The study of the Harrapan culture has been marked by a large number of conflicting views, and a very small amount of verified archeological evidence. Some sites which show continuous occupation for over a thousand years were definitely settled well before 3000 BCE, but the extent to which the culture was unified is difficult to determine.
The earliest studies had a very strong predisposition to accord responsibility for much of the Harrapan culture to association with the Sumerians, and even later cultures. There is little evidence to support that, and the more remote sites, in Pakistan, and Afghanistan have not been thoroughly or meticulously studied by modern methods, primarily because of the civil situation over the last half century. However some indigenous scholars have strong convictions that the culture grew from local roots in the Indus valley from as early as 6500 BCE.
It’s a non starter for this thread, though, since a document no one can decipher is not much use in naming names from the dawn of written language.
I believe that scientists have estimated that Dick Clark is between 3 and 4 million years old (give or take 500,000 years). Of course, the very early episodes of “American Bandstand” are no longer available, making confirmation impossible.
i don’t know if this helps, but my history book refers to the first known conquerer in history, sargon. he was king of the akkadians in northern babylonia.
Apart from Narmer,
My wife has come up with a few other predynastic kings or chiefs of Egypt, from what is somtimes called Dynasty 0
(i.e. before Dynasty 1)
According to the hieroglyphs their ‘names’ were
king Scorpion
king Crocodile
Iri-Hor
Ka
Aha
and king Catfish, also known as Narmer.
We are talking approximately 3200-3000b.c. here
so a little before Enmebaragisi
(probably)…
The Gilgamesh epic is believed to be based on history, from everything I’ve ever heard.
However, he lived about 2700 BCE, and I’m fairly sure the King Scorpion pottery and the first couple faces on the Wall of Kings (Menes, Narmur?) predate him.
We seem to be accepting hieroglyphic documentation, so why not cave paintings? I’d wager at least a few of the Lascaux images represent actual individuals, rather than “men”.
You know, it can’t have been much fun for king Catfish when he met up with the others at royal parties … “OK, it makes sense that King Croc got his name because of his strength and power, and K.S. got his name because of his vicious sword skills. Now, why were you named after a carrion-eating bottom dweller again?”
