What do the 6 places where civilization arose indepedently have in common?

Warm enough to grow food all year long.

Thats an even better question than OP, why did the early civilizations stagnate?

Nordic Aryans taught them the basics of agriculture and writing

Define 'civilisation' or this thread will go to shit even faster.

They were Nords

Caral wasn't a civilization.

Temperate climate, warm enough to grow food but with seasonal variations to force people to adapt and store food for the winter, with game not as plentiful.

Also, this:

Attached: Nile_Delta_Egypt_node_full_image_2.jpg (525x700, 165K)

Urban centres, Social classes (like ruling elite), Communication system (like pictographs), Crop growing

Then Caral doesn't count, neither do Olmecs since they lacked urban centers

the Olmecs had cities

"This highly productive environment encouraged a densely concentrated population, which in turn triggered the rise of an elite class."

They're not cities in the true sense of the world, they're proto urban centers, large organized villages

Caral had urbanization, lacked social classes in the truest sense, lacked communication system (proto-quipus=glyphs), but had crop growing.

I don't know if you can call those sanctuaries cities, is there any evidence of urban planning?

They're not in Australia

Of course.
"Caral is the largest recorded site in the Andean region with dates older than 2000 BCE and appears to be the model for the urban design adopted by Andean civilisations that rose and fell over the span of four millennia. It is believed that Caral may answer questions about the origins of the Andean civilisations and the development of the first cities."

Organized settlements imply complex social hierarchy, communal structures, etc... That's urbanization. Urbanized settlements are cities.

Attached: Caral2.jpg (450x353, 31K)

This one is more detailed.

Attached: ciudadsagrada2.jpg (2249x1569, 1.28M)

That doesn't really look like a city, just a group of pyramids, compare it to actual cities like Sumerian ones

Attached: _ur.jpg (770x437, 74K)

Attached: Early-human-migration-map.png (1406x786, 1.15M)

the same places favorable to early agriculture might not be the ideal places for industrialization 10000 years later, whodathunkit

It's a city, user.
Jericho was similar to Caral, though. Both had urban plannification, had the earliest complex hierarchy from their respective zones, and had communal projects, but Jericho settlement happened in 9500BC.

Attached: zsC1T6v.jpg (1600x1028, 1.2M)

That map is wrong.

jericho, caral not really

How so?

Valleys surrounded by otherwise arid terrain void of useful, food bringing life most of the year.

Jericho was completely encircled by a wall and was compact, Caral just seems to me like very sparse buildings all over the place and some monuments, it just looks like a sanctuary

user, not all cities are encircled by a wall. And inhabitants of Caral had also "compact" houses. The residencial zones are represented here:

It just doesn't look like a city, if that counts I guess bronze age Europeans had civilizations too, and not only Greece

Attached: _El_argar.png (1600x900, 1.96M)

>If
Caral was a city, user. I don't think it was a civilization though.

Why is it wrong?

No niggers

First of all, aboriginals in Australia are not homo sapiens.

They are part of an earlier migration (the yellow one) which also populated some of the islands in indonesia and phillipines while they were much easier to get to and fro due to lower water levels due to glaciation.

The modern populations up to precolonial era in micronesia, indonesia and phillipines are the result of much later subsequent and different waves of migrations of homo sapiens from the Asian mainland. These groups never made it to papua new guinea and Australia, but did cover all of micronesia and polynesia.

And finally, the populations in the majority of Eurasia are different amalgamans of migration waves that mixed the latter homo sapiens with different geographical groupings of previously established denisovans and neanderthals.

The only simple and verified migration route is the siberia to the new world through the bering straight migration, with possible cross mixixing in south america by small groups of south pacific boat peoples.

The relationship between migration pulses from NE Africa to and within Eurasia is far too complex to put into a simple map. It needs to use genetic mapping of different geographical areas to map gene spreading over time and would be a siginificant endeavor.

Not homo sapiens you say?

