![]() | This ![]() It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 10 January 2022 and 11 March 2022. Further details are available
on the course page. Student editor(s):
Sam Wege (
article contribs). Peer reviewers:
CantrellL,
YumoLu.
guys, you can delete this whenever you want, just a once-in-a-while wikipedia viewer, i dont fully trust this site, but its nice to see a page on Peru's earliest civilization, especially after the peru article has become a total mess, keep up the good work.
Possibel copy-vio. from [1]? Or is this a mirror of wikipedia? -- Banana04131 00:46, 10 September 2005 (UTC)
How is a number that implies a precision of a year arrived at? (i.e. why is it 2627 and not 2628 or 2626? should it just be 2600 implying +/- 50 years?) RJFJR 16:36, 1 October 2005 (UTC)
yes, the 2627 figure should only be quoted in the immediate context of the carbon dating the result of which it is. 83.76.222.140 12:13, 4 November 2005 (UTC)
Is it not strange that a civilization that has the knowledge to build such amazing structures with precision and organise a society so peaceful, no evidence of day to day necessities has been found? Its seems they understood how to create instruments, enjoy themselves and relax by using aphrodisiacs, they can make reed baskets to carry stones to build the pyramids. They set their city out in a planned and well organised way and organise the people to work on these. But, these people would need food, water, clothing, somewhere to sleep as the climate conditions could be extreme in Caral. I can understand that they may roast food over a fire, therefor no need for plates but something would be needed to drink from as would crops and food to be stored. Making a drinking cup or bowl out of bones is possible but surley there would be evidence of this. Surley sharp implements of some kind would be necessary to kill animals for food etc...even sharpened wooden spikes. I find it incredible that there are no answers to these simple questions. Surley if they can build such monumental structures they could make a cup or bowl albeit out of reeds, bones etc...or simple hunting tools. It does seem that when there are no answers to these questions they get overlooked in the hope that knowbody will notice. 86.134.13.112 11:00, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
Not only the utensils for everyday activities are missing, but so are the facilities, such as housing, water supply, etc. This has led some researchers, such as Professor Krzsysztof Makowski to believe that Caral was in fact not what could be called a city. The pyramidal mounds (which are indeed a very basic architectural structure) would have been built over the course of thousands of years, using a rather reduced workforce. No high level management or political structure would have been necessary. Therefore, heavy doubt is cast over the claim of Caral being the first "civilization" of the continent, since all the findings can be explained by a more parsimonious, elegant theory. General belief in the Peruvian archaeological community is that Caral's importance is being (widely) exaggerated in order to attract more tourism, and also to assure the financial support by the government of Peru trough enhancing the country's ego ("national self-esteem" in the words of Ruth Shady"
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4092265217728346257
I started a page on the Norte Chico civilization today. It seems to me that the Caral page was written when the city was considered the "mother city" and thus it has been described/linked in various places as synonymous with the civilization itself. This doesn't appear to be the case--it is one of many and may not be the oldest. The research is very new. Anyhow, editors welcome at the new page. Marskell 15:04, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
Hi Gene, I saw that you reverted my edits on a couple of pyramid related pages to include links to the pages on Ukrainian and Bosnian pyramids (and for links to the pyramid category as well). I just wanted to clarify why these links do not belong. The Bosnian "pyramid" is considered a hoax. If the digging on the Bosnian hill does eventually reveal a pyramid, then the links are justified. However, until proof of a pyramid is found, the site remains a hill, with an archeologically significant medieval village on top. In the case of the Ukrainian pyramid, the press simply carried a wrong impression of the site into the popular culture. This innacuracy was soon clarified by the archaeologist in charge. Hiberniantears 12:33, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
Please do not revert the external links sections of pyramid articles again. I am well aware that the Bosnian and Ukrainian "pramids" are not really pyramids, and that the scientific consensus supports this - however that is entirely beside the point; the main reason they are known by most people is because some people claimed they were pyramids; it is not for us to make value judgements concerning those claims; our job is simply to provide links to all pyramid-elated articles and let people read those articles and decide for themselves. The "see also" list is a list of related subjects - it is not merely a list of "legitimate pyramids". --Gene_poole 01:39, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
