1.  Sumerian, c. 3500 BC

2.  Egyptian, c. 3300 BC

3.  Elamite, c. 3200 BC

4.  Meluhhan, c. 2700 BC

5.  Marian/Eblaite, c. 2500 BC

Honorable Mention:

6.  Subarian, c. 2400 BC

7.  Hattian, c. 2300 BC

8.  Chinese, c. 2200 BC

Yes, and what is also not mentioned in his description is "writing" and "complex political and social institutions".  Nothing resembling the kind of bureaucratic and social stratification one finds in the earliest historic period like that of Mesopotamia or Egypt.  Sesklo may have been large by European standards, but it would not compare with Uruk in terms of size, complexity, architecture, or record-keeping.  Population studies show that Uruk was probably the first city, while Sesklo would still be considered a village. 

A good definition of a city can be found here.

[url]  http://cas.bellarmine.edu/tietjen/images/first_cities(settle_down).htm/url - http://cas.bellarmine.edu/tietjen/images/first_cities(settle _down).htm[/url ]

http://www.cais-soas.com/CAIS/History/older.htm - http://www.cais-soas.com/CAIS/History/older.htm   Iran is really replacing Mesopotamia as the oldest civilization.

Sesklo (c. 6700-5200 BC) is older than Uruk, but that is irrelevant.  The truth of the matter is that there was very little progress thoughout the history of Sesklo, while Uruk (founded, c. 5000 BC) began as a village, but urbanization took place, and by c. 3500 BC, it became the first city.  Because of the boon in the economic life of Uruk and surrounding areas, begun c. 3800 BC which spread Urukian cultural influence throughout the Middle East, a need to create an adequate system of book-keeping developed resulting in the creation of writing by the time Uruk became a city.  Monumental architecture was already in evidence since about 4000 BC. 

Anybody reviewing that site, one is left with the impression that Iran is the origin of humanity, the Aryans, and all facits of civilization, and these are actually the authors conclusions at the end of his pseudo-treatise, and therefore should be viewed with extreme skepticism.  He does present some facts but they are drowned into so much misconception and factual mistakes, that finding the truth is too laborious for the casual reader.   This author's agenda is loud and clear, and so I don't recommend this site for consideration.

the chinese civilization actually started around 3000 bc as the huangdi tribe.

http://www.greatchinese.com/emperors/table.htm - http://www.greatchinese.com/emperors/table.htm

the source is, however, in chinese.

but it's the only existing ancient civilization in the world today. all others are gone already.

Archaeologically, there is no evidence of civilization in China, until the time of the Xia.  There is some evidence of urbanization in at least one site identified as a Xia capital, but nothing before that.  Full urbanization seemed to have occurred during Shang (Yin) times.  As for "the huangdi tribe", the original myth speaks of an individual legendary first king, named Huangdi.  There is nothing to suggests that the individual can be made into a tribe. 

When we can say that this city was very old or had a very large population that Archaeologists have found something there.

Do you know how many thousands of people were needed to build it: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sialk - The 7,500-year-old ziggurat of Silak

the huangdi tride is also known as the xia. its another name is haung xia.

it started around 3000 bc.

that's what the people call themselves even today. the xia people.

the greater china area in chinese, which includes mainland china, hong kong, and taiwan is also called zhen xia, which means central xia.

The links associated with the Wikipedia article show that Sialk was founded about 5000 BC but the ziggurat dates to only c. 2800 BC.  Nevertheless, it was the largest known as well as the most ancient ziggurat.  It had been speculated since the 70's that ziggurats may have originated in Iran, since the earliest indirect evidence of ziggurats in Mesopotamia only date from the time of Sargon of Akkad, c. 2300 BC. 

I think Sumer was more civilized than Elam but the Elamite civilization was older than the Sumerian civlization and I also think Susa (and maybe Anshan) was older than Uruk.

Of course Susa has changed its location through history:

Elamite Susa (Shush) where the 3250 years old ziggurat of Chogha Zanbil is, Achaemenid Susa [45 km west of the Elamite one] where the 2500 years old Apadana palace of Darius the Great is and the Parthian or Sassanid city of Susa (Shushtar=better than Shush) [20 km east of the Elamite one], where 1800 years old Sassanid dams and bridges are.

But Archaeologists have found another city of Susa which is at least 3000 years older than the Elamite Susa -> http://www.payvand.com/news/04/sep/1116.html - 6,000-Year-Old Ziggurat Found

At the center of the city, a ziggurat was built of which two floors still exist. A wall surrounded it, which is the inner wall of three concentric walls in Dur Untash. Between the inner wall and the middle wall several temples belonging to different Elamite divinities were built. The outer city wall was about 4 km long enclosing an area of approximately 100 hectares. The royal quarter was situated adjacent to a major city gate some 450 meters east of the ziggurat. In this area, a group of three major buildings with large courts surrounded by lengthy halls and rooms were excavated. Beneath one of theses buildings (Palace I), five underground tombs were found similar to those of Haft Tappeh (Kabnak).

1.  Elamite, c. 4200 BC

2.  Sumerian, c. 3800 BC (but the Sumerian was more civilized than Elamite)

3.  Egyptian, c. 2900 BC (first dynasty 2920- 2770)

4.  Meluhhan, c. 2700 BC

5.  Marian/Eblaite, c. 2500 BC

6.  Subarian, c. 2500 BC

7.  Hattian, c. 2500 BC (see turkey history)

8.  Chinese, c. 2200 BC

Many of the new archeological digs show that Elam was an older civilization than Sumer. Articles and studies about this poping up all over the place, but most are not main stream yet

The article first announces this 6,000 year figure, but when it gets to specifics, the result is that Dur Untash was founded by Untash Napirisha (c. 1266-1245 BC).  Hardly 6,000 years ago; more like 3260 years.  Care must be taken also when evaluating an article to note how recent it is.  Initial estimates about the age of new discoveries tend to be adjusted downwards as the progress of research and digging continues.

