Re: Were the first settlers of Mehrgarh unsophisticated?

On Jul 21, 5:55 am, Doug Weller <dwel...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
On Thu, 19 Jul 2007 18:48:39 +0200, in sci.archaeology, Peter Alaca wrote:
Carl <pchristain...@xxxxxxxxx > wrote:

On Jul 17, 11:57 pm, Tom McDonald <kilt...@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Carl wrote:
The aceramic phase, Period 1A, leads one to believe that the first
settlers were relatively unsophisticated.

However, their competence as builders contradicts this view.

A Plan of Compartmented buildings at Mehrgarh was given Rao (1991).

The compartmented structures clearly had a function and were built
according to some sort of protocol. Such a protocol must,
logically, have antedated the foundation of Mehrgarh in order to
feature in
an already developed in the oldest habitation layers there.

More could be said about the well-made mud bricks.

---

The above is based on the SLIPSHOD work of Graham Han***
in UNDERWORLD: The Mysterious Origins of Civilization. -:)

...and therefore unreliable.

Whom did he rely upon for this information? Rao? Someone else, or
someone in addition?

In either case, tell us what the *archaeologist* said (quotations
with full references would be best).

And were the mud bricks fired? Or just baked in the sun to dry?

And 'well-made' in comparison to what, exactly? Mud brick
technology isn't difficult to do well.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Instead of going round and round, making David Christainsen
do more and more work, the decent thing to do is for
Tom McDonald to get Han***'s book and then check
it for primary sources.

So you still think the decent thing to do it to let others
do the work for you.

He's amazing, isn't he? Claims he wants to discuss archaeology but doesn't
actually want to read any primary sources (and he cites them even though
he hasn't read them, which is at best foolish and could be dishonest).

And please don't mention Han*** here again.

That's because he can't find an archaeologist to back him up, so he uses
someone who takes a journalistic approach to sources.





Right now, I will shortly be playing bridge for the afternoon.

You already know Google does a huge delay before
effectuating my posts.

The delay is over.
And if you don't like delays, don't use
google to post.

However, for the sake of getting Tom McDonald onboard and in better
relationship,
I shall answer your questions in detail tomorrow Friday.

Piss off, you have nothing to offer.

Doug
--
Doug Weller --
A Director and Moderator of The Hall of Ma'athttp://www.hallofmaat.com
Doug's Archaeology Site:http://www.ramtops.co.uk
Amun - co-owner/co-moderatorhttp://groups.yahoo.com/group/Amun/- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Doug, you were not paying attention.

On the contrary I cited many primary sources in scattered posts all
over the place.

Do you think for a single second that Possehl did not give primary
sources
ALL OVER THE PLACE in his 2 books.

His latter book I have read...

So, in all fairness I suggest you make a public retraction of your
statement about myself.

.

Quantcast