為什么四大古代文明中沒有一個起源于歐洲？（二）
Why didn''''t any of the four ancient civilizations originate from Europe?
譯文簡介
這里的人似乎沒有意識到，在柏拉圖和亞里士多德時代，也就是希臘文明的黃金時代，金字塔已經(jīng)有2000年的歷史了。認為文明起源于希臘是維多利亞時代的觀念，因為他們無法接受歐洲人從其他“種族”（種族是另一個維多利亞時代的概念）那里獲得知識的事實。
正文翻譯
David Sanders
People here don’t seem to realize that in the time of Plato and Aristotle, the Golden Age of Greek civilization, the Pyramids were already 2000 years old. The idea that civilization started in Greece is a Victorian notion, because they couldn’t accept that Europeans had received their knowledge from other “races” (races being another Victorian notion).
這里的人似乎沒有意識到，在柏拉圖和亞里士多德時代，也就是希臘文明的黃金時代，金字塔已經(jīng)有2000年的歷史了。認為文明起源于希臘是維多利亞時代的觀念，因為他們無法接受歐洲人從其他“種族”（種族是另一個維多利亞時代的概念）那里獲得知識的事實。
Agriculture was key, because civilization can only develop where there is a surplus in economic terms. But there were other fertile river valleys. I remember reading in Fukiyama - although I don’t think he claims it as his own idea - that a fertile area where people could not migrate from allowed leaders to capture that surplus and use it.
農(nóng)業(yè)是關(guān)鍵，因為只有在經(jīng)濟上有剩余的地方，文明才能發(fā)展。但還有其他肥沃的河谷地帶。我記得在福山的著作中讀到過，雖然我不認為這是他自己的觀點，但一個人們無法遷徙的肥沃地區(qū)讓領(lǐng)導(dǎo)者能夠掌控這份剩余，并加以利用。
農(nóng)業(yè)是關(guān)鍵，因為只有在經(jīng)濟上有剩余的地方，文明才能發(fā)展。但還有其他肥沃的河谷地帶。我記得在福山的著作中讀到過，雖然我不認為這是他自己的觀點，但一個人們無法遷徙的肥沃地區(qū)讓領(lǐng)導(dǎo)者能夠掌控這份剩余，并加以利用。
So for example in Egypt, there was a broad, fertile valley surrounded by desert. As the population grew, they couldn’t just migrate out into the desert, so leaders were able to exercise control and use the surplus to develop infrastructure and technologies.
例如，在埃及，存在著一個被沙漠包圍的廣闊肥沃的河谷。隨著人口增長，他們不能簡單地遷移到沙漠中，所以領(lǐng)導(dǎo)者能夠行使控制權(quán)，并利用剩余來發(fā)展基礎(chǔ)設(shè)施和技術(shù)。
原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網(wǎng) http://www.top-shui.cn 轉(zhuǎn)載請注明出處
例如，在埃及，存在著一個被沙漠包圍的廣闊肥沃的河谷。隨著人口增長，他們不能簡單地遷移到沙漠中，所以領(lǐng)導(dǎo)者能夠行使控制權(quán)，并利用剩余來發(fā)展基礎(chǔ)設(shè)施和技術(shù)。
原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網(wǎng) http://www.top-shui.cn 轉(zhuǎn)載請注明出處
評論翻譯
很贊 ( 2 )
收藏
As others have said, Europe was a bit cold and maybe its rivers were a bit less suitable. It may also have been a bit too heavily forested for early agriculturalists.
More generally, why should any of these ancient civilisations originate in Europe? Europe isn’t that huge. If we accept that only a few places originated the first civilisations, most other places, including Japan and Europe, are necessarily derivative.
正如其他人所說，歐洲可能有些寒冷，也許它的河流不太適合。它可能過于森林密布，不太適合早期農(nóng)業(yè)人口。 更一般地說，為什么這些古代文明中的任何一個要起源于歐洲呢？歐洲并不是那么龐大。如果我們接受只有少數(shù)幾個地方起源了第一個文明的觀點，那么其他大部分地方，包括日本和歐洲，必然是派生的。
Depedding how you want to think about it The Hittites were an Indo-European power based in Turkey on the Anatolian plateau. But speaking an indo-european language including words like Water etc. So possibly one of the major mid eastern powers was at least Indo-European.