Thus far, such articles which make that claim that I've seen, on close examination simply don't make the case.  One article I've seen claims that proto-Elamite script is older then Sumerian pre-cuneiform.  The most current evidence, however, still shows that pre-cuneiform is older, and that proto-Elamite owes some of its forms and numeric system to proto-cuneiform.  As I've stated above, initial estimates on the age of new discoveries should be taken with caution until better studies establish their true dating.  Another thing that should be borne in mind, is to examine articles which make such claims.  I've seen too many articles which have flashy titles only to find nothing in them to substantiate such claims.  In the case of the article cited by Cyrus, the 6,000 year figure given does not conform to the article which specified that an Elamite king founded the site about  3260 years ago.

****This advertising is in no way on topic and has been edited.  For permission to advertise a partner forum please contact the Administrators.***

vagabond

Here, here Cywr.  Yes that's right.

The word "civilization" as been tossed about to justify anything, to the point that where humanity began was the beginning of civilization.  In archaeological circles there is a phenomenon called an "industry", a "culture", and a "civilization".  An industry describes the first rudimentary artefacts of human creation, usually stone tools.  This term covers human development in Paleolithic times.  When stone tools are found with other artefacts, such as pottery, remnants of settlements, etc. we use the term "culture" to describe those assemblages.  When we use the term "civilization" we use it as a developement of a "culture" where the village developes into a city.  In current terminology, the earliest city was Uruk.  Coincidently, writing developed at about the same time that Uruk reached the status of a city, c. 3500 BC.

Ancient civilizations are something like this but the actual ranking is almost imposible to account for so here goes

Sumerian, Egyptian, Harappan, Chinese, Mayan

It is so sad and shows how narrow minded most people are when they ignore the Meso-American civilizations and Harappa.

There is a difference between indo-european languages and aryan religion. Aryan took birth in the vedas and avestan this is a notion of respect. Maybe an indoeupean language gradually came to India in a pacific way( the harrapa was dstruct by the time not by invaders), but the Indo-european didn't call themselfs aryan before the vedas.

Harappa could not have degraded by time because it was a sudden downfall not a gradual downfall.

No There is no evience of an "aryan" invasion. The AIT is completly false, This is a racist concept.

The first was sumer 5000 B.C

and the first village in the world was in mesopotamia too (JARMO)

 Aren't all of you discussing which groups got around to the idea of bashing their neighbor's heads in first? You've moved from a first assumption, civilization must be equated with cities, and moved quickly into a second: material grandeur constitutes civilization. Both, as Sharrukin underscored leave much to be desired. Could not a society function within 'civilized' parameters and abjure urbanization? Is not this latter more a response to conflict than a desired 'advance' in organization?  How do 'societies' respond with respect to their environment and hence organize their material priorities? Early neolithic centers in Anatolia and elsewhere might not have had the needs imposed by arid riverine environs that led to complex construction. Were all of these endeavors truly isolated from one another or are there links?

The race is won not by the first from the block but by the one that lasted the course.  Who got of the block 'first' with urbanized head-bashing? so far it's those lower Mesopotamian rascals south of Ur with their ox 'chariots'--in all probability many of the original settlements have disappeared under the waters of the Persian Gulf. But then Narmer was probably not far behind and apparently recent research has given a heads up to the Egyptians with regard to not only 'writing' but actually having more than a 'city-state' political organization.

I Think you are more closer to the truth than the rest. But i ask you too take early history serious. The less older civilization of present be advised would like the world to believe thier skin color is superior and that thier culture is far more advanced than the less mentioned african people. Indeed all Artifacts studied and kept (stolen) have been by europeans, Truth I ask you to seek with Intellegent study. The rabbit hole runs deeper than some BarBarians claiming the holes outer layer.

This is a useless topic. There is NO top 5 list of first civilized peoples. The process of becoming civilized is an ongoin process that man has endured, that we are still carrying out today. Where you wish to draw the line of civilized and non-civilized is your choice.

Personally I think general regions that began settling in larger cities and using agriculture include the general areas of Mesopotamia, Indus valley, Iranian plateau, and Yangtze river valley. There may have been more though. IMO places like Sumeria or Elam did not just get civilized but rather gradually developed into it by their discoveries and their interactions with other peoples.

I'm afraid it is you who is ignorant here. Here: check out this topic for more info on early cultures/civilizations in the Balkans. They may not have been the oldest, or the most advanced civilizations, but they certainly deserve an honorable mention.

http://www.allempires.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=6877&PN=2 - http://www.allempires.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=6877& ;PN=2

I'd say that Mesoptamia together with a few other parts of the Fertile crescent deserves the title of the oldest civilization in the world. As for establishing an actual ranking, how do we decide at what precise date a culture becomes a civilization? Where are all those dates that you guys throw around coming from? This is a futile argument.

To truly date the first civilization one must first fine the starting point of human ingenuity. Then trace the progress of it to the point of permanent dwellings. Such as this maybe: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/662794.stm - http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/662794.stm . Culture as in the advent of traditions and social behaviour can be traced back to our first ancestor when you see the behaviour of apes in their social groups. The use of tools and manipulations of our environment can be traced back nearly as far. Painting on cave walls show that many family groups lived in caves and perhaps made these their permanent dwellings. Perhaps they could have been small communities. Such as http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cave_painting - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cave_painting .

