Why do we still call Mesopotamia the "cradle of civilization"?

Linschoten

Ad Honoris
Aug 2010
16,214
Welsh Marches
In the case of Ancient Egypt and China, it's already agreed upon that they created their civilizations without outside help, hence they're "original" (or "pristine"). Would Japan or Greece be the same societies without influences from China and Egypt respectively? As for the scientific revolution, would it happen without the help of past ideas from prior civilizations such as the Greeks and Muslims? As an example: as you said, everything is built from previous ideas, but where is the source that these previous ideas come from? The source was built entirely from the ground up. No one else in the world was thinking about these ideas, but this particular society/civilization was the first one to come up with the idea organically, and later copied or borrowed by other societies/civilizations and those other societies built upon and innovated upon that idea and created something "new". But this new idea would not have happened if it weren't for the original idea.
You don't seem to realize that words and concepts can carry different meanings in different contexts, and that you are moving from one use of the term 'original' to another, and making a value judgement based on a lingusitic confusion. Except for certain cultures in very early times, no culture is in fact totally self-enclosed, and that is as true of China after a certain period as it of Japan , but putting that aside, you are moving from one meaning of 'original', relating to a civilization that is primarily at least developed of internal influences, to another meaning of 'original' when you imply that a civilzation like that of Japanese or Greek, as being more open to external influences (or might say, suggestions) that some others, is less 'original' in the sense of having less right to claim that it has introduced things that are new and distinctive into the world. There are quite a number of aspects of Greek culture that are no less original in the latter sense any aspect of Egyptian or Mesopotamian culture; and European culture of the early modern period did not sacrifice any of its originality in the latter sense by being open to the world, quite the opposite in fact.
 
Last edited:

robto

Ad Honorem
Jun 2014
6,184
Lisbon, Portugal
In the case of Ancient Egypt and China, it's already agreed upon that they created their civilizations without outside help, hence they're "original" (or "pristine"). Would Japan or Greece be the same societies without influences from China and Egypt respectively? As for the scientific revolution, would it happen without the help of past ideas from prior civilizations such as the Greeks and Muslims? As an example: as you said, everything is built from previous ideas, but where is the source that these previous ideas come from? The source was built entirely from the ground up. No one else in the world was thinking about these ideas, but this particular society/civilization was the first one to come up with the idea organically, and later copied or borrowed by other societies/civilizations and those other societies built upon and innovated upon that idea and created something "new". But this new idea would not have happened if it weren't for the original idea.
Ancient Egypt was heavily influenced by the Near East, the very crops that were grown in Egypt mostly came from the Near East, they were not authoctonous to Egypt.
In China is a more complex history, although most of its civilization stems from the culture around the Yellow river and the Central Plains, they received a lot of influences from southern Chinese cultures - who were not originally Sinitic - and from the Northwest Steppes as well.
 
  • Like
Reactions: sparky
Jul 2019
19
Abidjan
Why is Mesopotamia often still dubbed "the cradle of civilization", meaning the site where human civilization first emerged and developed? While it was the first region to establish agriculture and a complex society, there were many regions of the world where agriculture and the building of complex societies with advanced economics, politics and use of technology have occurred independently, including: China, MesoAmerica, Egypt and South Asia (all known as pristine civilizations).

My theory on why Mesopotamia is called the "cradle of civilization" has to do with western bias and lots of false theories generated by western scholarship many hundred years ago because they had superiority complexes. Not only was Mesopotamia is the earliest known site to be excavated along with ancient Egypt, it is also connected to European civilization, from the origins of European agriculture to the civilizations of Greece and Rome (the originators of Western civilization).
- One, early agriculture in Europe originated in the Mesopotamian region where it spread from the Near East to Anatolia to Southern Europe to all Europe.
- Two, the roots of Western civilization (which really refers to Western European countries or the former Western areas of the Roman empire) lay in Ancient Rome and Ancient Greece, but these two civilizations were not pristine civilizations as they largely build upon the foundation that Ancient Mesopotamia and Egypt laid out.
- Three, the widespread European religion, Christianity, originated in the Middle East, and the very core of Christianity is still largely Semitic/Judaic.

