Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Oldest Lunar Calendar Found In Scotland

Posted by samzenpus on from the saving-dates dept.

First time accepted submitter eionmac writes "The BBC reports that Archaeologists believe they have discovered the world's oldest lunar 'calendar' in an Aberdeenshire field. Excavations of a field at Crathes Castle found a series of 12 pits which appear to mimic the phases of the moon and track lunar months. A team led by the University of Birmingham suggests the ancient monument was created by hunter-gatherers about 10,000 years ago. The pit alignment, at Warren Field, was first excavated in 2004. The experts who analyzed the pits said they may have contained a wooden post. The Mesolithic calendar is thousands of years older than previous known formal time-measuring monuments created in Mesopotamia. The analysis has been published in the journal Internet Archaeology."

14 of 51 comments (clear)

  1. ahem by wbr1 · · Score: 5, Funny

    The experts who analyzed the pits said they may have contained a wooden post.

    So, first moon post?

    Thanks, I'll be here all week. Try the filet mignon.

    --
    Silence is a state of mime.
  2. The more they study it ... by gstoddart · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The more they realize that there was a lot more known by pre-historic people than we've suspected.

    Mankind had many thousands of years to try to do things before we had a written history, and everyone likes to believe those cultures were oblivious.

    But it seems the more they look at this, the more things like agriculture, building, and some understanding of astronomy was a lot more widespread.

    It didn't just suddenly start with the Egyptians.

    --
    Lost at C:>. Found at C.
    1. Re:The more they study it ... by PmanAce · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Who is claiming everything started with the Egyptians?

      --
      Tired of my customary (Score:1)
    2. Re:The more they study it ... by gstoddart · · Score: 4, Informative

      When something is dated several millenia before the birth of civilization

      See, the problem is 10,000 years ago isn't before the birth of civilization, it's just before civilization as we know it and have historically understood it.

      People have tended to believe the Sumerians and Babylonians were the first civilizations, but there's mounting evidence that there were things going on that predates that by quite a bit.

      The whole point is the more they discover, they more they are pushing back the 'birth of civilization'.

      --
      Lost at C:>. Found at C.
    3. Re:The more they study it ... by steelfood · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Duh?

      Most people are surprised by how intelligent ancient humans were because in their mind, they begin with the fallacy that people today (i.e. themselves) are more intelligent than people ten, twelve, fifteen thousand years ago. This in and of itself is an extrapolation from the certainty that they are smarter than their parents and grandparents.

      --
      "If a nation expects to be ignorant and free in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be."
    4. Re:The more they study it ... by 140Mandak262Jamuna · · Score: 2, Interesting
      Recorded history begins with Egyptians because they were the first ones to record history in an enduring medium still readable after 5000 years. Chinese might have recorded history but it was probably lost. Indians don't have the habit of recording much. Most of Indian history comes from the records of Greeks Chinese or fragmentary stone inscriptions on temples and carved pillars.

      But before recorded history we have some reconstructed history from artifacts. Tracing the histories of domesticated plants and animals also give us some insight into earlier histories. Then there is genetic and DNA research. As our technology improves we get greater insights and better reconstructed history. For example, now we can now answer when we started wearing clothes. http://scienceandreason2.wordpress.com/2011/01/11/when-did-humans-start-wearing-clothes/

      So we are not simply going to say it started with the Egyptians. We will say it started with the Africans.

      --
      sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
    5. Re:The more they study it ... by argStyopa · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I've found that people today are generally very dismissive of early cultures, as if 'primitive' was synonymous with stupid.

      Personally, in terms of raw horsepower (and conceding that these early people would likely have much more broadly suffered early childhood illnesses, malnutrition, and such that would generally impair higher functions) I suspect early peoples were generally much MORE intelligent than we are today.

      Of course, it could be that they weren't so constantly distracted. I'd think about this more, but I think someone just texted me.

      --
      -Styopa
    6. Re:The more they study it ... by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 3, Interesting

      (I really love the episode where he doesn't even take the hint from some Oxbridge geneticist that around 80% of the English population are of Celtic descent..)

      Certainly you're mistaken. The majority of English genetic material, as far as I know, is actually of pre-Celtic descent. Both the Celtic and Anglo-Saxon element were mostly cultural admixtures rather than large-scale population movements. Certainly no genocide of the original population took place. Or am I wrong?

      ...WHAT? Mick is dead? Fuck me. Fuck me again. :(

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    7. Re:The more they study it ... by Attila+Dimedici · · Score: 2

      The wikipedia link you posted suggests that the Trojan War as in the 12th Century BC, which would put it at 3200 years ago, NOT 14,000 years ago and significantly more recent than the above discovery.

      --
      The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison
    8. Re:The more they study it ... by triffid_98 · · Score: 2

      Yes, it does. Dreyer's text was dated between 3200 and 3300BC, Mesopotamian writing came several hundred years earlier and was based on record keeping dating back to 8000BC.

      ...but thanks for playing and please accept a copy of our home game.

    9. Re:The more they study it ... by icebike · · Score: 2

      Something to be said for that theory.

      But the intelligence was probably more focused on survival skills. What plants you could eat, where/when to hunt, how to avoid predators and enemy tribes, sources for workable stones, skins, etc. Much of this was oral knowledge.

      They may well have had their share of imbeciles and morons. There is probably no consistency in how these were handled in all early civilizations, but I suspect more than a few were drowned or sacrificed.

      On the other hand they probably did not put up with anti social or homicidal whack jobs like we do today.
      Those people either became tribal leaders, or were executed. Probably both, in that order.

      --
      Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
  3. Re:Sotland by gstoddart · · Score: 2

    Something else Invented In Scotland, then?

    Or something even older but more widespread than we've liked to believe.

    There's, what, 100K years or more before what we call 'civilization' happened -- for all we know, this was common knowledge a very very long time ago.

    --
    Lost at C:>. Found at C.
  4. That settles it by dkleinsc · · Score: 4, Funny

    The Scots must be lunatics!

    --
    I am officially gone from /. Long live http://www.soylentnews.com/
  5. Simple Explanation by ThatsNotPudding · · Score: 3, Funny

    All the amazing accomplishments by ancient civilizations can be easily explained.

    Nothing good on TV.