171–180 of 199 posts
That's impossible, the mirror wasn't invented until millennia later, so there's no way the sculptor would have known what a human face looked like. They must think we're stupid.
So, they were all blind? They couldn't see each other? (Not to mention reflection in water).
That's impossible, the mirror wasn't invented until millennia later, so there's no way the sculptor would have known what a human face looked like. They must think we're stupid.
The age is pretty impressive, also I noticed that Firefox could translate the article without issues using privacy-preserving offline translation. Now nobody will know that I have read the article!
Kind of looks like the Stonks guy meme.
Sorry, but the rectangular eyebrow and nose could just as well be a construction feature - a notch for stabilizing a wall or a beam to the next pillar. Any mouth is too faint.
Great find! and I don’t want to underestimate the discovery by any means, but... We humans are predisposed to see anthropomorphic shapes in things. I understand why that could be interpreted as a face, but at the same time, it could just be a random shape. It’s just a “T” shape. Sure, it could look like a nose and a pair of eyes, but it could also just be... something.
> We humans are predisposed to see anthropomorphic shapes in things. This was sculpted by other modern humans.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
mostly because all the bones of all the dead were mixed in with all the others. implying no concept of "this guy was THE guy in my lifetime". but they presumably still had a meritocracy because while the bones were mixed in with all others of all generations, not everyone would have their bones were mixed in upon death. it was likely only the craftsmen or shamans that achieved that honor. but being honored is differe…
That's an extraordinary claim since every group of humans in written history, not to mention chimps, whales, and probably all social vertebrates, form social hierarchies. If that's an accepted idea in the field, hopefully it comes with a lot more evidence than bones being mixed, as future archaeologists might find in many of our cemeteries of today.
The above comment also illustrates their biases. They map their knowledge to history that came much later to the Tepe sites. Stating that it was "was likely only the craftsmen or shamans" is a prime example of that.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't see why you couldn't have a highly hierarchical society that also has a "in death we're all the same" philosophy when it comes to burial.
So this person is at the top of the social hierarchy, dresses, eats, lives better than everybody else, then their child dies and they shrug and throw the body away in a common grave?
Also hierarchy doesn't mean that there is a single individual that's at the top. There could be a series of caste hierarchies, where groups of people were considered "better" than others.
We don't know if everyone from the tribe was in the common grave or a select group of people.
You're building a narrative based on your knowledge of other civilizations histories and understanding of modern day social structures, and assuming those traits must apply to this civilization. The truth is, we don't, and likely won't ever, know how their social hierarchy was built. Anything said is speculation. This isn't the case where you can be 80% confident something is true, more like 2% confident based on the discovered evidence.