An anon keeps showing up to change things here and elsewhere on the site. To get a few things straight:
So please anon, stop changing this. Marskell 14:10, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
This site: http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/esp_caral.htm claims to be a copy of an article from "Frontier Magazine 8.3 (May 2002)", and reads as a nearly perfect copy of this article, with superior formatting and spacing. The way the text is bunched together in this article and the marked similarity of the text implies that there are potential copyright problems with this page. Beyond the copyvio, the tone and structure of the article's a hair off too. Flagged for rewrite. Hoping to find time to finish it myself over the next week or two, but it'd be nice to have someone more familiar with the subject beat me to it. MrZaius talk 16:35, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
I've uploaded a number of pictures I took at Caral to the Commons [2] (Mine are "Caral 1.jpg" through "Caral 9.jpg") and I wanted to replace one of the copies of the "Pyramid at Caral" pictures with this one:
I'll plan on switching it in a few days if I hear nothing. If you would rather a different picture replace the duplicate let me know. Also I can do some color correction on any of the images if you think it is needed. KyleT 17:58, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
The map within the article shows Caral located way out in the Pacific ocean, at the edge of the continental slope. I reverted the joke, and put Caral back on solid ground. Freederick 19:54, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
I have recently seen a BBC Horizon documentary regarding Caral, and thought putting the link to it on this page might be useful. The documentary is from 2007, but it still suggests Caral to be a "mother city," which I gather from this talk page is no longer current. I thought the addition of the link might be useful to anyone interested in the basics of Caral. I found it very informative: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4092265217728346257
Sound good? 72.78.6.125 ( talk) 04:57, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
Sorry, it doesn't. That BBC documentary is not from 2007 but from 2002 (you mistook the posting for the production date) and it is full of mistakes. 66.50.201.151 ( talk) 14:03, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
This article is so poor, bad and misinformed that I for one am convinced that it should be a greater service to Wikipedia to completely change it and substitute it for a better one, perhaps a translation of the spanish article on the same subject which is far superior. Regarding the information used, this article is practically a bad copy of the 2002 BBC Documentary over Caral, which is full of wishfull thinking and bad science. Carlos Tirado 66.50.201.151 ( talk) 14:00, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
"In one of the pyramids they uncovered 32 flutes made of condor and pelican bones and 37 cornets of deer and llama bones."
Cornet links to a page about a brass instrument of the same name. They had brass instruments back then? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.30.25.225 ( talk) 16:34, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
http://anthropogene.blogspot.com/2007/02/mother-city-of-flutes-cocaine-and.html Wk 85 ( talk) 08:43, 9 October 2008 (UTC)
"Caral was inhabited between roughly 2600 BC and 2000 BC, enclosing an area of 66 hectares.[1]"
The footnoted source gives the dates but NOT the size. I'm moving the citation and adding anote that the size needs to be cited. 209.162.56.97 ( talk) 18:22, 21 October 2010 (UTC)
A website already listed as an external link: http://academic.evergreen.edu/curricular/hacop/CaralPeru.htm states "The site's central area covers more than 150 acres..." That is over 60 ha. for the central area which supports the un-cited 66 ha. statement, though it implies the whole settlement was larger than that. 209.162.56.97 ( talk) 18:37, 21 October 2010 (UTC)
Alright, I found the article on the NY Times and what appears to be a stable url for it. I referenced that and changed the ha. measurement to "more than 60." I then removed the Evergreen University link from the external links section since it is now redundant, but I'm leaving it here in case that NY Times url proves unstable, since I had some trouble finding a url that worked at all. 209.162.56.97 ( talk) 20:12, 21 October 2010 (UTC)
The "Musical Instruments" paragraph isn't convincing. It is implied that "coronets" are musical instruments, whereas as far as I can tell from the references what is meant is actual coronets, that is, small crowns worn on the head. Also flutopedia doesn't appear to be a WP:RS although possibly it contains references to usable sources. I'd rather leave the corrections to those who know more about the subject, but if no-one does it I'll have a go at some stage. SamuelTheGhost ( talk) 14:20, 30 November 2012 (UTC)
