• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Experience

Leonardo

Active Member
I got this idea after arguing with a racist about the importance of nurture versus nature and the usual white supremist ideology of why sophisticated architecture emerges from cultures of the middle east and further north and not in central and Southern parts of Africa.

When humanity migrated from Africa it caused some peculiar adaptations. For the tens of not hundreds of thousands of years humanity lived on ice sheets as they moved north into Europe, and Asia the art of constructing Igloos is highly probable to have been developed sometime during that period. Thinking how meanable ice is, cutting blocks or forming them and then stacking them into shelters isn't a far leap. Such an adaptation establishes architectural principles of how to balance weight, form arches and ceilings using blocks. The ice ages last long enough for humans to have migrated from the extremes of Europe and Asia, even Siberia back to the warmer southern regions, inclusive of the middle east, bringing back the knowledge of igloo like building. Understanding the technology of how blocks can be balanced, stacked and fitted to build shelters can naturally be extended to other materials like stone.

Looking at where monuments have been built it seems rational that the art of block forming came about from cultures that had been influenced by humans that lived on ice sheets. e.g. In central Africa there aren't those kinds of structures in the way they are in South America. Central Africa's tropical environment is difficult for developing large societies, the soil is like cement, the problems with malaria force tribes to be small and distant from one another. South America has similar issues but the cultures did build monuments and shelters with blocks. The difference between the cultures of South America to those of central Africa is the experience of living on ice sheets!

The Clovis people migrated from Siberia and China where using blocks of ice to form shelters was common. The Clovis like cultures, and some say some did sail along the coast of the western Americas to get to Nazca, adapted ice block stacking to other materials, such as stone and clay. The Zimbabwe culture doesn’t violate this theory since it is known that the people of Zimbabwe were influenced by northern African cultures whom they traded with.

Without the exodus from Africa and living in the harsh icing environments of Europe and Asia people may not have developed the technology of block buildings. Just an idea…
 

Leonardo

Active Member
You are assuming that everything outside of Africa was a frozen wasteland however.

Neolithic architecture - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


No I'm not...the period before the Neolithic era was an ice age and large parts of Eurasia was covered in ice. As I mentioned in the post, migrations into those icy lands brought about adpatations for a frozen world. Migrations back from those frozen lands into the middle east introduced the ice block stacking technology that they adapted to stones, which is what has been found in the Neolithic era.

Ice age - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
Last edited:

Photonic

Ad astra!
No I'm not...the period before the Neolithic era was an ice age and large parts of Eurasia was covered in ice. As I mentioned in the post, migrations into those icy lands brought about adpatations for a frozen world. Migrations back from those frozen lands into the middle east introduced the ice block stacking technology that they adapted to stones, which is what has been found in the Neolithic era.

Ice age - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Can you produce valid evidence of this?
 

outhouse

Atheistically
Why is that a mistake?


the ice age ended a long time ago, agriculture has since taken off and man started multiplying rapidly enough to form civilizations.

these new civilizations had thousands of years with no ice before they even began working with stone in the methods your describing.


many people built out of mud and clay and when that didnt hold up to weather they switched to stone.


You need to build more of a case then want or fantasy
 

Leonardo

Active Member
the ice age ended a long time ago, agriculture has since taken off and man started multiplying rapidly enough to form civilizations.

The use of stacking stone to build small shelters happens right after the ice age but during the ice age in the wamer climate zones people are building grass huts or mud huts.

these new civilizations had thousands of years with no ice before they even began working with stone in the methods your describing.

That's when the larger structures of stone started appearing, well before that were much smaller structures made of stacked stones.

many people built out of mud and clay and when that didnt hold up to weather they switched to stone.

They'd find out that the mud or clay structures without reenforcement would not hold up within a year. So your argument doesn't hold that it was weather that motivated the use of stones, mud was used for thousands of years .

The use if ice as the first material to be used to stack blocks to build a shelter makes sense from two points:

1. The impetus to build a shelter where there isn't any other material, while hunting or migrating, is very high. Without such shelter death is certain, especially when children are with the group.

2. The material, ice, is very meanable, it doesn't take steal tools to chisel the blocks as it would with stones.

Looking at the architecture of central and South Africa with that of South America the difference between the two cultures is that one is from a ice culture and the other never experienced such an environment, and therefore did not have the impetus to make block stacking shelters.

The colonization of the Nazca plains is actually older than Clovis sites and the Nazcan people did build clay brick and stone shelters. Comming from an ice culture has the advantage of gaining experience using ice as a block that can easily be applied to clay or stone.
 

outhouse

Atheistically
They'd find out that the mud or clay structures without reenforcement would not hold up within a year

not true. straw or grass mixed in has held up well in the plain states for a long long time and around the world.


The colonization of the Nazca plains is actually older than Clovis sites and the Nazcan people did build clay brick and stone shelters. Comming from an ice culture has the advantage of gaining experience using ice as a block that can easily be applied to clay or stone.

Ill call Horse pucky on this one. I know Nazca well, and most of Peru. I also have artifacts from that culture from when I was there.

They have a few clovis tips in the museo de oro and even if the did there are not enough remain to base any sort of building on. I believe those are the oldest artifacts in perus best museo

Most all of the buildings there were done by the incas. Clovis people and those before were nomadic so I dont think you have much to go on.








Now, ones buildings will be mainly made out of avalible resources no matter where you go on the planet during ancient times

You have failed to make a decent connection from ice to stone work. People did not learn stonework from working with ice
 

outhouse

Atheistically
Nope; the Incas had nothing to do with Nazca...

Dang you got me there, LOL good catch

Nazca is older.

I do generalize the empire that the incas had within its boundries, but yes the culture and people were their own and not built by that culture.