As to actually civilization the building of the first city there are many across the board. The South American Mayan civilization though dated to 1500 AD to have such a sophisticated method of living and a road system 14,000 miles long I think this culture deserves a closer look. The Point is until we know our full history we can only speculate, attempt to discover and learn more and possibly we will find that our first civilization was over 10,000 years ago. When researching a society try to look at all aspects of it.chemas-microsoft-comfficeffice" />>>

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/662794.stm -  

this would make more sense if it were:

oldest existing civilisation.

which would make the list Iran, China, Greece, and Egypt (if you dont believe that the arabisation of Egypt techinically ended Egypts connection with its past.)

first of all, turkey has nothing to do with troy, troy was a different civilisation. 

and lets see, egyptians now refer to themselves as arabs, speak arabic, and have embraced arabic culture, so some could say that egypt has lost its connection with its ancestors.

and as far as i know, bulgarians still speak bulgarian and still have their own culture.

what you say makes no sense at all.

what you are saying is basically this:  turkey can claim hitite, byzantine, trojan, and greek history just because at different points in history these different civilisations inhabited the same land?

and

that Iraq can claim sumerian, babylonian, assyrian, etc... history just because they now have that land.

that makes no sense at all. 

 and let me add, the USA can claim native american as their own civilisation, the mongols can claim chinese civilisation,  afghans can claim the mongol empire....

is anyone else reading these statements this guy is making?

Not actually: in this case there was a genocide and a mass replacement of population but I'm pretty sure that wasn't the case in the rest of the aforementioned examples. Sumerians abandoned their language for Akkadian and then for Aramean to finally learn Arab... but they are still there: Kuwaities and Iraqui Shias are clearly descendants of the Sumerians.

I don't kow why you have such a problem with that. It's not about claiming because you can perfectly be a direct descendant of Cyrus that you are not him nor can claim what you ancestor did: just bear it like a part of your ancestry, not something you have done yourself. Only what you have done yourself you can claim as fully yours.

1.Melunhnan 7500 BC

Mesopotamia was home to some of the oldest major ancient civilizations, including the Sumerians, Akkadians, Babylonians and Assyrians. They were all one people and spoked the same language. There were no differences between them.  My conclusion is that everybody knows that the world first civilisation started in Mesopotamia. Many scientist, professors and archaeologist have evidence and proved that it started with Mesopotamia..

The Sumerians spoke "Sumerian", a language totally unrelated to Akkadian (i.e. Old Akkadian, Babylonian, Assyrian).  Sumerian was an agglutinative language, whereas Akkadian languages were inflective languages. 

Minoans were an ofshot of Egypt.

TURKISH ...BC 7500

oldest civilisation!

omg, this is a history forum, if you just joined to cause trouble, then you will get banned really quickly. 

first of all, that is turkish, second of all, we are not talking about the oldest people, we are talking about the oldest civilisation!  if you want to go by the oldest people,

the iranians, basques, etc.. africans, aborigines, etc...

this is an oldest civilisation thread.

yeah like you

u.... like me?? have a look around the this sub forum. look at how many threads i have made.

yet when someone comes in here with only 10 posts, and is trolling, then it shows why they have joined the forum.

• The one day is divided into 14 periods. Six such periods are over. We are now in the 7th.
• Each period is named after the One Ruler who is appointed to rule the entire earthly world during that period. The generic name for such a ruler is Manu. The period is called a Manvantara.
• The name of the present Manu is Vaivasvata, the son of the Sun-God.
• How long is the day of Brahma ? ( http://www.indiaheritage.org/rendez/article1.htm#brama - 4.32 billion years )
• What is the present http://www.indiaheritage.org/rendez/article1.htm#age - age of this universe ?
• What is the http://www.indiaheritage.org/rendez/article1.htm#hindu - Hindu concept of Time ?

Names of the manvantaras of this day of Brahma upto the present seventh.
(each manvantara is of duration 306,720,000 human years)

             7. Vaivasvata          http://www.indiaheritage.org/rendez/article1.htm#image1 - PRESENT MANVANTARA
                        There are http://www.indiaheritage.org/rendez/article1.htm#episode - seven more manvantaras to go in the future

We are in the 7th manvantara .
Each manvantara is divided into 71 maha-yugas.
We are in the 28th maha-yuga of this manvantara.
Each maha-yuga is divided into 4 yugas shown below for the current maha-yuga.

Age of the Universe

Duration of Brahma’s day

One day of Brahma is of duration equivalent to 1000 mahayugas. His night is equally long. At the beginning of every day creation starts. At the end of the day all that was created merge in the Absolute and Brahma ‘sleeps’ as it were. 360 such days and nights make one year of Brahma. According to the Puranas, He has spent 50 years like this and this day is the first day in his fifty-first year!

One day of Brahma  = 14 manvantaras + 15 manvantara twilights
(because there is an extra manvantara - twilight at the end of all the 14 manvantaras)

= 14 x 71 mahayugas + 15 x 4 l
= 994 mahayugas + 60 l
= 994 mahayugas + 6 mahayugas
= 1000 mahayugas
= 1000 x10 l = 4,320,000,000 human years.