Also the Myceanians in Greecewould definetly be European as well.
這取決于你怎么想。赫梯人是一支印歐勢力，位于安納托利亞高原的土耳其。但是說印歐語，包括水等詞。所以很可能中東強國之一至少是印歐語系的。
希臘的邁錫亞人也肯定是歐洲人。
You need agriculture, permanent settlement and a significant concentration of people. This appears to have occurred only where there were very fertile river valleys that were easy to defend and irrigation was possible. Although Europe had agriculture and permanent settlement relatively early, they did not have the other attributes that lead to cities.
Nevertheless cities did develop in Europe. Once cities emerged they appear to have spread, mostly by conquest and imitation (or for self-defence). They still tended to need some of the environmental characteristics of the original civilisations. Greek cities for example, developed in the valleys between mountain ranges. Again easily defended and based on agriculture, though it should be noted that the land was not very fertile and there was consequently pressure to expand and conquer more land.
你需要農(nóng)業(yè)，永久定居和人口的大量集中。這似乎只發(fā)生在有肥沃河谷、易于防御且可進行灌溉的地方。盡管歐洲的農(nóng)業(yè)和永久定居相對較早，但它們沒有其他導(dǎo)致城市形成的因素。
然而，歐洲仍然出現(xiàn)了城市。一旦城市出現(xiàn)，它們似乎通過征服和模仿（或為了自衛(wèi)）傳播開來。它們?nèi)匀恍枰恍┰嘉拿魉哂械沫h(huán)境特征。例如，希臘城市就是在山脈之間的河谷中發(fā)展起來的。同樣易于防御，并以農(nóng)業(yè)為基礎(chǔ)，不過需要注意的是，土地并不是很肥沃，因此會產(chǎn)生擴張和征服更多土地的壓力。
原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網(wǎng) http://www.top-shui.cn 轉(zhuǎn)載請注明出處
Other than the need for some creative individuals (their identity lost to history), access to wild crops and wild animals that could be domesticated matters. Anatolia/Syria/Iraq/Iran had the spectrum of plants and animals we still mostly rely on in the same way that Bolivia had wild potato and wild maize, not California. Once domesticated the plants and animals spread but the places near where they first were, if they had fertile river valleys, were well-suited to the population increase you need for urban life.
除了需要一些有創(chuàng)造力的個體（他們的身份已經(jīng)湮沒在歷史中），還需要能夠馴化的野生作物和野生動物。安納托利亞/敘利亞/伊拉克/伊朗擁有我們現(xiàn)在仍然主要依賴的植物和動物的種類，就像玻利維亞擁有野生土豆和野生玉米一樣，而不是加利福尼亞。一旦馴化成功，這些植物和動物就會傳播開來，但最初馴化地附近的地方，如果有肥沃的河谷，就非常適合人口的增長，這對于城市生活是必需的。
原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網(wǎng) http://www.top-shui.cn 轉(zhuǎn)載請注明出處
You will find that Ancient Civilisations arose with early agrigulatural centres. Early European farmers never managed to establish such centres. The reason could be a very strange one, indeed: they kept separate from Ancient European hunter-gatherers, who could have served as catalysts in a scaling-up process.
你會發(fā)現(xiàn)古代文明興起于早期的農(nóng)業(yè)中心。早期的歐洲農(nóng)民從未能夠建立起這樣的中心。原因可能是非常奇特的，他們與古代歐洲的狩獵采集者保持分離，而后者本可以成為擴大規(guī)模過程中的催化劑。
A Theory of Civilization - unifier and pacifier catalysts
February 03, 2021
In The WEIRDest People in the World (2020) Joseph Henrich discusses the problem of scaling up primitive societies and turning them into complex ones. Joseph’s answer is that intergroup competition (e.g. stealing and raiding of corn and cattle) made scaling up for protection a necessity (there is strength in numbers). This is usually how the transition from foraging to farming is explained, as farming was considerably harder labour and early farmers most likely had shorter life-spans than foragers.