Having been to the adobe built ancient site Cahuachi I can say without a doubt there is nothing there built from any ice born method.

Same for any of the Andian cultures despite glaciers there today but melting fast




Peru brings up a good point as it has some of the best stonework ruins in the world, some of the blocks and their placement are still a mystery and cannot be duplicated today. Nothing of which could ever be tied to ice


glad you caught me, I wont make that mistake generalizing again
 

painted wolf

Grey Muzzle
If you actually look what you see is that in places where food is plentiful but migratory, so are the people. Nomadic and semi-nomadic people do not construct elaborate stone architecture because it's a waste of time and resources. Why bother?

Massive numbers of roving food animals mean you don't need a stone or mud brick house because you don't have to baby sit a semi-feral cow, pig, or goat. Keeping on the move yourself means a stone or brick house is a joke.

wa:do
 

Jayhawker Soule

-- untitled --
Premium Member
Hey, Shulgi, I was thinking of building something to honor the gods but I haven't a clue where to start. Any thoughts?

You know, Ekur, back when my great, great, great, ... great grandfather was in his youth, he use to cut these huge blocks of ice and stack them in the most interesting way. I bet we could do the same thing with brick and stone. We could call it a ziggurat. What do you think?

Outstanding. But, first, how's about you and me seeing if we can hunt up a walrus or two for dinner!
 
Last edited:

sandy whitelinger

Veteran Member
I got this idea after arguing with a racist about the importance of nurture versus nature…
To explain nature vs. nurture I remember when I asked a friend why someone was such a jerk. They replied, "On the nauture side, he came from a long line of jerks. On the nurture side, he was raised by a long line of jerks."
 

Leonardo

Active Member
Hey, Shulgi, I was thinking of building something to honor the gods but I haven't a clue where to start. Any thoughts?

You know, Ekur, back when my great, great, great, ... great grandfather was in his youth, he use to cut these huge blocks of ice and stack them in the most interesting way. I bet we could do the same thing with brick and stone. We could call it a ziggurat. What do you think?

Outstanding. But, first, how's about you and me seeing if we can hunt up a walrus or two for dinner!

Igloo's are a temporary form of shelter, they can be built fairly easily and quickly, which why they are built! :D
 

Leonardo

Active Member
If you actually look what you see is that in places where food is plentiful but migratory, so are the people. Nomadic and semi-nomadic people do not construct elaborate stone architecture because it's a waste of time and resources. Why bother?

Massive numbers of roving food animals mean you don't need a stone or mud brick house because you don't have to baby sit a semi-feral cow, pig, or goat. Keeping on the move yourself means a stone or brick house is a joke.

wa:do

True, but the fact is that most if not all stone/brick architecture just happens to be those cultures that are accessible to ice cultures. The Arians were a nothern culture that invaded the middle eastern territories. Stories such like Achillies, Arjuran and even Hercules are pretty common amongst the middle eastern cultures suggesting a common influence. That being said; older cultures than the Arians that lived in areas that would have been covered in ice could have migrated to middle east and therefore ice block stacking could very well be an established technology that was adapted to stone and clay.

I wouldn't have thought twice about the idea if it weren't for the age of the Nazca civilization which means they were much more directly related to the Clovis ice culture. The Clovis were nomandic, so for the Nazcans to rethink their life styles to an agricultural model surely required some innovated thinking. As all innovation it is inspired by experience.
 

painted wolf

Grey Muzzle
True, but the fact is that most if not all stone/brick architecture just happens to be those cultures that are accessible to ice cultures. The Arians were a nothern culture that invaded the middle eastern territories. Stories such like Achillies, Arjuran and even Hercules are pretty common amongst the middle eastern cultures suggesting a common influence. That being said; older cultures than the Arians that lived in areas that would have been covered in ice could have migrated to middle east and therefore ice block stacking could very well be an established technology that was adapted to stone and clay.
Except you don't. The first stone architecture is in the Middle East and South East Asia... where no ice was ever to be found.

I wouldn't have thought twice about the idea if it weren't for the age of the Nazca civilization which means they were much more directly related to the Clovis ice culture. The Clovis were nomandic, so for the Nazcans to rethink their life styles to an agricultural model surely required some innovated thinking. As all innovation it is inspired by experience.
No, they are separated by ten thousand years and thousands of miles. The Nazca arrived in 300BC and are likely descendants of the Chavan culture. The oldest stone buildings are in Caral and are contemporaneous with Mesopotamia (2,600-2,000BCE).

Even still... this city is at least ten thousand years younger than the Clovis people who died out 13,000 years ago in North America, thousands of miles away. Meanwhile South America had it's own people (older than Clovis) in Monte Verde, well away from any glaciers.

Even skimming Wiki will provide a basic grasp of general history.
 

CynthiaCypher

Well-Known Member
I think our first stone builder did it out of defence and basically they were imitating natural structures. There were and still are natural forts and arches that they could have imitated
 

Leonardo

Active Member
Except you don't. The first stone architecture is in the Middle East and South East Asia... where no ice was ever to be found.


No, they are separated by ten thousand years and thousands of miles. The Nazca arrived in 300BC and are likely descendants of the Chavan culture. The oldest stone buildings are in Caral and are contemporaneous with Mesopotamia (2,600-2,000BCE).

Even still... this city is at least ten thousand years younger than the Clovis people who died out 13,000 years ago in North America, thousands of miles away. Meanwhile South America had it's own people (older than Clovis) in Monte Verde, well away from any glaciers.

Even skimming Wiki will provide a basic grasp of general history.

You're right. For some reason one of the science channels did a special on early Americas and it transitioned from early occupation of South America before the Clovis people to Nazca. I assumed that they were implying that Nazca was that old.
 
Top