https://allthatsinteresting.com/when-was-the-great-pyramid-of-giza-built The mainstream position places the construction of the Great Pyramid in the 4th Dynasty of the Old Kingdom, during the reign of Khufu, roughly in the mid-third millennium BCE. This view isn’t based on tradition or assumption. It rests on multiple independent lines of evidence. Administrative papyri discovered at Wadi al-Jarf describe the transport of limestone from Tura to Giza during Khufu’s reign and reference a project widely identified as the Great Pyramid. Radiocarbon dating of organic material found in mortar and construction debris consistently falls within an Old Kingdom timeframe, with known offsets explained by the reuse of older wood. The wider archaeological context matters too: causeways, temples, worker settlements, and quarries all form a coherent state-run building programme rather than a monument inherited from the distant past.
1
0
12h •
When do you think civilisation begins?
This follows from our recent discussion on deep-time complexity.If sites such as Göbekli Tepe predate widespread agriculture, and symbolic behaviour stretches back tens of thousands of years, perhaps our definition needs refining. Vote, then explain your reasoning.
Poll
1 member has voted
1
0
3d •
If the Persians Had Won, the World Would Be Calmer, and Smaller
The idea that the West was “saved” at Marathon or Salamis is so deeply embedded in historical storytelling that it is rarely questioned. We are taught that a Persian victory would have smothered freedom, crushed thought, and extinguished the spark that became modern civilisation. This is comforting. It flatters us. It is also only half true. If the Achaemenid Empire had defeated the Greek city-states decisively in the early fifth century BC, the world would not have descended into darkness. It would have become something more stable, more hierarchical, and less obsessed with the individual voice. In many ways, it might have been a quieter world. Whether it would have been a better one depends on what we value. Persian rule was not built on cultural erasure. Across Anatolia, Mesopotamia, and Egypt, local customs, religions, and elites were left largely intact so long as taxes were paid and rebellions avoided. Greece would almost certainly have followed the same pattern. Athens might have survived as a wealthy port city. Sparta as a regional military culture. Greek art, language, and religion would have endured. What would not have endured is the idea that ordinary citizens should openly argue about how power is exercised. That loss matters. Athenian democracy was crude, exclusionary, and short-lived, but it normalised something historically radical: the belief that authority could be publicly questioned by non-elites. From that atmosphere came not just political experimentation, but a confrontational style of thinking. Figures like Socrates were not valuable because they offered answers, but because they made disruption respectable. A Persian-dominated Greece would likely still have produced philosophy, but it would have been philosophical instruction rather than philosophical challenge. Wisdom, not argument. The result would have been a world more comfortable with empire as the natural state of affairs. Central authority, layered administration, and managed diversity would have been the norm, not the problem to be solved. Without an independent Greece, there is no obvious route to Alexander the Great, no Hellenistic explosion, and no Greek intellectual framework spreading westward into Rome. Rome would still rise, but into a world shaped by Persian models of governance rather than Greek ideas of citizenship. Law and order would likely trump representation and debate.
0
0
1-24 of 24
skool.com/the-worldmind-society-1949
A home for curious minds exploring culture, story, place, and history through thoughtful learning, writing, and meaningful discussions.
Powered by