One ‘second’ of Brahma http://www.indiaheritage.org/rendez/article1.htm#image1 - = 4,320,000,000 / 12x60x60 = 100,000 human years

http://www.indiaheritage.org/rendez/article1.htm#back - Names of the remaining seven (future) manvantaras of this day of Brahma 8 Saavarni   -------------------> 9 Daksha-saavarni 10 Brahma-saavarni 11 Dharma-saavarni 12 Rudra-saavarni 13 Deva-saavarni 14 Indra-saavarni after which cosmic night will follow The next Manu (i.e., the eighth) will be Saavarni. This promise was made by Mother Goddess to one King Suratha during the http://www.indiaheritage.org/rendez/article1.htm#image1 - second Manvantara . To him (and another) the triple story of Mother Goddess is narrated in the Devi-bhagavatam ( also Chandi or Durg A-saptasati ). The story begins from a mythological event that happened after the end of the last kalpa (= day of Brahma) and ends up by forecasting the feats of Mother Goddess that are yet to happen in this kalpa. One such is the prediction that Suratha will be born as Manu Saavarni.                                  A mind that cannot comprehend to such times call all these things myths,  these were callled myths until the scientists by their own tools put the age of earth ot 4 billion years....but this is what from acient times the Hindus beleived.....                                 Now its time the Iranians grabbed this one too and make this their part of civilisation....                               Anyone who has such info is got to be the oldest civilization , the mayans, the aztechs and a few other had similar views but not in such detail, so it got to be Indian civilization the oldest of all.

---

Posted By: Gloval
Date Posted: 30-Jun-2006 at 00:43

---

We get the point, hindus make irrelevant the idea of linear time. As i recall kali yuga means we are about to "restart" the cycle sometime in the next few aeons. But these ideas came after the established middle eastern civilizations since they were passed down sometime after 1500 bce i think. Their origins could go deeper but the indus valley didn't exist as a civilization until after the mid eastern ones took off. i don't think it makes sense to call some of the ancient civilizations iranian though, it's like calling babylon an iraqi civilization. I know most people are aware of that, but i think i saw some people just lumping everything from iran as iranian.      ------------- You don't spread democracy through the barrel of a gun.

---

Posted By: varma
Date Posted: 30-Jun-2006 at 04:21

---

Your notion that middle eastern civilizations to be old, is not in tune with the latest archelogical discoversies being made in the World.....            The ruins discovered in the GULF of Cambay are dated to be 9500 years old. It is found at the exact place of the Legendary Sri Krishna's capital city DWARAk which was recorded in the Mahabarath to have submerged in the sea..              Moreover there is not much of time difference between Indus and Mesaptomia, both the civilization evoloved side by side and the advances made by Indus valley stand out as ahead of their times visit the site and update some current affairs about civilization http://www.grahamhancock.com/forum/BadrinaryanB1.php?p=1 - http://www.grahamhancock.com/forum/BadrinaryanB1.php?p=1

---

Posted By: Sharrukin
Date Posted: 30-Jun-2006 at 04:22

---

Here's the problem with judging time using the "yuga cycle".  There is simply nothing to confirm it - no inscriptions, no other physical correlations, nothing.   Virtually everything written, comes from a religious source; a source from a much more recent time.  I've read, where the date of Rama was said to be as early as 7,000 BC, yet when placed in the context of the Puranas, the implication is that he reigned for hundreds of years, along with each of his successors.  This is obviously unnatural, and thus must be rejected as historical.  If varma insists on this perception of history, let it be understood by all that it is in context of his own faith and not to sober history.