以下是我剛寫的一篇博客文章： 《文明的理論 - 統(tǒng)一和調(diào)節(jié)劑引論》 2021年2月3日 在約瑟夫·亨里奇的《世界上最奇怪的人》（2020）中，討論了將原始社會擴大規(guī)模并轉(zhuǎn)變?yōu)閺?fù)雜社會的問題。約瑟夫的答案是，跨群體競爭（例如偷竊和劫掠玉米和牛馬）使得擴大規(guī)模以獲得保護成為必要（人多力量大）。這通常是解釋從采集到農(nóng)耕轉(zhuǎn)變的方式，因為農(nóng)耕比較艱苦，早期農(nóng)民的壽命很可能比采集者短。
因此，早期的農(nóng)耕并不是因為理性個體更愿意從事農(nóng)耕，而是因為擁有特定制度的農(nóng)耕社區(qū)在跨群體競爭中擊敗了流動的狩獵采集者人口。
原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網(wǎng) http://www.top-shui.cn 轉(zhuǎn)載請注明出處
但在擴大規(guī)模問題上卻有一個巨大的難題：部落主義。大多數(shù)小規(guī)模社會非常團結(jié)，并且隨著規(guī)模的擴大，內(nèi)部群體之間的競爭增加，社會開始再次分裂。我們只需要回想一下幾個世紀(jì)前蘇格蘭的部落之間的戰(zhàn)爭就能明白。
在世界的另一邊，蘇格蘭分支血統(tǒng)中的榮譽文化的余波仍然影響著生死存亡。在美國南方的一些縣，根據(jù)1790年的第一次美國人口普查中蘇格蘭或蘇格蘭愛爾蘭居民的比例越高，今天謀殺率就越高。這些移民的文化后裔在面對威脅到他們的榮譽、家庭或財產(chǎn)時往往會做出激烈的反應(yīng)。全球范圍內(nèi)的研究人員認為，“伊斯蘭恐怖主義”的特點最好通過部落血緣心理學(xué)來解釋。例如，博科圣地組織、索馬里青年黨和基地組織都大量招募來自具有分支族系的人口，并且其基于親屬關(guān)系的制度可能塑造了這些團體所采納的特定宗教信仰。
?Transition to a patrilineal and patrilocal system
?Transition to a more hierarchical system and rising inequality
?Nepotism
?Higher levels of conformity
?Loosening of kinship marriage taboos (e.g marrying first-degree cousins)
So, we get these two opposing forces:
Intergroup competition: pressure to scale up
Scaling-up increasing intragroup competition: pressure to scale down
我認為，部落主義實際上在從采集到耕牧的過渡中有所增加。早期農(nóng)民在親屬間共享的東西比整個部落還要多，而且有許多社會上的，可能也有進化上的發(fā)展促進了部落主義的增加：
?向父系和父系制度過渡
?過渡到更加等級森嚴(yán)的制度，不平等程度的上升
?裙帶關(guān)系
?更高水平的一致性
?松動的親屬婚姻禁忌（例如近親結(jié)婚）
因此，我們得到了這兩股對立的力量： 跨群體競爭：擴大規(guī)模的壓力 擴大規(guī)模引發(fā)的群體內(nèi)競爭增加：縮小規(guī)模的壓力
Therefore the more in-group social the clans were there less likely that civilization could bootstrap. In fact, this phenomenon can be observed later in pastoralist conquests: these societies tended to rise very quickly (Mongols, Huns Vikings, etc.) but their empires dissipated as quickly as they arose. So, what prevented early civilizations from falling apart? There must have been catalysts: unifiers and pacifiers who had more interest in keeping peace than gaining profit for themselves and their clan. These catalysts were unlikely farmers or pastoralists themselves, as they had not such evolved instincts. Their instincts were geared towards maximising the profit for their own clans.