. “Clearly, music played an important role in their society,”
Read more: http://www.smithsonianmag.com/history-archaeology/firstcity.html#ixzz2DivHmbbV Follow us: @SmithsonianMag on Twitter
. “Clearly, music played an important role in their society,”
Read more: http://www.smithsonianmag.com/history-archaeology/firstcity.html#ixzz2DivHmbbV Follow us: @SmithsonianMag on Twitter
Dougweller ( talk) 16:20, 30 November 2012 (UTC)
In the Lead section there was a sentence that is a close paraphrase of the introduction of a book chapter on Caral. The information is both too close a plagiarism and, lacking the context that the original source gives, is out of place in the article regardless. I am deleting it, but will include the text here: "Although its development was contemporary with that of other early civilizations such as Egypt, India, Sumeria, and China, it developed in complete isolation." Please see 'Solis, Ruth Shady, "America's First City? The Case of Late Archaic Caral", Andean Archaeology III, Boston, MA: Springer US, pp. 28–66, ISBN 978-0-387-28939-7.' on page 28 for close paraphrase: "inhabited nearly contemporaneously with the Sumerian cities of Mesopotamia and the construction of the Pyramid of Sakara or the later pyramids of Giza in Egypt. But unlike Old World societies such as Mesopotamia, Egypt and India that had exchange networks of goods and knowledge allowing them to benefit from each other’s experiences, the Peruvian process took place in total isolation from other societies on the continent." Sam Wege ( talk) 01:44, 10 March 2022 (UTC)
Just that, and who is it 'sacred' to? It's one of those clickbait terms to attract readers. It should be deleted. 94.30.20.9 ( talk) 00:06, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
![]() | This ![]() It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 10 January 2022 and 11 March 2022. Further details are available
on the course page. Student editor(s):
Sam Wege (
article contribs). Peer reviewers:
CantrellL,
YumoLu.
guys, you can delete this whenever you want, just a once-in-a-while wikipedia viewer, i dont fully trust this site, but its nice to see a page on Peru's earliest civilization, especially after the peru article has become a total mess, keep up the good work.
Possibel copy-vio. from [1]? Or is this a mirror of wikipedia? -- Banana04131 00:46, 10 September 2005 (UTC)
How is a number that implies a precision of a year arrived at? (i.e. why is it 2627 and not 2628 or 2626? should it just be 2600 implying +/- 50 years?) RJFJR 16:36, 1 October 2005 (UTC)
yes, the 2627 figure should only be quoted in the immediate context of the carbon dating the result of which it is. 83.76.222.140 12:13, 4 November 2005 (UTC)
Is it not strange that a civilization that has the knowledge to build such amazing structures with precision and organise a society so peaceful, no evidence of day to day necessities has been found? Its seems they understood how to create instruments, enjoy themselves and relax by using aphrodisiacs, they can make reed baskets to carry stones to build the pyramids. They set their city out in a planned and well organised way and organise the people to work on these. But, these people would need food, water, clothing, somewhere to sleep as the climate conditions could be extreme in Caral. I can understand that they may roast food over a fire, therefor no need for plates but something would be needed to drink from as would crops and food to be stored. Making a drinking cup or bowl out of bones is possible but surley there would be evidence of this. Surley sharp implements of some kind would be necessary to kill animals for food etc...even sharpened wooden spikes. I find it incredible that there are no answers to these simple questions. Surley if they can build such monumental structures they could make a cup or bowl albeit out of reeds, bones etc...or simple hunting tools. It does seem that when there are no answers to these questions they get overlooked in the hope that knowbody will notice. 86.134.13.112 11:00, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
Not only the utensils for everyday activities are missing, but so are the facilities, such as housing, water supply, etc. This has led some researchers, such as Professor Krzsysztof Makowski to believe that Caral was in fact not what could be called a city. The pyramidal mounds (which are indeed a very basic architectural structure) would have been built over the course of thousands of years, using a rather reduced workforce. No high level management or political structure would have been necessary. Therefore, heavy doubt is cast over the claim of Caral being the first "civilization" of the continent, since all the findings can be explained by a more parsimonious, elegant theory. General belief in the Peruvian archaeological community is that Caral's importance is being (widely) exaggerated in order to attract more tourism, and also to assure the financial support by the government of Peru trough enhancing the country's ego ("national self-esteem" in the words of Ruth Shady"