Attached: _abo1.jpg (600x337, 32K)

thats obviously a hybrid mix (if one of the parents is a part abbo)

Google tichitt settlements

Attached: 474983d23ef5fa1a533db8310bc95222.jpg (640x426, 47K)

Attached: Solutrean First Americans migration.jpg (640x419, 82K)

That's from medieval ghana

It's Missing the niger river valley in west africa
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_West_Africa

Attached: fa1fa957c83ac9a64e0500710ef5609f.jpg (597x367, 24K)

All the niger river settlements

It's missing much more than that

aliens

>Ukraine (Cucuteni)
this is controversial because of the strict definition of civilization, BMAC definitely had contact with IVC

the North American chalcolithic period actually predates the introduction of maize agriculture by something like several thousand years so in that sense it's unique, Watson Brake was built over 5 centuries

it has to be said, the Americans destroyed a lot of evidence during their initial expansion west and much of it lies underneath modern cities

Niger ancient City

Attached: 1520785467195.jpg (500x333, 44K)

rivers and a food source that could be grown.

Not ancient

Why is it not ancient ?

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sao_civilisation

It's not from the Sao
Medieval

Source ?

Yeah you guys left out the Danube river civilization in old Europe from I think 5000 bc as well as Niger river civilization circa 1000 BC

except for one

Attached: chine.jpg (820x457, 72K)

>Danube river civilization
is this a real thing now?

Attached: vinca-symbols.jpg (468x371, 53K)

Niger river dates back to around to 4000 b.c. with large scale living around 2000 b.c. with the tichitt settlements
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tichit

Attached: images (12).jpg (335x150, 13K)

Not for the plebs

Post the source for the ruins you see today being from the Sao, please, I can't find any information about these irrelevant cultures

I'd imagine yes, just because they didn't have monumental architecture doesn't mean it wasn't a great civilization. They had writing, agriculture, the wheel, pottery, and textiles. Same with The Niger and Mississippian's river civilizations minus the writing.

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_West_Africa

Danube had proto urban settlement with 40,000 inhabitants in 5,000 bc, in 4000 bc there was barely anything there in W Africa

I said the settlements began around 4000 then around 2000 tichitt began
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_West_Africa

In 4000 bc it didn't have shit, in 1000 bc it had large villages that were much smaller than Tichitt

That were much smaller than Cucuteni's

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_West_Africa

>> 4275989
That's from the Tichitt culture in modern day central Mauritania which was a series of I believe 400 or so drystone villages and settlements stretching along a large escarpment. For Niger river civilization you have cities like...
Djenne Jenno 250 BC
Dia 1000 BC
Gao 100 BC
Kukyia 1500 BC
And literally hundreds of smaller villages and specialist settlements that dotted the river banks in ancient times.

It doesn't say what you're stating, it said that agriculture started in 4000 bc

The start of the settlements

Not of the stone settlements

I believe the proper term is "half-caste"

The history of West Africa began with the first human settlements around 4,000 BCE. It has been commonly divided into its prehistory, still settlements

And? Settlments are not a civilization

water access

Didn't say they wete

Were

The start of civilizations had alot to do with interactions between groups and the start of farming population growth etc places like africa have highly nutritional yet low yield crops like sourgum and millit

African archology highly under studied so there's still massive holes in it like how the only discoverd nok in the 90s

yeah like nobody spends time digging around in Egypt and there are massive holes in the explanations of egyptologists

Is there any evidence for this outside of the botched reconstruction?

Outside of eygpt

Ethiopia?

West africa mostly

where's the evidence?

define civilisation

>soultrean garbage
Again?

The first Olmec "city" was proto-urban, the second had a populatiton of arounnd 10k, if not higher; it qualifies, albeit in the same way Mississipian ones do, still with mostly earthenwork and perishable materials.

>aboriginals in Australia are not homo sapiens.

Do you have evidence to back this up

Attached: d63.jpg (600x909, 30K)