早期文明的自我發(fā)展問題 因此，部落的群體社會關(guān)系越緊密，文明的自我發(fā)展就越不可能。實際上，這種現(xiàn)象在后來的游牧民族征服中也可以觀察到：這些社會往往迅速崛起（如蒙古人、匈奴人、維京人等），但他們的帝國也會像他們的崛起一樣迅速消散。那么，是什么阻止了早期文明的瓦解？必須存在一些催化劑：統(tǒng)一者和安撫者，他們對保持和平比為自己和他們的家族謀取利益更感興趣。這些催化劑很可能不是農(nóng)民或游牧民族本身，因為他們沒有這樣進化出來的本能。他們的本能是為自己的家族最大化利潤。
然而，確實存在這樣的人。當(dāng)我們回顧歷史時，我們可以看到在農(nóng)業(yè)發(fā)展的最初幾千年后，這些催化劑開始崛起。邁克爾·E·麥卡洛寫道：
Even so, some kings eventually began to take action to protect society’s most vulnerable people from oppression. Consequently, ancient documents, such as the Reforms of Uruinimgina (2300 BCE ), the Code of Ur-Nammu (2050 BCE ), and the better-known Code of Hammurabi (1750 BCE ), suggest that the world’s first kings began to place some sort of priority on shielding society’s most vulnerable people—the orphan, the widow, and “the man of one shekel”—from the most flagrant forms of oppression. [...]Hammurabi prevented army officers from stealing their subordinates’ property. Uruinimgina outlawed extortion and other Mafia-style methods to pressure poor people into selling their property at far below asking price. Another king even bragged that he had reduced the corvée labor requirement to only four days per month!
《陌生人的善意》（2020年） 即便如此，一些國王最終開始采取行動，保護社會上最弱勢的人們免受壓迫。因此，古代的文件，例如烏魯·伊寧吉納的改革（公元前2300年），烏爾納姆的法典（公元前2050年），以及更為著名的漢謨拉比法典（公元前1750年）表明，世界上的第一批國王開始將一些優(yōu)先權(quán)放在保護社會上最弱勢的人——孤兒、寡婦和“貧窮的人”——免受最明目張膽的壓迫之下。...漢謨拉比阻止軍官竊取部下的財產(chǎn)。烏魯·伊寧吉納禁止敲詐勒索和其他黑手黨式的手段，迫使窮人以遠低于要價的價格出售他們的財產(chǎn)。甚至還有一個國王夸耀他將苦役勞工的要求減少到每月僅四天！
這是怎么回事呢？財富的再分配、遏制裙帶關(guān)系、保護弱勢群體、減少不平等。所有這些都是狩獵采集者思維方式的跡象。狩獵采集者在農(nóng)業(yè)興起后的幾千年里一直生活在農(nóng)牧社會之外，并逐漸融入這些社會。
起初，這只是個別案例，但隨著社會的不斷擴大，這成為了一個常見的模式。在所謂的“軸心時代”，各高級文化都出現(xiàn)了平等主義運動，從希臘（斯多亞派）到印度（佛教）再到中國（儒家思想），都強調(diào)利他主義和仁慈，淡化物質(zhì)主義。
In conclusion, we can assume that these hunter-gatherer types provided the social kit for scaling up early farmer-herder societies. Whenever hunter-gatherer types ruled peace, trade, science and the arts flourished.
許多這些運動所共有的一個特點是自我發(fā)現(xiàn)：“Γν?θι σεαυτ?ν”——認識你自己。這些人有著狩獵采集者的血統(tǒng)，他們意識到自己與周圍的農(nóng)民和牧民不同。佛陀放棄了所有的財富，選擇過一種禁欲的沉思與自我發(fā)現(xiàn)的生活方式——對農(nóng)民和牧民來說，這是否合理呢？ 總的來說，我們可以假設(shè)這些狩獵采集者類型的人提供了擴大早期農(nóng)民和牧民社會的社會工具包。每當(dāng)狩獵采集者類型的人掌握和平時，貿(mào)易、科學(xué)和藝術(shù)就會蓬勃發(fā)展。
Because the original man chose for himself the best part of the planet Earth. All human life was born in the east and travelled west. It is said that the original man went from Africa to India And then returned back home. Europeans are Asian too, they originated in central Asia and over time migrated into Europe. The original population of Europe is black, they were known as Phoenicians and Mycenaeans
原始人選擇了地球上最好的部分。所有人類生活的起源都是從東方向西方遷移的。據(jù)說原始人從非洲前往印度，然后返回家園。歐洲人也是亞洲人，他們起源于中亞，并隨著時間的推移遷移到歐洲。歐洲最早的人口是黑色的，他們被稱為腓尼基人和邁錫尼人。
An even simpler answer to the question - Europe is naturally a landscape of small, discrete areas, walled from each other by rivers, mountains, or both. look at the Iberian peninsula - with mountains that not only isolate it from the rest of Europe, but separate Catalonia and Aragon (itself almost self-contained in the mountains) from other areas, mountains that define natural boundaries for Portugal, for Leon and Old Castile in the north, and so forth. France, apart from it’s northern edge, has reasonable natural boundaries, as do the Czech lands of Bohemia and Moravia, and the central Austrian lands. Italy is walled off, and itself heavily subdivided, naturally. In fact, the only part of Europe that lacks really good borders is the low lands of northern France, Belgium, the Netherlands (think about that label, and the fact that it was once referred to as the Low Countries), and the North German Plain, which merges into the steppe country of eastern Europe - Belarus, the Ukraine, and Russia, west of the Urals - typically the areas most fought over for the last couple of millennia.
