When I was in high school, it was generally thought that agriculture drove the development of towns: that permanent settlements were not useful without farming. The first major towns known at that time dated to around 5000 BC.

Discoveries of new sites and further investigation of known sites in the 1990s upended this view somewhat. Sites such as Hasankeyf Höyük, Göbekli Tepe, Tell es Sultan and Tell Abu Hureyra were founded some 12000 years ago, with permanent stone structure but no sign of agriculture or pottery in their earliest layers. Farming at these sites came over 1000 years later: driven, or at least facilitated, by the permanent settlement.

The motivation for hunter-gatherers to build settlements would be basically the same as the motivation for them to make repeated use of natural caves. Some areas provide well enough that a living could be made without leaving a small range. Some peoples may have a need for a winter base to tuck away during the low-hunting season. And perhaps it just became a pain in the arse continually rebuilding new settlements and lugging all of your tools from place to place, as tool cultures became more specialised and complex.

These sites represent the peak of the Natufian culture which commenced around 13000 BC. Early in that period, people began to build semi-permanent villages of a handful of people that had long term periodic use.

https://www.jstor.org/stable/40024495
On ‘Sedentism’ in the Later Epipalaeolithic (Natufian) Levant

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/arp.1777
A Neolithic sedentary hunter–gatherer settlement with densely arranged buildings: results of geophysical prospection at Hasankeyf Höyük in south-eastern Anatolia

https://youtu.be/iSG1MsQSo_A
Gobekli Tepe, dawn of civilisation

dv said:

When I was in high school, it was generally thought that agriculture drove the development of towns: that permanent settlements were not useful without farming. The first major towns known at that time dated to around 5000 BC.

Discoveries of new sites and further investigation of known sites in the 1990s upended this view somewhat. Sites such as Hasankeyf Höyük, Göbekli Tepe, Tell es Sultan and Tell Abu Hureyra were founded some 12000 years ago, with permanent stone structure but no sign of agriculture or pottery in their earliest layers. Farming at these sites came over 1000 years later: driven, or at least facilitated, by the permanent settlement.

The motivation for hunter-gatherers to build settlements would be basically the same as the motivation for them to make repeated use of natural caves. Some areas provide well enough that a living could be made without leaving a small range. Some peoples may have a need for a winter base to tuck away during the low-hunting season. And perhaps it just became a pain in the arse continually rebuilding new settlements and lugging all of your tools from place to place, as tool cultures became more specialised and complex.

These sites represent the peak of the Natufian culture which commenced around 13000 BC. Early in that period, people began to build semi-permanent villages of a handful of people that had long term periodic use.

https://www.jstor.org/stable/40024495
On ‘Sedentism’ in the Later Epipalaeolithic (Natufian) Levant

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/arp.1777
A Neolithic sedentary hunter–gatherer settlement with densely arranged buildings: results of geophysical prospection at Hasankeyf Höyük in south-eastern Anatolia

https://youtu.be/iSG1MsQSo_A
Gobekli Tepe, dawn of civilisation

I am not sure why someone as clever as yourself has not considered this beforehand.

roughbarked said:

dv said:

When I was in high school, it was generally thought that agriculture drove the development of towns: that permanent settlements were not useful without farming. The first major towns known at that time dated to around 5000 BC.

Discoveries of new sites and further investigation of known sites in the 1990s upended this view somewhat. Sites such as Hasankeyf Höyük, Göbekli Tepe, Tell es Sultan and Tell Abu Hureyra were founded some 12000 years ago, with permanent stone structure but no sign of agriculture or pottery in their earliest layers. Farming at these sites came over 1000 years later: driven, or at least facilitated, by the permanent settlement.

The motivation for hunter-gatherers to build settlements would be basically the same as the motivation for them to make repeated use of natural caves. Some areas provide well enough that a living could be made without leaving a small range. Some peoples may have a need for a winter base to tuck away during the low-hunting season. And perhaps it just became a pain in the arse continually rebuilding new settlements and lugging all of your tools from place to place, as tool cultures became more specialised and complex.

These sites represent the peak of the Natufian culture which commenced around 13000 BC. Early in that period, people began to build semi-permanent villages of a handful of people that had long term periodic use.

https://www.jstor.org/stable/40024495
On ‘Sedentism’ in the Later Epipalaeolithic (Natufian) Levant

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/arp.1777
A Neolithic sedentary hunter–gatherer settlement with densely arranged buildings: results of geophysical prospection at Hasankeyf Höyük in south-eastern Anatolia

https://youtu.be/iSG1MsQSo_A
Gobekli Tepe, dawn of civilisation

I am not sure why someone as clever as yourself has not considered this beforehand.

