Ancient civilisations

If ancient H sapiens ~200 Kya, was anatomically similar to the modern version, how come that he apparently never seem to bother developing complicated civilisations, whilst the modern men needed only some 4-6 Kya to accomplish that.

But my understanding, which may be wrong, is that formation of stable civilizations accompanied the transition from nomadic hunter/gatherer societies to stable agrarian societies. The key to forming the agrarian societies would be the ability to domesticate animals. Not just any animal can be domesticated easily, as we know from the difficulty of raising and breeding zoo animals or other wild-captured animals in captivity.

So, assuming my premise is correct that the accepted consensus is that animal domestication occurred along with the formation of stable civilizations (as opposed to nomadic tribes, which may leave little evidence of their presence due to the short time spent in any one location) I would be tempted to argue that formation of civilizations had less to do with a dramatic change in the communication/language/skills/intelligence/social organization of early humans and more to do with the discovery of/increased association with a species of ungulate that could be domesticated, or at least tamed, sufficient to begin living around the captive herds rather than following herds as they migrate.

Yes it could be that what was thought of as a transition in humanity was actually just due to the better preservation of more recent paintings and fragile artifacts like bone needles and flutes. There could have been a lot of kit that just couldn't survive for 100,000 years.

I absolutely don't agree that our previous thread had anything to do with "lost civilizations". The modern human species spent a long time in the lower stone age, with a stone kit that didn't change at all for thousands of years. Then came the Cro-Magnon cultural explosion, which was way pre-agriculture and pre-domestication, except dogs. Like 25,000-35,000 years ago versus less than 10,000 years ago for neolithic with domestic animals and/or agriculture. After 10,000 years ago you have towns in the fertile crescent and its surrounding uplands, and also in Egypt and the Indus valley. Nothing unknown or lost about that.

If ancient H sapiens ~200 Kya, was anatomically similar to the modern version, how come that he apparently never seem to bother developing complicated civilisations.

If ancient H sapiens ~200 Kya, was anatomically similar to the modern version, how come that he apparently never seem to bother developing complicated civilisations.

Which would imply that we should be certain that he didn't do that in the first place. I simply challenged that. There seems to be no need to wait hundreds of thousands of years with domesticing stock, invent fire and/or the wheel, steel and concrete. But there must be evidence first before you can start up the scientific method.

the only 'way back' was population collapse (a.k.a. mass starvation). the only 'way back' was population collapse (a.k.a. mass starvation).

But it was also possible that an advanced civilization faced a calamity of largescale, their place forsaken and buried deep in the sands of time until someone discovers it.

Whereas just when you and other nations are beginning to be provided with letters and the other requisites of civilized life, after the usual interval, the stream from heaven, like a pestilence, comes pouring down, and leaves only those of you who are destitute of letters and education; and so you have to begin all over again like children, and know nothing of what happened in ancient times, either among us or among yourselves. As for those genealogies of yours which you just now recounted to us, Solon, they are no better than the tales of children.

Long term fishing communities are easy to spot, by the mounds of fish bones they have discarded over time. Unlike hunting communities, they can't move around, but are stuck at the shoreline features where coastal fish are found.