---

Posted By: varma
Date Posted: 30-Jun-2006 at 05:04

---

Even if we the Indian mythology and its tmelines as as just fictio what about the archeology that suggest the existence of even more older civilisation a synopsis of Indus and much more older civilisation http://www.arikah.com/encyclopedia/Indus_Valley_Civilization - Indus Valley 3300–1700 BC The Indus Valley civilization first appeared around 3300 BC at http://www.arikah.com/encyclopedia/Harappa - Harappa , followed by Mohenjo-Daro a few centuries later. By 2600 BC, it had developed into the most advanced civilization of its time, covering almost all Pakistan and North-Western http://www.arikah.com/encyclopedia/India - India . The earliest-known http://www.arikah.com/encyclopedia/Farming - farming cultures in http://www.arikah.com/encyclopedia/South_Asia - South Asia emerged in the hills of http://www.arikah.com/encyclopedia/Balochistan%2C_Pakistan - Balochistan, Pakistan , which included http://www.arikah.com/encyclopedia/Mehrgarh - Mehrgarh in http://www.arikah.com/encyclopedia/7000_BC - 7000 BC . These semi-nomadic peoples domesticated http://www.arikah.com/encyclopedia/Wheat - wheat , http://www.arikah.com/encyclopedia/Barley - barley , sheep, goat and http://www.arikah.com/encyclopedia/Cattle - cattle . http://www.arikah.com/encyclopedia/Pottery - Pottery was in use by the http://www.arikah.com/encyclopedia/6th_millennium_BC - 6th millennium BC . The oldest http://www.arikah.com/encyclopedia/Granary - granary yet found in http://www.arikah.com/encyclopedia/Mehrgarh - Mehrgarh in the http://www.arikah.com/encyclopedia/Indus_Valley - Indus Valley dates from http://www.arikah.com/encyclopedia/6000_BC - 6000 BC . Their http://www.arikah.com/encyclopedia/Hamlet - settlement consisted of mud buildings that housed four internal subdivisions. http://www.arikah.com/encyclopedia/Burial - Burials included elaborate goods such as http://www.arikah.com/encyclopedia/Basket - baskets , http://www.arikah.com/encyclopedia/Stone_tools - stone and bone http://www.arikah.com/encyclopedia/Tool - tools , http://www.arikah.com/encyclopedia/Bead - beads , http://www.arikah.com/encyclopedia/Bangle - bangles , http://www.arikah.com/encyclopedia/Pendant - pendants and occasionally http://www.arikah.com/encyclopedia/Animal_sacrifice - animal sacrifices . http://www.arikah.com/encyclopedia/Figurine - Figurines and ornaments of http://www.arikah.com/encyclopedia/Sea_shell - sea shell , http://www.arikah.com/encyclopedia/Limestone - limestone , http://www.arikah.com/encyclopedia/Turquoise - turquoise , http://www.arikah.com/encyclopedia/Lapis_lazuli - lapis lazuli , http://www.arikah.com/encyclopedia/Sandstone - sandstone and polished http://www.arikah.com/encyclopedia/Copper - copper have been found. By the http://www.arikah.com/encyclopedia/4th_millennium_BC - 4th millennium BC we find much evidence of http://www.arikah.com/encyclopedia/Manufacturing - manufacturing . http://www.arikah.com/encyclopedia/Technology - Technologies included stone and copper http://www.arikah.com/encyclopedia/Drill - drills , updraft http://www.arikah.com/encyclopedia/Kiln - kilns , large pit kilns and copper melting http://www.arikah.com/encyclopedia/Crucible - crucibles . Button http://www.arikah.com/encyclopedia/Seal_%28device%29 - seals included geometric designs. By 4000 BC, a pre- http://www.arikah.com/encyclopedia/Harappa - Harappan culture emerged, with http://www.arikah.com/encyclopedia/Trade - trade networks including http://www.arikah.com/encyclopedia/Lapis_lazuli - lapis lazuli and other raw materials. http://www.arikah.com/encyclopedia/Village - Villagers domesticated numerous other crops, including http://www.arikah.com/encyclopedia/Pea - peas , http://www.arikah.com/encyclopedia/Sesame_seed - sesame seed , http://www.arikah.com/encyclopedia/Date_%28fruit%29 - dates , and http://www.arikah.com/encyclopedia/Cotton - cotton , plus a wide range of domestic animals, including the http://www.arikah.com/encyclopedia/Water_buffalo - water buffalo which still remains essential to intensive http://www.arikah.com/encyclopedia/Agriculture - agricultural production throughout http://www.arikah.com/encyclopedia/Asia - Asia today. There is also evidence of http://www.arikah.com/encyclopedia/Shipbuilding - sea-going craft. Archaeologists have discovered a massive, dredged canal and docking facility at the coastal city of http://www.arikah.com/encyclopedia/Lothal - Lothal , http://www.arikah.com/encyclopedia/India - India , perhaps the world's oldest sea-faring harbor. Judging from the dispersal of artifacts the trade networks integrated portions of http://www.arikah.com/encyclopedia/Afghanistan - Afghanistan , the http://www.arikah.com/encyclopedia/Iran - Persian coast, northern and central http://www.arikah.com/encyclopedia/India - India , http://www.arikah.com/encyclopedia/Mesopotamia - Mesopotamia (see http://www.arikah.com/encyclopedia/Meluhha - Meluhha ) and http://www.arikah.com/encyclopedia/Ancient_Egypt - Ancient Egypt (see http://www.arikah.com/encyclopedia/Silk_Road - Silk Road ). Archaeologists studying the remains of two men from http://www.arikah.com/encyclopedia/Mehrgarh - Mehrgarh , http://www.arikah.com/encyclopedia/Pakistan - Pakistan , discovered that these peoples in the http://www.arikah.com/encyclopedia/Indus_Valley_Civilization - Indus Valley Civilization had knowledge of http://www.arikah.com/encyclopedia/Medicine - medicine and http://www.arikah.com/encyclopedia/Dentistry - dentistry as early as circa http://www.arikah.com/encyclopedia/3300_BC - 3300 BC . Recently there was found dentistry as early as 7000 BC ( see http://archaeology.about.com/od/inventions/qt/dentistry.htm - http://archaeology.about.com/od/inventions/qt/dentistry.htm ). The http://www.arikah.com/encyclopedia/Indus_Valley_Civilization - Indus Valley Civilization gains credit for the earliest known use of http://www.arikah.com/encyclopedia/Decimal - decimal fractions in a uniform system of http://www.arikah.com/encyclopedia/Ancient_weights_and_measures - ancient weights and measures , as well as http://www.arikah.com/encyclopedia/Negative_number - negative numbers (see http://www.arikah.com/encyclopedia/Timeline_of_mathematics - Timeline of mathematics ). Ancient http://www.arikah.com/encyclopedia/Indus_Valley - Indus Valley artifacts include beautiful, glazed stone http://www.arikah.com/encyclopedia/Fa%C3%AFence - faïence beads. The http://www.arikah.com/encyclopedia/Indus_Valley_Civilization - Indus Valley Civilization boasts the earliest known accounts of http://www.arikah.com/encyclopedia/Urban_planning - urban planning . Major cities included Lothal (2400 BC), Harappa (3300 BC), and Mohenjo-Daro (2500 BC) As seen in http://www.arikah.com/encyclopedia/Harappa - Harappa , http://www.arikah.com/encyclopedia/Mohenjo-daro - Mohenjo-daro and (recently discovered) http://www.arikah.com/encyclopedia/Rakhigarhi - Rakhigarhi , http://www.arikah.com/encyclopedia/India - India , their urban planning included the world's first urban http://www.arikah.com/encyclopedia/Sanitation - sanitation systems. Evidence suggests efficient municipal governments. Streets were laid out in perfect grid patterns comparable to modern http://www.arikah.com/encyclopedia/New_York_City - New York City . Houses were protected from noise, odors and thieves. The http://www.arikah.com/encyclopedia/Sewage - sewage and http://www.arikah.com/encyclopedia/Drainage - drainage systems developed and used in cities throughout the http://www.arikah.com/encyclopedia/Indus_Valley - Indus Valley were far more advanced than that of contemporary urban sites in http://www.arikah.com/encyclopedia/Mesopotamia - Mesopotamia and http://www.arikah.com/encyclopedia/Egypt - Egypt and also more advanced than that of any other http://www.arikah.com/encyclopedia/Bronze_Age - Bronze Age or even http://www.arikah.com/encyclopedia/Iron_Age - Iron Age civilization. For an unknown reason, the Harappan civilization came to an end at around 1700 BC. Some historians, however, believe in an ancient civilization in present-day Gujarat known as the Sorath civilization, dating back to 3700 BC. This view is starting to gain credence among historians, but has not yet been verified. This civilization was completely different from the Harappan civilization, with 90% different pottery, different crops, and a rural rather that urban aspect. Another earlier claim was presented by oceanographical researchers of an Indian institution called NIOT in the Gulf of Cambay which consists in possible underwater structures resembling Harappan ones but dated about 7000 BC.