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4092265217728346257
I started a page on the Norte Chico civilization today. It seems to me that the Caral page was written when the city was considered the "mother city" and thus it has been described/linked in various places as synonymous with the civilization itself. This doesn't appear to be the case--it is one of many and may not be the oldest. The research is very new. Anyhow, editors welcome at the new page. Marskell 15:04, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
Hi Gene, I saw that you reverted my edits on a couple of pyramid related pages to include links to the pages on Ukrainian and Bosnian pyramids (and for links to the pyramid category as well). I just wanted to clarify why these links do not belong. The Bosnian "pyramid" is considered a hoax. If the digging on the Bosnian hill does eventually reveal a pyramid, then the links are justified. However, until proof of a pyramid is found, the site remains a hill, with an archeologically significant medieval village on top. In the case of the Ukrainian pyramid, the press simply carried a wrong impression of the site into the popular culture. This innacuracy was soon clarified by the archaeologist in charge. Hiberniantears 12:33, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
Please do not revert the external links sections of pyramid articles again. I am well aware that the Bosnian and Ukrainian "pramids" are not really pyramids, and that the scientific consensus supports this - however that is entirely beside the point; the main reason they are known by most people is because some people claimed they were pyramids; it is not for us to make value judgements concerning those claims; our job is simply to provide links to all pyramid-elated articles and let people read those articles and decide for themselves. The "see also" list is a list of related subjects - it is not merely a list of "legitimate pyramids". --Gene_poole 01:39, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
An anon keeps showing up to change things here and elsewhere on the site. To get a few things straight:
So please anon, stop changing this. Marskell 14:10, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
This site: http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/esp_caral.htm claims to be a copy of an article from "Frontier Magazine 8.3 (May 2002)", and reads as a nearly perfect copy of this article, with superior formatting and spacing. The way the text is bunched together in this article and the marked similarity of the text implies that there are potential copyright problems with this page. Beyond the copyvio, the tone and structure of the article's a hair off too. Flagged for rewrite. Hoping to find time to finish it myself over the next week or two, but it'd be nice to have someone more familiar with the subject beat me to it. MrZaius talk 16:35, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
I've uploaded a number of pictures I took at Caral to the Commons [2] (Mine are "Caral 1.jpg" through "Caral 9.jpg") and I wanted to replace one of the copies of the "Pyramid at Caral" pictures with this one:
I'll plan on switching it in a few days if I hear nothing. If you would rather a different picture replace the duplicate let me know. Also I can do some color correction on any of the images if you think it is needed. KyleT 17:58, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
The map within the article shows Caral located way out in the Pacific ocean, at the edge of the continental slope. I reverted the joke, and put Caral back on solid ground. Freederick 19:54, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
I have recently seen a BBC Horizon documentary regarding Caral, and thought putting the link to it on this page might be useful. The documentary is from 2007, but it still suggests Caral to be a "mother city," which I gather from this talk page is no longer current. I thought the addition of the link might be useful to anyone interested in the basics of Caral. I found it very informative: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4092265217728346257
Sound good? 72.78.6.125 ( talk) 04:57, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
Sorry, it doesn't. That BBC documentary is not from 2007 but from 2002 (you mistook the posting for the production date) and it is full of mistakes. 66.50.201.151 ( talk) 14:03, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
This article is so poor, bad and misinformed that I for one am convinced that it should be a greater service to Wikipedia to completely change it and substitute it for a better one, perhaps a translation of the spanish article on the same subject which is far superior. Regarding the information used, this article is practically a bad copy of the 2002 BBC Documentary over Caral, which is full of wishfull thinking and bad science. Carlos Tirado 66.50.201.151 ( talk) 14:00, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
"In one of the pyramids they uncovered 32 flutes made of condor and pelican bones and 37 cornets of deer and llama bones."
