Also enjoying Ancient Apocalypse.
It’s great to offer new hypotheses and evidence that challenge existing paradigms.
Just don’t need an advanced civilization from the Ice Age to explain what Hancock puts forward as evidence of one.
Hancock points out myths that attribute megalithic structures to an early race of giants
He interprets the giants as a memory of remnants of an advanced civ.
But attributing BIG BUILDING to BIG PEOPLE is the most simplistic folk explanation when you’ve FORGOTTEN who built them
“Who built BIG BUILDING?”
“BIG PEOPLE!!!”
That seems less a memory than a lack of memory.
I say this as someone who sees a lot of value in myth and legend.
We have material remains from low-density, nomadic foragers with a limited material culture during and before the Ice Age.
But all the remains from a high-density, populous, advanced civilization were destroyed?
THAT DOESN’T MAKE ANY SENSE.
Yes, we will find older examples of everything.
Yes, foragers were more advanced than thought.
Yes, we will find more structures and remains underwater that were submerged after the Ice Age.
Yes, myths often contain memories.
Yes, some ancient people were far more advanced than we ever realized, at least among small numbers of elites, and one artifact can revolutionize our understanding:
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antikythe…
Yes, scientific breakthroughs can overturn an existing paradigm overnight: en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interbree…
Yes, academics are notoriously territorial and often resent outsiders who achieve popular success.
No, I haven’t seen evidence of an advanced Ice Age civilization of the kind Graham Hancock proposes.
Here’s an archaeologist who responds to each episode of Ancient Apocalypse.
Pretty gracious/un-defensive about things Hancock gets right, but points out some of the flaws in his logic and evidence.
archeothoughts.wordpress.com
Yes, Hancock is correct that history is not an uninterrupted rise of civilizational complexity (a view that is called Whig history).
There are times, such as the Bronze Age Collapse, when complexity falls and things are forgotten.
Yes, we could still discover sites that reveal civilizational complexity that is earlier than currently thought to exist.
And it’s fine to look!
But its also fine to say that based on current evidence, I think the strong form of Hancock’s hypothesis is wrong.
True that many ancient monuments had an astronomical purpose.
But as to Serpent Mound, if Hancock thinks it’s been refurbished and rebuilt many times, how well can the alignments be used to date the original construction?
Astronomy seems fruitful but sensitive to error.
Also, disparate cultures building monuments that point to the same astrological feature — say, the rise of Sirius — need not indicate a common cultural origin.
It’s the brightest star in the night sky.
The sky itself is a coordinating mechanism across time and place!
Lots of different cultures built monuments to the sun or moon.
Doesn’t mean there was a common origin or mysterious coordination.
The sun and moon are salient features of the heavens all over the world.
You can’t miss them!
Re: Gobeckli Tepe, Hancock claims it’s a profound mystery that the sculptures are so well formed, the construction so adept.
Where did they learn all these skills, from remnants of a lost civ?!
The next segment is a similar site nearby that is of more primitive construction.
I must say, the show is very well done — well written and narrated, terrific cinematography, and cool digital reconstructions.
Archaeologists who want to generate more funding and public interest could learn a thing a two.
I love ancient mysteries from the distant past!
If there weren’t a turf war and struggle over the science, I’m sure more academics would admit to a similar sense of wonderment at ancient mysteries in their childhood that inspired their career path.
A book about Ancient Egypt or the Mayans, a book that is now very out of date!
On ambiguous question of the ancient past, it’s okay to take a probabilistic point of view.
90% chance no complex societies capable of megalithic construction before end of Ice Age
9.9% chance of a complex society during Ice Age capable of megaliths, etc
0.1% chance Atlantis!
I think there’s something to all the flood myths.
Strikes me as plausible even though I haven’t researched all the cultural variations and possible origins.
Large, complex, durable things of common materials — like stone pyramids — are very well represented in the archaeological record.
Small, expensive, rare artifacts — like Antikythera mechanism — made of valuable materials that could be pillaged & repurposed are underrepresented
This suggests we systematically underestimate the sophistication of known ancient civilizations more than we overlook entire civilizations.
Imagine our civilization collapsed and 10k years from now, future humans were digging up our artifacts.
Assume they never translate our languages. All electronics dead.
They would know our civilization existed well before they learned we put a man on the moon, and might never.
Share this Scrolly Tale with your friends.
A Scrolly Tale is a new way to read Twitter threads with a more visually immersive experience.
Discover more beautiful Scrolly Tales like this.