Further, it’s had, typically, a smaller population than the Fertile Crescent area (the Middle East - which, until about a thousand years ago was one of the most productive areas in the world.
對于這個問題，還有一個更簡單的答案——歐洲自然地由被河流、山脈或兩者分隔開來的小而離散的地區(qū)組成。以伊比利亞半島為例，它不僅被山脈與歐洲其他地區(qū)隔離，還將加泰羅尼亞和阿拉貢（自身幾乎被山區(qū)包圍）與其他地區(qū)分開，山脈為葡萄牙、北部的萊昂和舊卡斯蒂利亞等地定義了自然邊界，等等。法國除了北部邊緣以外，也具備相對合理的自然邊界，同樣適用于捷克的波西米亞和摩拉維亞地區(qū)以及奧地利中部地區(qū)。意大利也是被自然隔離的，并且自然上劃分了許多子區(qū)域。事實上，歐洲唯一一個缺乏良好邊界的地區(qū)是法國北部的低地、比利時、荷蘭（想想這個名稱，以及曾經(jīng)被稱為低地國家的事實）和北德平原，它與東歐的草原地區(qū)——白俄羅斯、烏克蘭和烏拉爾山脈以西的俄羅斯相接，這些地區(qū)通常是過去幾千年來爭奪最激烈的地區(qū)。 此外，相比于肥沃新月地區(qū)（中東地區(qū)——直到大約一千年前，它曾是世界上最富饒的地區(qū)之一），歐洲人口通常較少。
原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網(wǎng) http://www.top-shui.cn 轉(zhuǎn)載請注明出處
Read National Geographic about Out of Africa and Back Into Africa migrations and the research of the Max Planck Institute fleshing out the Journey of the Genes. The blossoming of Europe was, in all likelihood, due to migrations across the globe, making Europe the recipient rather than the source of major human improvements.
Martin Bernal’s BLACK ATHENA highlights Egypt and the Sumerians as pioneers. Others like Wim van Binsbergen (www.shikanda.net) have fleshed out that hypothesis in the meantime.
請閱讀《國家地理》關(guān)于“出自非洲”和“返回非洲”的遷徙的文章，以及馬克斯·普朗克人類歷史學(xué)研究所的研究，詳細闡述了基因之旅。歐洲的繁榮很可能是由全球范圍內(nèi)的遷徙所致，使歐洲成為人類重大進步的接受者而非源泉。 馬丁·貝納爾的《黑色雅典娜》強調(diào)了埃及和蘇美爾人的先驅(qū)地位。其他像溫·范·賓斯貝爾根（www.shikanda.net）這樣的人則在此期間進一步闡述了這一假設(shè)。
原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網(wǎng) http://www.top-shui.cn 轉(zhuǎn)載請注明出處
Though my first thought was climate, my next was that civilization grew best at the mouths and deltas of major river valleys like the Nile, the Tigris/Euphrates, the Indus, and the Yangtze…
There are theories that assume the rising ocean levels thousands of years ago suddenly flooded what is now the Mediterranean Sea and then the Black Sea, as waters crested over and then eroded away what is now the Pillars of Hercules/Strait of Gibraltar, and then the Bosporus. Any ancient civilization at the low end of southern Europe’s rivers lies under these seas.
盡管我最初的想法是氣候，但接下來我認為文明在尼羅河、底格里斯和幼發(fā)拉底河、印度河和長江等主要河流的河口和三角洲地區(qū)發(fā)展得最好...