Cornet links to a page about a brass instrument of the same name. They had brass instruments back then? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.30.25.225 ( talk) 16:34, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
http://anthropogene.blogspot.com/2007/02/mother-city-of-flutes-cocaine-and.html Wk 85 ( talk) 08:43, 9 October 2008 (UTC)
"Caral was inhabited between roughly 2600 BC and 2000 BC, enclosing an area of 66 hectares.[1]"
The footnoted source gives the dates but NOT the size. I'm moving the citation and adding anote that the size needs to be cited. 209.162.56.97 ( talk) 18:22, 21 October 2010 (UTC)
A website already listed as an external link: http://academic.evergreen.edu/curricular/hacop/CaralPeru.htm states "The site's central area covers more than 150 acres..." That is over 60 ha. for the central area which supports the un-cited 66 ha. statement, though it implies the whole settlement was larger than that. 209.162.56.97 ( talk) 18:37, 21 October 2010 (UTC)
Alright, I found the article on the NY Times and what appears to be a stable url for it. I referenced that and changed the ha. measurement to "more than 60." I then removed the Evergreen University link from the external links section since it is now redundant, but I'm leaving it here in case that NY Times url proves unstable, since I had some trouble finding a url that worked at all. 209.162.56.97 ( talk) 20:12, 21 October 2010 (UTC)
The "Musical Instruments" paragraph isn't convincing. It is implied that "coronets" are musical instruments, whereas as far as I can tell from the references what is meant is actual coronets, that is, small crowns worn on the head. Also flutopedia doesn't appear to be a WP:RS although possibly it contains references to usable sources. I'd rather leave the corrections to those who know more about the subject, but if no-one does it I'll have a go at some stage. SamuelTheGhost ( talk) 14:20, 30 November 2012 (UTC)
. “Clearly, music played an important role in their society,”
Read more: http://www.smithsonianmag.com/history-archaeology/firstcity.html#ixzz2DivHmbbV Follow us: @SmithsonianMag on Twitter
. “Clearly, music played an important role in their society,”
Read more: http://www.smithsonianmag.com/history-archaeology/firstcity.html#ixzz2DivHmbbV Follow us: @SmithsonianMag on Twitter
Dougweller ( talk) 16:20, 30 November 2012 (UTC)
In the Lead section there was a sentence that is a close paraphrase of the introduction of a book chapter on Caral. The information is both too close a plagiarism and, lacking the context that the original source gives, is out of place in the article regardless. I am deleting it, but will include the text here: "Although its development was contemporary with that of other early civilizations such as Egypt, India, Sumeria, and China, it developed in complete isolation." Please see 'Solis, Ruth Shady, "America's First City? The Case of Late Archaic Caral", Andean Archaeology III, Boston, MA: Springer US, pp. 28–66, ISBN 978-0-387-28939-7.' on page 28 for close paraphrase: "inhabited nearly contemporaneously with the Sumerian cities of Mesopotamia and the construction of the Pyramid of Sakara or the later pyramids of Giza in Egypt. But unlike Old World societies such as Mesopotamia, Egypt and India that had exchange networks of goods and knowledge allowing them to benefit from each other’s experiences, the Peruvian process took place in total isolation from other societies on the continent." Sam Wege ( talk) 01:44, 10 March 2022 (UTC)
Just that, and who is it 'sacred' to? It's one of those clickbait terms to attract readers. It should be deleted. 94.30.20.9 ( talk) 00:06, 7 February 2024 (UTC)