Notice how he changed from “Sumer was the first civilization” to “Sumer was the first city” to back up his “Genesis” nonsense claim? I can’t wait until we get his claim “Sumer was the first city with indoor plumbing”
Sumer is icumen in. Lhude sing cuccu.
7000 years ago… before the rise of the Sumer civilization, agriculture came to the Middle East… and then passed on into Anatolia on its way to Europe.
The bigger the river systems agriculture encountered, the more potential there was for civilization to emerge to coordinate the use of the river ecology… which then facilitated larger populations… which created feedback loops to better exploit the river niche even better… as well as to co-opt neighboring people and ideas.
And yet, on the other side of the Earth, some native Americans joined into hierarchical societies, and some rejected hierarchies and became exemplars of egalitarian societies. As we were told in the movie “DANCES WITH WOLVES”: “…no man can tell another man what he can or cannot do…”
On such differences, we cannot build a theory of the image of God.
So you’ve been following along well enough to notice I changed from first civilization to first city, did you not see all the confusion and disagreement over the definition of “civilization” that caused the change?
You’re the one that linked to a list to show Sumer wasn’t the first civilization by including the Aborigines as a civilization. So I pointed out that a Sumerian city is the first city. We’re still talking about the first civilization, I just had to change how I was showing that, specifically for you.
Yes, it’s often thought that it’s the change to agricultural/farming practices that brought about all the changes that led to the first civilizations through higher concentrated populations and interactions and such.
The problem with that is that farming was being adopted all across the European and Asian continent, yet the sudden advancements seen in places like Sumer didn’t happen in any of those other places. There are numerous highly populated farming cultures that formed that never advanced the way Sumer did.
So the idea that farming/agriculture is the cause isn’t consistent with the evidence.
LOL! Now you’re going to claim the Sumerians “invented” the city and that no other city-states were developing in other parts of the world at the same time?
You’re a pretty funny guy!
Stop laughing at me and actually help by showing me that I’m wrong.
Some claims are so loopy and off-base all they deserve is laughter.
You’re doing all this just to support your “Genesis” claim too, right? The one no historian or anthropologist anywhere accepts?
Give me a definition of “city” which is universally accepted. How to you tell when a large town crosses the magic line to being a city?
True, I’ve yet to come across anyone qualified that’s even considered what I’m claiming.
But I’ve got loads of evidence to back up everything I’m saying. Your only arguments against thus far have been responses like this where there’s no references sited. You’ve yet to back up anything you’ve said. I’m just silly for thinking such nonsense.
Show me it’s “loopy” and “off-base”. If you’re able. Surprise me.
If there were a universally accepted definition then googling “first human city” would only return one response.
Ya think? Why do you suppose historians who have been studying the evidence for centuries never stumbled on your “loads of evidence” idea?
So “city” is just like “civilization” - highly subjective. Pretty much cuts the legs out from under your argument, eh?
Well, because there’s been a lot of confusion over how Genesis is interpreted. This whole site is about exploring an idea not covered or considered by historians or theologians. So, what makes my view “loopy” or “off-base”, compared to any other views/discussions going on here?
No. But because you count cultures like the Aborigines among human “civilizations” I had to pivot. I thought what a “civilization” is was clearly understood. You’re the one that made me reconsider that.
The claim that cities and civilizations only formed after two specific people were given “free will” in a specific location in the Middle East is loopy. We have tons of evidence showing the gradual rise of civilization and villages growing into towns then into cities occurring at the same time in parallel all over the globe.
Why do you keep harping on the Aborigines while ignoring the Jiahu and Peiligang cultures of China which predate the Sumerians by 1500 years?
You’ve apparently got some reading to do before you’re qualified to determine whether or not my claim is loopy. You’ve been very off on a lot of relevant information so far.
Get your claim published in a professional Archaeology or Anthropology journal along with your “evidence”, then crow.
Because most everyone here is much more familiar with the Aborigines than they are with the other two. Both of those other cultures do not qualify for the same reason the Aborigines do not.
This is all your fault. Don’t blame me.