LOL, this again?

roughbarked said:

dv said:

When I was in high school, it was generally thought that agriculture drove the development of towns: that permanent settlements were not useful without farming. The first major towns known at that time dated to around 5000 BC.

Discoveries of new sites and further investigation of known sites in the 1990s upended this view somewhat. Sites such as Hasankeyf Höyük, Göbekli Tepe, Tell es Sultan and Tell Abu Hureyra were founded some 12000 years ago, with permanent stone structure but no sign of agriculture or pottery in their earliest layers. Farming at these sites came over 1000 years later: driven, or at least facilitated, by the permanent settlement.

The motivation for hunter-gatherers to build settlements would be basically the same as the motivation for them to make repeated use of natural caves. Some areas provide well enough that a living could be made without leaving a small range. Some peoples may have a need for a winter base to tuck away during the low-hunting season. And perhaps it just became a pain in the arse continually rebuilding new settlements and lugging all of your tools from place to place, as tool cultures became more specialised and complex.

These sites represent the peak of the Natufian culture which commenced around 13000 BC. Early in that period, people began to build semi-permanent villages of a handful of people that had long term periodic use.

https://www.jstor.org/stable/40024495
On ‘Sedentism’ in the Later Epipalaeolithic (Natufian) Levant

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/arp.1777
A Neolithic sedentary hunter–gatherer settlement with densely arranged buildings: results of geophysical prospection at Hasankeyf Höyük in south-eastern Anatolia

https://youtu.be/iSG1MsQSo_A
Gobekli Tepe, dawn of civilisation

I am not sure why someone as clever as yourself has not considered this beforehand.

Well this isn’t my first rodeo but I thought I’d start a conversation on it here.

JudgeMental said:

roughbarked said:

dv said:

When I was in high school, it was generally thought that agriculture drove the development of towns: that permanent settlements were not useful without farming. The first major towns known at that time dated to around 5000 BC.

Discoveries of new sites and further investigation of known sites in the 1990s upended this view somewhat. Sites such as Hasankeyf Höyük, Göbekli Tepe, Tell es Sultan and Tell Abu Hureyra were founded some 12000 years ago, with permanent stone structure but no sign of agriculture or pottery in their earliest layers. Farming at these sites came over 1000 years later: driven, or at least facilitated, by the permanent settlement.

The motivation for hunter-gatherers to build settlements would be basically the same as the motivation for them to make repeated use of natural caves. Some areas provide well enough that a living could be made without leaving a small range. Some peoples may have a need for a winter base to tuck away during the low-hunting season. And perhaps it just became a pain in the arse continually rebuilding new settlements and lugging all of your tools from place to place, as tool cultures became more specialised and complex.

These sites represent the peak of the Natufian culture which commenced around 13000 BC. Early in that period, people began to build semi-permanent villages of a handful of people that had long term periodic use.

https://www.jstor.org/stable/40024495
On ‘Sedentism’ in the Later Epipalaeolithic (Natufian) Levant

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/arp.1777
A Neolithic sedentary hunter–gatherer settlement with densely arranged buildings: results of geophysical prospection at Hasankeyf Höyük in south-eastern Anatolia

https://youtu.be/iSG1MsQSo_A
Gobekli Tepe, dawn of civilisation

I am not sure why someone as clever as yourself has not considered this beforehand.

LOL, this again?

Well it should be obvious?

I watched this related video a few days ago.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oZnW-E70wq8&ab_channel=JoeScott

https://youtu.be/2daUmpI6ftA

This person draws parallels between Natufians and Semites. I think he’s drawing a long bow in terms of some specifics but I do think that the exile from Eden and the Cane/Abel story may reflect some nostalgia for pastoralism or dissatisfaction with the farming lifestyle.

sibeen said:

I watched this related video a few days ago.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oZnW-E70wq8&ab_channel=JoeScott

Cheers.

dv said:

https://youtu.be/2daUmpI6ftA

This person draws parallels between Natufians and Semites. I think he’s drawing a long bow in terms of some specifics but I do think that the exile from Eden and the Cane/Abel story may reflect some nostalgia for pastoralism or dissatisfaction with the farming lifestyle.

I will watch that. Thanks.

The indigenous first Australians should have been able to show us more than we have allowed them to.

dv said:

When I was in high school, it was generally thought that agriculture drove the development of towns: that permanent settlements were not useful without farming. The first major towns known at that time dated to around 5000 BC.

Discoveries of new sites and further investigation of known sites in the 1990s upended this view somewhat. Sites such as Hasankeyf Höyük, Göbekli Tepe, Tell es Sultan and Tell Abu Hureyra were founded some 12000 years ago, with permanent stone structure but no sign of agriculture or pottery in their earliest layers. Farming at these sites came over 1000 years later: driven, or at least facilitated, by the permanent settlement.