---

Posted By: edgewaters
Date Posted: 30-Jun-2006 at 05:23

---

You can have trade, medicine, a certain level of sophisitication and so on, all without being a "civilization". You need to have cities to be a civilization. The oldest cities in the Indus are 4th millenium BC, which is very old - much older than most of the world - but not the oldest. Susa is definitively dated to 4000 BC, predating any cities in the Indus (though whether it falls in the Elamite or Mesopotamian sphere is entirely debatable).

---

Posted By: varma
Date Posted: 30-Jun-2006 at 23:28

---

Edgewater, As u said Susais much older than Indus, but what about the findings in DWARAKA(GULF of Cambay ) of the Gujarat coast.         The findings are dated some 9500 years ago and it is just not a settlement, it is a fortefied city.....

---

Posted By: edgewaters
Date Posted: 06-Jul-2006 at 20:35

---

Originally posted by varma         Edgewater, As u said Susais much older than Indus, but what about the findings in DWARAKA(GULF of Cambay ) of the Gujarat coast.         The findings are dated some 9500 years ago and it is just not a settlement, it is a fortefied city..... Dubious. http://www.hinduonnet.com/fline/fl1905/19050670.htm - http://www.hinduonnet.com/fline/fl1905/19050670.htm

---

Posted By: varma
Date Posted: 06-Jul-2006 at 22:51

---

Dubious may be for those who are limited in theior frame of mind that civilization started 4000 Years ago          The above given site mentions that the announcement of the finding was made hastily, but it doent change anything the findings lie there for you to see and the carbon dating of the various finds are well documneted and you know before u I dont know how can u call it dubious by just reading something and ignoring the painful research that has gone into it. For all the excavation info and the datings of the individual finds u ca have a look at it just saying dubious will place u in bankrupted intellectuals and doesnt dissaprove anything about the find..   It is well accepted in all archeological journals and archeologists about the date of the find, it is people like you with a bigoted view of history http://www.grahamhancock.com/forum/BadrinaryanB1.php?p=1 - http://www.grahamhancock.com/forum/BadrinaryanB1.php?p=1 Visit the above site and better brush up your knowledge.       Now if u think that these findings I would questing the reasons for they being dubious You must not that the findings were dated not in India alone, the OXFORD UNiversity and Institute of Earth Sciences ,Hannover Germany. It must be that even those prestigious institutes are fooling and engaging in dubious research I guess according to u http://www.atributetohinduism.com/Dwaraka.htm - http://www.atributetohinduism.com/Dwaraka.htm

---

Posted By: Kamran the Great
Date Posted: 06-Jul-2006 at 23:18

---

Originally posted by Cywr India has gone? Persia has gone? Wtf?   Is/was India an ancient civilization ???

---

Posted By: Sharrukin
Date Posted: 07-Jul-2006 at 04:57

---

Oh my.  Now watch these two get into it.  Incidently, I do agree with edgewaters "DUBIOUS".  You cannot date a civilization by a piece of wood.  Far too many questions as to its context.  Questionable methodology.

---

Posted By: Yiannis
Date Posted: 07-Jul-2006 at 05:24

---

Post by GreekSoul deleted.   You better watch it, or your stay in the AE forum will be very brief! ------------- The basis of a democratic state is liberty. Aristotle, Politics Those that can give up essential liberty to obtain a temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. Benjamin Franklin

---

Posted By: Anujkhamar
Date Posted: 07-Jul-2006 at 06:13

---

Originally posted by Kamran the Great Is/was India an ancient civilization ??? This site should have the answer to your question. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_India - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_India Also we're having a discussion on the oldest accepted roots of Indian civilisation on this thread if you want more info: http://www.allempires.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=12987 - http://www.allempires.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=12987

---

Posted By: Decebal
Date Posted: 07-Jul-2006 at 11:55

---

Originally posted by varma          Dubious may be for those who are limited in theior frame of mind that civilization started 4000 Years ago          The above given site mentions that the announcement of the finding was made hastily, but it doent change anything the findings lie there for you to see and the carbon dating of the various finds are well documneted and you know before u I dont know how can u call it dubious by just reading something and ignoring the painful research that has gone into it. For all the excavation info and the datings of the individual finds u ca have a look at it just saying dubious will place u in bankrupted intellectuals and doesnt dissaprove anything about the find..   It is well accepted in all archeological journals and archeologists about the date of the find, it is people like you with a bigoted view of history http://www.grahamhancock.com/forum/BadrinaryanB1.php?p=1 - http://www.grahamhancock.com/forum/BadrinaryanB1.php?p=1 Visit the above site and better brush up your knowledge.       Now if u think that these findings I would questing the reasons for they being dubious You must not that the findings were dated not in India alone, the OXFORD UNiversity and Institute of Earth Sciences ,Hannover Germany. It must be that even those prestigious institutes are fooling and engaging in dubious research I guess according to u http://www.atributetohinduism.com/Dwaraka.htm - http://www.atributetohinduism.com/Dwaraka.htm   Look, Graham Hancock has virtually no credibility among established historians, so I would be very careful in accepting anything on his site or sponsored by him as facts.   As for Indian history in general, there's no doubt that Indian civilization is one of the oldest in the world. Whether it is older than the civilizations in the Fertile Crescent however is very much a matter of dispute and dubious at best. I have noticed that a lot of hindus tend to adhere to the theory that India has the oldest civilization in the world and what's more, that Indian civilization can be considered a mother civilization with radiating power throughout the world. This view is supported by dubious methodology in archeology and by oral records, neither of which can easily convince professional historians. ------------- What is history but a fable agreed upon? Napoleon Bonaparte Even if you are a minority of one, the truth is the truth.- Mohandas Gandhi

---

Posted By: edgewaters
Date Posted: 07-Jul-2006 at 17:06

---

Originally posted by Kamran the Great Is/was India an ancient civilization ??? Yes. Civilization in the Indus Valley was one of the early ones.

---

Posted By: Bulldog
Date Posted: 11-Jul-2006 at 12:18

---

The oldest civillisation was the Sumerians. Who were the Sumeians though? who were their ancestors?   There are many speculations into this, the strongest connection is to todays Kuwaiti's, however, a connection is also drawn to Hungarians and Turkic peoples. The link is said to be linguistic and religious, what is amazing is that Tengrism and Sumerian religion are very similar.   More investigations into this will ultimately discover the explanations behind this.   Stonehenge is the oldest civillisation in the world   Hey, what about ChatalHoyuk, Jericho? they're pretty old.   What is the longest surviving civillisation/culture however? I'd say Chinease, you could say that the Mongol period meant it didn't remain fully Chinease surviving but then again, the people who made China where Mongoloid from Northern China, the Southern Chinease were invaded and assimilated into being Chinease.   Itallians also could be one of the oldest surviving civillisations, they havnt been occupied since Roman times.   The Japanease?   The Turks, the Turks of Turkey havnt been ruled over for over a thousand years if we take into account the Selcuk Turk Empire and that its how they entered today's Turkey.   The oldest surviving Civillisations alive today would be,   Itallian - Turkish of Turkey   These two surviving nations civillisations have never been conquered, ie the people living their today as Itallians in Itally and Turks in Turkey have never been ruled or occupied by anyone else.   Very interesting. -------------       “What we do for ourselves dies with us. What we do for others and the world remains and is immortal.” Albert Pine

---

Posted By: mamikon
Date Posted: 11-Jul-2006 at 20:15

---

Originally posted by bulldog The oldest surviving Civillisations alive today would be,   Itallian - Turkish of Turkey there is Greece, Armenia, Egypt, Iran (Persia), Israel, China, India + Pakistan (assumingly the indus valley civilizations were progenitors of both countries)...unless you think old is 1000 A.D. Moreover, "Italy" was only a geographical term until modern times. And the current Italians are a mix of the Romans and  germanic tribes, Greeks, Africans, ostrogoths, visigoths (and any other goths you can think off) and etc...while Turkey (Anatolia) of 1000 AD you speak off was full of "non-Turk" people like Armenians, Greeks, Kurds, Arabs, Georgians, Persians, Romans and of course the newcomers (Turks)... it doesnt take one day to "Turkify" all those people... -------------

---

Posted By: raygun
Date Posted: 11-Jul-2006 at 21:13

---

Just a question.   If we adopt the "Out of Africa" theory of the evolution of man, then shldn't the Africans be the oldest people, and potentially the oldest civilization? I said potentially 'cause I haven't read anything about any African ancient cities, but who knows....   cheers

---

Posted By: Bulldog
Date Posted: 11-Jul-2006 at 21:32

---

there is Greece, Armenia, Egypt, Iran (Persia), Israel, China, India + Pakistan (assumingly the indus valley civilizations were progenitors of both countries)...unless you think old is 1000 A.D.     Your missing the point, I clearly stated civillisations which still exist today, the ancient Hellenic city states do not have a continious unbroken lineage to modern day people of Greece as they stop rulling the area thousands of years ago. The Roman invasion, then the conversion to Christianity and a whole new Roman then Roman-Byzantine civillisation, followed by on top of that Turkic civillisation, has all added to modern day Greece. The ancient city state civillisation is not alive today, its a part of history, there are obviously still connections not all was lost but it cannot be called the same.   The same can be applied to Ancient Egyption civillisation, Persia, India, Armenia etc   Israel is an intersting one as Jewih civillisation has managed to perserve its unique identity and return to the areas it began from.   China also to a large extent kept its civillisation from after the Mongol conquest although there was a brief Japanease invasion.   I was referring to civillisations existing today, ie people who managed to stay in control of their lands and not be occupied and put under a different civillisation to their own.   Itallian Chinease (to a large extent) Turkish of Turkey   Fit this category. Moreover, "Italy" was only a geographical term until modern times. And the current Italians are a mix of the Romans and  germanic tribes, Greeks, Africans, ostrogoths, visigoths (and any other goths you can think off) and etc...while Turkey (Anatolia) of 1000 AD you speak off was full of "non-Turk" people like Armenians, Greeks, Kurds, Arabs, Georgians, Persians, Romans and of course the newcomers (Turks)... it doesnt take one day to "Turkify" all those people...   There is no such thing as the "pure race", I'm simply referring to nations, it doesn't matter what races of people exist within a nation, race doesn't make a nation, language, identity, common history, common culture, to a certain religion etc etc   All these are things that Itallians have in common, it doesn't matter that there may be different races among them, that's not important, for someone to think its of any value it just bring "racism" into the equation.   The same applies to Turks of Turkey, also I stated that the Turks of Turkey always claim their historical heritage which goes back to the Selcuk Empire prior to that the Karakhanids, Uygurs etc The Turks in Turkey trace a direct unconquered identity, they have never been conquered by non-Turkic civillisation.     -------------       “What we do for ourselves dies with us. What we do for others and the world remains and is immortal.” Albert Pine