有一種理論認為，數(shù)千年前上升的海平面突然淹沒了現(xiàn)在的地中海和黑海，隨著水位超過并侵蝕了如今的大西洋柱和直布羅陀海峽，然后是博斯普魯斯海峽。在南歐低洼地區(qū)的任何古代文明都位于這些海域之下。
原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網(wǎng) http://www.top-shui.cn 轉(zhuǎn)載請注明出處
Europe was still coming out of an ice age when the Meso, Egypto, MesoAmerica, China-SE Asia civs were arising.
Specifically, the European Coastal Plain, that most important part of Northern, Central and Western Europe was still covered with ice 10,000 years, ago.
It would first have to become habitable, and then colonized by peoples familiar with the various arts of civilization. This all happened, in due time.
當(dāng)公元前中世紀(jì)、古埃及、古中美洲、中國和東南亞的文明興起時，歐洲仍處于冰河時代的尾聲。 具體而言，歐洲沿海平原，即北歐、中歐和西歐最重要的地區(qū)，在1萬年前仍被冰雪覆蓋。 首先，這片區(qū)域得變得適合居住，然后才能被熟悉各種文明技藝的人們所殖民。這一切都在合適的時間內(nèi)發(fā)生了。
There were likely many civilizations that became extinct throughout the early world including Europe.
There were definitely many more than four ancient civilizations.
Europe has been for millennia a crossroad, when draught or famine drove people from geographical areas south, west and east they likely resettled in Europe.
The immigrants possibly brought with them diseases that locals had not developed immunity and vanished,
At this point in time in human development there was little written language or technology, that would have left any trace of their existence.
The greatest civilization in history may have lived in Europe st one early time . There would be no material trace of them now except a couple of genes.
在早期世界歷史上，包括歐洲在內(nèi)，可能有許多文明已經(jīng)滅亡。古代的文明數(shù)量肯定不止四個。
幾千年來，歐洲一直是一個十字路口，當(dāng)干旱或饑荒迫使人們從南方、西方和東方的地理區(qū)域遷徙時，他們很可能重新定居在歐洲。這些移民可能會帶來當(dāng)?shù)厝藳]有免疫力的疾病，導(dǎo)致原住民消失。
在人類發(fā)展的這個階段，很少有書面語言或技術(shù)能夠留下他們存在的痕跡。
可能有一段早期時期，歷史上最偉大的文明曾存在于歐洲。除了一些基因之外，現(xiàn)在已經(jīng)沒有任何物質(zhì)痕跡能夠證明他們的存在。
I think there isn't an answer on this topic, or at least I don't know it.
From my point of view it could be because the majority of the first settlers outside of Africa were not going through Europe and maybe it's a matter of numbers.
It could also be just they were lucky to do it first, or that the aliens chose them instead of choosing the Europeans, who knows? (joking)
Since this is a very interesting question and topic, I'll be doing my little research to know more about it.
我認為這個問題并沒有一個確定的答案，或者說至少我不知道。從我的角度來看，可能是因為最早的非洲以外的定居者大多沒有經(jīng)過歐洲，這可能與人口數(shù)量有關(guān)。也可能他們只是幸運地首先進行了這樣的遷徙，或者外星人選擇了他們而不是選擇歐洲人，誰知道呢？（開玩笑）由于這是一個非常有趣的問題和話題，我將進行一些小研究，以了解更多相關(guān)信息。
Because the middle east had a nice climate and the abundance of food gave people time to organize and come together, as there leaders let things go to their heads and become falls gods and develop writing so they could introduce taxes being civilized is open to question, and there is little evidence that we in the north did not have happy fulfilled lives, the art and spread through Europe of the Vikings is an example the quality of stone built houses in the Scottish Iles, being barbaric is the opinion of others and the winners write the history.
因為中東地區(qū)擁有宜人的氣候和豐富的食物，這使得人們有時間組織和團結(jié)起來。隨著領(lǐng)袖們驕傲自大并發(fā)展文字，他們開始征稅，從而被認為是文明社會。然而，對于我們北方地區(qū)是否過上了幸福充實的生活存在疑問，很少有證據(jù)表明我們沒有。維京人的藝術(shù)和在歐洲的傳播就是一個例子，蘇格蘭群島上建造的石頭房屋的質(zhì)量也是如此。野蠻與否是他人的觀點，而獲勝者書寫了歷史。
europe in history as well as today, is a barbaric entity in all her forms, society, economy, culture and politics.
europe does not have the powers of a real civilization, except a certain hard force accumulated with barbaric military aggression inwards and particularly outwards, also with the application of repressive cultural-political schemes, colonization and even enslaving of asia, africa, americas.
so, its in vain to expect a certain civilized contribution to history of mankind from almost any european entity. as the whole concept and reality is not formed towards this type of values.
歐洲在歷史上以及今天，無論是在社會、經(jīng)濟、文化還是政治方面，都是一個野蠻的實體。 歐洲沒有真正文明的力量，除了一定程度上通過對內(nèi)和尤其對外的野蠻軍事侵略積累的強硬力量，還有對亞洲、非洲和美洲的殖民、甚至奴役的應(yīng)用制度和文化政治方案。 因此，期望幾乎任何歐洲實體對人類歷史做出某種文明的貢獻是徒勞的。因為整個概念和現(xiàn)實并沒有形成朝著這種價值觀的方向。
Because the early Europeans did not care to create a “civilization” as we recognize it. They were quite happy to live in their great forests, write their sagas, and instill in their children a love for honor and courage, without erecting permanent monuments to themselves or their powers that be.
因為早期的歐洲人并不關(guān)心創(chuàng)建我們所認可的“文明”。他們非常愿意生活在茂密的森林中，寫下他們的傳說，并在子女中灌輸榮譽和勇氣的愛，而不建立永久性的紀(jì)念碑來表達自己或權(quán)力的存在。
然而，他們確實從歐洲向世界其他地方擴散開來。如果你想要證明這一點，可以看一下蘇美爾史詩中提到的古老神靈，特別是吉爾伽美什。
特別要提到的是一位女神，她教會他們數(shù)學(xué)、制圖，并將楔形文字從簡單的記錄方法發(fā)展成為一種完整的語言。根據(jù)他們自己的歷史記載，她被描述為“皓如雪，頭發(fā)金色如麥穗或用其他詞匯形容”。傳統(tǒng)的歷史學(xué)家很少提及這些，因為它被認為是“不合適”和“白人種族主義”的推崇。是的，事實往往對某些人來說是不合適的。
Theres a very simple answer to your question. There was a fifth source of civilization that was on Europe. It was called Doggerland and occupied a vast area in northwestern Europe and was a continental civilization that contained what is now England, Scotland, Wales and Ireland although they were not islands then like today vut rather were connected by land ti continental Europe. The Druids and the original Europeans (traced from migrated Indo-Aryans) occupied Doggerland; however at the end of the Ice Age the waters began to rise rapidly swallowing up parts of Doggerland rapidly. Then in 9300 BCE comet strikes sped up the rising waters causing manu world floods. After it all settled, the vast majority of Doggerland was now under the Ocean leaving Ireland and Great Britain as islands no longer connected to continental Europe. Vast numbers of people had been drowned and killed during these times leaving the remaining land mostly unoccupied until the Celtic peoples migrated fron the Italian peninsula into the remaining parts of Doggerland. That's why today's Europeans are vastly different genetically from the original Europeans of Doggerland!
對于你的問題有一個非常簡單的答案。在歐洲存在著第五個文明源頭，那就是古代的多格蘭。它占據(jù)了歐洲西北部的廣闊地區(qū)，是一個大陸文明，包括現(xiàn)在的英格蘭、蘇格蘭、威爾士和愛爾蘭，盡管當(dāng)時它們不像今天那樣是島嶼，而是通過陸地與大陸歐洲相連。德魯伊教士和原始歐洲人（可以追溯到遷徙的印歐雅利安人）居住在多格蘭；然而，在冰河時代結(jié)束時，水位迅速上漲，迅速吞噬了多格蘭的部分地區(qū)。然后，在公元前9300年，彗星撞擊加快了上升的水位，引發(fā)了全球洪水。經(jīng)過一切平息后，絕大部分的多格蘭都沉入了海洋，使愛爾蘭和大不列顛成為不再與歐洲大陸相連的島嶼。在這段時間內(nèi)，大量的人口在洪水中遇難，剩下的土地大部分無人居住，直到凱爾特人從意大利半島遷徙到多格蘭的殘余地區(qū)。這就是為什么如今的歐洲人在基因上與古代的多格蘭居民有很大的不同！