The motivation for hunter-gatherers to build settlements would be basically the same as the motivation for them to make repeated use of natural caves. Some areas provide well enough that a living could be made without leaving a small range. Some peoples may have a need for a winter base to tuck away during the low-hunting season. And perhaps it just became a pain in the arse continually rebuilding new settlements and lugging all of your tools from place to place, as tool cultures became more specialised and complex.

These sites represent the peak of the Natufian culture which commenced around 13000 BC. Early in that period, people began to build semi-permanent villages of a handful of people that had long term periodic use.

https://www.jstor.org/stable/40024495
On ‘Sedentism’ in the Later Epipalaeolithic (Natufian) Levant

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/arp.1777
A Neolithic sedentary hunter–gatherer settlement with densely arranged buildings: results of geophysical prospection at Hasankeyf Höyük in south-eastern Anatolia

https://youtu.be/iSG1MsQSo_A
Gobekli Tepe, dawn of civilisation

Interesting stuff.

I visited many “ancient” sites in Turkey, but never got to any of the really old ones.

I have often wondered what even older buildings may now be under the Black Sea.

Not read the links but do they distinguish between horticulture and animal husbandry? There’s still people in Africa with a settled existence who primarily tend animals on land not suited to cropping.

Witty Rejoinder said:

Not read the links but do they distinguish between horticulture and animal husbandry? There’s still people in Africa with a settled existence who primarily tend animals on land not suited to cropping.

In Victoria there were settlements simply because eels were there.

Witty Rejoinder said:

Not read the links but do they distinguish between horticulture and animal husbandry?

These settlements appear to have been founded by people without domesticated animals

Excavations at Gusir Höyük, Turkey.

https://www.atlasdergisi.com/kesfet/arkeoloji-haberleri/yerlesik-avcilar-gusir-hoyuk-siirt.html

Certainly, a very interesting place considering the scale of construction and the age of it, plus obviously done by a considerable number of people over a lengthy period of time. However, the references to before agriculture is just a red herring. People ONLY came together in large numbers when there was an abundance of food, which is rarely found in any one place for any length of time, thereby requiring the people to move to a new location when its supply began to dwindle, which agrees with the video statement that the site was not permanently occupied but visited at certain times of the year.

The Fertile Crescent where the Göbekli Tepe is sited has long been known to have been a place of plenty, with much flora and fauna, including naturally occurring cereals from which today’s grain crops are largely descended. This would permit the gathering of seed from this natural resource as Aboriginals in Australia did for thousands of years to make flour, meaning this resource would permit a longer stay in one place than if they relied on game and other less available foods. However, this grain harvesting in not farming, but gathering and so fits well with the situation.

Apart from the farming reference, Göbekli Tepe is undoubtably a fascinating and informative discovery that will intrigue for many years to come.

I love this stuff.

> I am not sure why someone as clever as yourself has not considered this beforehand.

Well, I didn’t. I was a firm believed that farming was a necessary prerequisite for towns.
In the light of dv’s posting, I’m rethinking that.

dv said:

When I was in high school, it was generally thought that agriculture drove the development of towns: that permanent settlements were not useful without farming. The first major towns known at that time dated to around 5000 BC.

Discoveries of new sites and further investigation of known sites in the 1990s upended this view somewhat. Sites such as Hasankeyf Höyük, Göbekli Tepe, Tell es Sultan and Tell Abu Hureyra were founded some 12000 years ago, with permanent stone structure but no sign of agriculture or pottery in their earliest layers. Farming at these sites came over 1000 years later: driven, or at least facilitated, by the permanent settlement.

The motivation for hunter-gatherers to build settlements would be basically the same as the motivation for them to make repeated use of natural caves. Some areas provide well enough that a living could be made without leaving a small range. Some peoples may have a need for a winter base to tuck away during the low-hunting season. And perhaps it just became a pain in the arse continually rebuilding new settlements and lugging all of your tools from place to place, as tool cultures became more specialised and complex.

These sites represent the peak of the Natufian culture which commenced around 13000 BC. Early in that period, people began to build semi-permanent villages of a handful of people that had long term periodic use.

Well, you don’t expect pottery, it seems reasonable that farming came way before pottery.

Also, I don’t see how you can claim “no evidence of farming”, absence of evidence is not necessarily evidence of absence. Perhaps they just haven’t looked in the right place.

My tentative hypothesis is that the first farming was of narcotics. High value very portable no need for permanent storage.

Such crops need year round military protection, and so the first towns were garrisons holding permanent troops and their families, as well as centres for narcotics trading.

That was my idea, anyway. But their idea has merit as well. Stone buildings figuratively “scream” military protection. But it doesn’t have to be protection of agricultural crops.