This is just my opinion, since it's a widely accepted idea in the mainstream. What are you're opinions?
Mesopotamia was peopled by black dravidians , the sumerians
mtDNA from the Early Bronze Age to the Roman Period Suggests a Genetic Link between the Indian Subcontinent and Mesopotamian Cradle of Civilization
Christianity originated in sumerians , dravidians people
 
Jul 2019
19
Abidjan
Ancient Egypt was heavily influenced by the Near East, the very crops that were grown in Egypt mostly came from the Near East, they were not authoctonous to Egypt.
In China is a more complex history, although most of its civilization stems from the culture around the Yellow river and the Central Plains, they received a lot of influences from southern Chinese cultures - who were not originally Sinitic - and from the Northwest Steppes as well.
crops grown in egypt doesn' t come from middle east, southern chinese cultures were sinitic ( tibeto burman) and mongoloid
 
Jul 2019
19
Abidjan
You are being redirected...
I actually read an article on their artwork today on another website. This is the oldest settlement in Europe on the Danube in Serbia. It predates Assyria by many thousands of years. Actually there are Middle Eastern Kingdoms that Predate Assyria, but the thing is WRITING, documenting your history and leaving it behind. Just me but as I recall writing began in the middle east along with the earliest KNOWN history. I mean we know nothing about the Serbian settlement except that it was there.
serbians settlements were illyrians, pelasgians settle first in serbia abd in all illyria coming from middle east Turkey and are also ancestors of the thracians, the dacians and were identical to the lydians
 

robto

Ad Honorem
Jun 2014
6,184
Lisbon, Portugal
crops grown in egypt doesn' t come from middle east,
Wrong. Ancient Egyptian staple crops like wheat, barley, chickpeas and lentils are all native middle eastern crops, they are not native at all from Egypt.

southern chinese cultures were sinitic ( tibeto burman) and mongoloid
That is also wrong.
First, Tibeto-Burman is not Sinitic. Both Sinitic and Tibeto-Burman belong to the Sino-Tibetan family, but still they are two different branches from the same family. I was very specific when I said "Sinitic people".
Second, Tibeto-Burmans do not inhabit most of historical southern China, in fact traditionally they occupied the fringes of southwestern China. Most southern Chinese ancient cultures were from Austronesian, Hmong-mien, Tai-Kradai and Austroasiatic peoples - those peoples were not Sinitic in any way.
Third, what do you mean by "mongoloid"?
 
  • Like
Reactions: sparky
Jul 2019
19
Abidjan
That is also wrong.
First, Tibeto-Burman is not Sinitic. Both Sinitic and Tibeto-Burman belong to the Sino-Tibetan family, but still they are two different branches from the same family. I was very specific when I said "Sinitic people".
Second, Tibeto-Burmans do not inhabit most of historical southern China, in fact traditionally they occupied the fringes of southwestern China. Most southern Chinese ancient cultures were from Austronesian, Hmong-mien, Tai-Kradai and Austroasiatic peoples - those peoples were not Sinitic in any way.
Third, what do you mean by "mongoloid"?
Austronesian, Hmong-mien, Tai-Kadai and Austroasiatic peoples are mongoloid
Ancient Egyptian staple crops like wheat, barley, chickpeas and lentils are all native middle eastern crops, they are not native at all from Egypt.
which proofs ?
crops are native , egyptians doesn' t borrow agriculture from near east , they were already agriculturists
 
Aug 2018
594
london
Again, just because they have an Indo-European origin does not imply they related to Europeans
Actually yes it does imply that.

anymore than Latin Americans are related to Iberians.
Latin Americans are related to Iberians.

Greeks and Romans ruled Egypt and parts of the Middle East for a short time
1000 years is not a short time. Greek and Latin were the common languages at that time. Greco-Roman culture obviously had a massive influence, but of course you don't know anything about that.

The Arabs who conquered Egypt and Mesopotamia were the same stock as The Ancient Egyptians and Mesopotamian societies (Afro-Asiatic)
So Indo-Europeans are completely unrelated but Afro-Asiatics are all the same stock. Got it.

Did Greeks come up the alphabet on their own? No. They borrowed their alphabet from the Phoenicians, which in turn evolved from Egyptian hieroglyphics.
The Greeks already had their own writing system before the invention of the alphabet. And Egyptian hieroglyphs are not an alphabet, so the Egyptians didn't have an alphabet.

I'll repeat that so there's a chance it might get into your head.


The Greeks already had their own writing system before the invention of the alphabet. And Egyptian hieroglyphs are not an alphabet, so the Egyptians didn't have an alphabet.

The Phoenician alphabet is the earliest known alphabet, but the Phoenician alphabet only has consonants whereas the Greek alphabet also has vowels. As such the Greek alphabet is often referred to as the first 'true' alphabet. The Egyptians later adopted the Greek alphabet and added letters derived from Egyptian Demotic to create the Coptic alphabet. The Phoenician alphabet may also have been influenced or partly derived from earlier Greek/Aegean scripts as well as Egyptian hieroglyphs.
 
Last edited: