[Editor’s Note: The following discussion took place in response to an article listed blow by the members of The Mago Cirlce, Facebook group of Goddessians/Magoists from May 6 to May 10, 2016. Readers are recommended to read the original article linked below that has invoked the converation.]
Morgaine Swann That’s beautiful with all that gold – is that real? I have to get that guy’s book! “In his book “The mysteries of the Danube Civilization” Harald Haarmann proves that the Balkans were inhabited by the civilization that developed the first written language. Haarmann calls this culture“Old European”. It existed on the territories of modern-day Serbia, Macedonia, Bulgaria, Romania, Greece as well as parts of Ukraine and Hungary. According to archaeological discoveries, its emergence can be traced back to 7000 BC.”
Anna Tzanova Yes, it is real gold.
Morgaine Swann I’m sorry, I was unclear – I meant the layout of the grave.
Alaya Dannu Hm, and I’ll be the one to ask the question or questions many would either hesitate to ask or not think to.
So what this article is saying is, the Balkan region is NOW the new location to the cradle of civilization. It’s no longer Sumer. So this is to put Old Europe on location as roots or foundations for those with European ancestry?
Has anyone ever considered how these discoveries have a flair of politics, to see or put to the forefront some version of a Eurasian origin for Europeans and their descendants? It’s like the hotly contested Aryan invasion theory…and ancient India speculated to have actually planted the seeds to bear the fruit of what is being called Old Europe.
How is it that humanity desires to move ahead when it cannot even reconcile its origins, fighting against its inclusiveness, perpetuating the age old politics of separatism?
This kind of conflicts with the Sarasvati River dating and the people it supported until it dried up.
Whose agenda does this new theory belong to?
Morgaine Swann Ultimately there is an answer as to which is the oldest, but this talks about an advanced civilization that (supposedly) predates things we’ve already identified. If it is the oldest yet, what came before it? Human progress has not been linear. There have been ups and downs we haven’t even begun to map. There was an ancient mariner culture that traded all over the globe that isn’t in our theoretical timeline yet. The remains of it are being found in oceans all over the world as our technology improves. Whose agenda does it serve? I know the guys (Michael Tellinger is one of them) who claim we were bred as a slave race to mine gold will be all over it. Alaya Dannu, do you think this will be used to advance a racist agenda? Is it better or worse if the society in question is older than the Minoan age?
Alaya Dannu Yes, advanced. The civilization along the Sarasvati river was considered to be advanced, but there’s little talk about that. I wasn’t referring to civilizations in general, I was referring to what is considered advanced.
It isn’t a matter of Minoans, Sumer, Greece, Egypt, or India, even. I am pointing out that the concept of oldest is being compared to civilizations that fit an ideology. They mentioned Greece, Egypt, and Sumer – all civilizations that were speculated to give rise to Europeans and then some. Um, where is the comparison to the civilization that IS older than Greece, Egypt, and Sumer? I don’t think this discovery is of THE oldest, but is ONE of. I’m throwing India in now because in the archeological community, it is almost taboo to mention India. Who knows, maybe there was one that predated India as well.
The point I’m trying to make is why aren’t people more observant to what’s being presented to them, and more knowledgeable on what’s been proposed? Look at the “advanced civilizations” they listed as comparisons, and then look at the past discussions on the origins of the European people’s. That is what I’m trying to draw attention to.
Ask Questions. Think About the information. Do Research on past discussions.
Morgaine Swann Sorry to bother you again. Since I’m not in the archeological community, can you tell me why it is taboo to talk about India? I’m new to this Circle and I’m interested in finding older discussions on this topic if someone can tell me where to find them?
Karen J. Boden Excuse me, as a mere cultural anthropologist, may I point out that there is a difference between discussing the origins of “advanced civilization” (a plague on our human species IMHO) & the origins of our species itself. As far as I know, the facts that support the origin of our species in Africa remain strongly supported. “Advanced civilizations” could very well have risen in various locations at various times. It does not surprise me in the least that we keep finding more of these sites dating to different times in different places & the arguments that ensue will eventually sort themselves out, possibly giving us a much more accurate picture of the migrations & cultural trajectories of our species as it migrated out of Africa across the globe (if we don’t drive ourselves to extinction first, that is).
Alaya Dannu Sure Morgaine Swann. I’m typing from my phone, so I’ll provide what I know off the tool of my head and hopefully you’ll be able to fall into a black hole while searching for more information (I mean that in a good way. Getting lost while reading and researching is something I thoroughly enjoy).
I’ve mentioned the Saraswati/Sarasvati River a couple of times. The archeological community denied this area actually existed, stating its mention in the Vedas is mythological. A geological survey was done and found a dried up riverbed in the exact same location. And it has been proven that it did once exist. This throws off the Aryan invasion theory because it suggests that the people along that river migrated because it dried up, thus seeding the Egyptians, Sumers, and Anatolia to name a few offshoot colonies. And then they returned to India, integrating with the people that were already there – how long apart this happened, is hard to say.
Because of this aspect, it would further suggest Old Europe was seeded, if not heavily influenced by Indians. The Aryan theory once worked – and people still hold on to it in the Archeo community – because it was racially motivated. And then Hitler came along and made things worse for the word Aryan and its concept. So the taboo with India is that it could have influenced Old Europe.
I will publish this comment, look into my bookmarks for names and links, and then come back and update it for you.
Alaya Dannu Karen, what was the theory before Africa? Besides, I’m not referring to origins in this conversation. I’m referring to asking questions and looking at these discoveries from more than one angle. Being the one that rocks the boat…😉
Karen J. Boden The only other theory was a multi-regional evolution theory floated around before we were able to analyze genetic material. The ‘Out of Africa’ theory has actually become almost as strongly supported as evolution among biological & other anthropologists, which is to say it is accepted by fact by the majority (both because they are supported by the preponderance of scientific evidence). And, please do not get me wrong. I love this group & I joined because I firmly believe that many prehistoric societies as well as the very first religions were female based. I also believe that these facts have been largely over-looked/covered-up because academia has been ruled by men. I’d be willing to bet that the gorgeously adorned skeleton in the Danube grave may well be female, as these peoples migrated further west to become the Celts, who greatly respected women.
(To be continued)