---

Posted By: mamikon
Date Posted: 11-Jul-2006 at 22:08

---

Originally posted by bulldog "Your missing the point, I clearly stated civillisations which still exist today, the ancient Hellenic city states do not have a continious unbroken lineage to modern day people of Greece as they stop rulling the area thousands of years ago. The Roman invasion, then the conversion to Christianity and a whole new Roman then Roman-Byzantine civillisation, followed by on top of that Turkic civillisation, has all added to modern day Greece. The ancient city state civillisation is not alive today, its a part of history, there are obviously still connections not all was lost but it cannot be called the same."' So if they (Greeks) ruled Greece for a couple of hundred years and for the next thousand years another empire ruled Greece, Greek civilization somehow ceases to exist? you cant be serious...is this your definition of "civilization"? Originally posted by bulldog I was referring to civillisations existing today, ie people who managed to stay in control of their lands and not be occupied and put under a different civillisation to their own. the land now known as Israel has been governed by foreign powers for how long? Originally posted by bulldog There is no such thing as the "pure race", I'm simply referring to nations, it doesn't matter what races of people exist within a nation, race doesn't make a nation, language, identity, common history, common culture, to a certain religion etc etc   All these are things that Itallians have in common, it doesn't matter that there may be different races among them, that's not important, for someone to think its of any value it just bring "racism" into the equation. ..Italy reunified in 1860s. During this time it has been reported that about 90% of the populace did not know the National language... using your own definition, how does "Turkish of Turkey" (whatever that means) qualify? how do you come up with those abstract definitions and pick "civilizations" to fit these definitions out of thin air...I bet you didnt even know that Italy as a nation has only been alive for a mere 150 years or so. -------------

---

Posted By: Bulldog
Date Posted: 11-Jul-2006 at 22:28

---

So if they (Greeks) ruled Greece for a couple of hundred years and for the next thousand years another empire ruled Greece, Greek civilization somehow ceases to exist? you cant be serious...is this your definition of "civilization"? It wouldn;t necessarily "cease" to exist but it would be diluted and slowly disintegrated and changed to a point its unrecognisable to what existed before by the dominant civillisation of the ruling powers. The previous civillisation would not be living in the next thousand years, only traces of it and the history would remain. the land now known as Israel has been governed by foreign powers for how long?   It doesn't matter, Jews preserved their language, religion and customs thanks to the religion which preserved their civillisation to a large extent.     ..Italy reunified in 1860s. During this time it has been reported that about 90% of the populace did not know the National language...   The part about the language is ridiculous, you wouldn't be able to back that up would you?   Italy as a nation has only been alive for a mere 150 years or so.   Itally traces its historical nation lineage back to the Romans, since the time of the Romans no non-Roman has totally conquered and ruled the people. As the people were never conquered they kept their civillisation, language, culture etc and evolved into today's Itally via themselves.   So it doesn't matter wether the actuall country Itally has only been alive for 150 years, the people that formed it were in existance before then and had never been totally ruled over since the times of their national ancestors the Romans.     -------------       “What we do for ourselves dies with us. What we do for others and the world remains and is immortal.” Albert Pine

---

Posted By: mamikon
Date Posted: 11-Jul-2006 at 22:51

---

Originally posted by bulldog It wouldn;t necessarily "cease" to exist but it would be diluted and slowly disintegrated and changed to a point its unrecognisable to what existed before by the dominant civillisation of the ruling powers. The previous civillisation would not be living in the next thousand years, only traces of it and the history would remain. and you lived through these years to witness this? why dont you ask Greek members here if they think their current civilization if a phantom of what it was three millenia ago (as you claim)...obviously nothing is static, and "civilizations" do evolve over time, but you cant say that just because they did not have self rule, they lost their civilization. Armenia has been under a muslim rule for a close thousand years and guess what I am still Christian...and the Armenian Church more or less still carries the traditions it had aquired at the time of its creation.. Originally posted by bulldog It doesn't matter, Jews preserved their language, religion and customs thanks to the religion which preserved their civillisation to a large extent. What makes you think Greeks and Armenians didnt? Just because today you dont see half-naked Greeks running around in Athens yelling "Toga! Toga!" doesnt mean they have lost their civilization. Originally posted by bulldog The part about the language is ridiculous, you wouldn't be able to back that up would you? as a matter of fact I would; read Barricades and Borders, (plus my European History professor said so ) Originally posted by bulldog Itally traces its historical nation lineage back to the Romans Greece traces its historical nation lineage back to the Etruscans. Originally posted by bulldog , since the time of the Romans no non-Roman has totally conquered and ruled the people. no one did? I dont see "Roman Empire" on today's world map, do you? Originally posted by bulldog As the people were never conquered they kept their civillisation, language, culture etc and evolved into today's Itally via themselves anything to back up this claim? or just opinion? -------------

---