@HungBunny

the bag thing is weird. I don't know much about it tbh, or what it could symbolize

I havnt read about this stuff in ages but I think it's something akin to the origin of the free masons

A large collection of traders built gobekli tepe is my guess

idk, probably not.

They'd be the most travelled, the most wise and most learnt

Trade routes necessitate agriculture in order to sustain production

Graham says pre agriculture but I don't remember much about how he explains that

I dont see hunter gatherers building that

What's interesting, is about 1500-2000 years after Gobekli Tepe was built, the Yamnaya just on the north side of the Caucuses spread out to create the Indo-European peoples

@HungBunny Well that's my point

They weren't 'hunter gatherers'

The cow wasn't domesticated *quite yet*, but it dates to around the same time as Gobkli tepe

And building fences is hard. So why not herd them like goats?

Just follow your cattle wherever they travel. Eventually you see that the cows stop in the same places to-and-fro

You build a camp site, and then start preparing it for your journey next season

True

It couldnt have just gone from hunter-gatherer to agriculture

Would've been many steps along the way

idk, I haven't seen anyone talk about Aurochs and gobekli tepe in the same context yet.

Or postulating ancient herding techniques

Another explanation could be highly religious hunter-gatherers but that seems less likely

Have you heard about the Eye of the Sahara Atlantis theory?

Nah. I'm fairly certain they were more sedentary than hunter-gatherers, but more mobile than a purely agrarian society.

They were the first cowboys lol

Yeah, I've heard about it

It's all so interesting. We could've been around for so much longer then we thought

Look more into the Yamnaya and the Indo-European expansion

If you haven't already

They might have been a 'Mongol invasion' that was lost to oral istory

I'll do that

Genetically, only the Finns/Sami were unaffected (I think), and the Swedish seem to have mixed with them freely both men and women, and kept a distinction

Which indicates that they are the only group that wasn't raped/pillaged/absorbed

Typical swedes

Fended off rape from a literal world conquering nomadic warlord population in ancient times, yet can't do the same for some lowly Muslim immigrants lol

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benjamin_Spock

http://sequart.org/magazine/53115/bill-mauldin-cartoons-captured-the-truth-of-wwii/

https://twitter.com/HistoryTime_/status/1124568726706249728

our last "proper" Prime Minister

Atleast thatcher had them ladyballs

Aint cucking the iron lady

@Capitán Alatriste My point was, that during the Roman era, the people of North Africa were closer to the North side of the Mediterranean and more intertwined than they are today.

There's been a huge divergence in the last 1800 years after the fall of Rome and the spread of Islam.

So today's North African populations are not a great representation of historical populations

The North African population of today is mostly Arab, with the exception of Morocco and Algeria where they are berbers

i.e. historical Egypt was more Greek in the past than Arab like today

In Egypt, the rulers were Ptolemaic, however most of the peasantry were still native North Africans