the original lost civilization
First and last ... there is the Sphinx
This artifact, by the evidence first put forth by West and Schoch, is on the order of 10,000 years (or more) old. The evidence consists of water weathering patterns on the Sphinx enclosure (from a wet period) which could not have occurred if the Sphinx was anything like the 5000 or so years posited by formal Egyptologists (a dry period to the present day). Their analysis is based on the head which is certainly of that period. However, it is painfully obvious that the head has been "re-carved" perhaps several times while the body lay buried under sand unbeknownst to those who re-carved it. I say painfully because it is clearly much too small to have been "passed on" at the design stage by whomsoever originally paid for or authorized this enormous undertaking. The smallness of the head makes artistic sense only as a re-carving.
Sphinx, water-weathered enclosure, small head
It was originally supposed to be just a reclining lion facing east. Recall that there were lions in the wild around there in those times (and many other places around the Mediterranean as well).
The lion was made by the Sahara Culture
I give this name to the proto-culture which preceded and was the source of all of the Earth's present cultures. It had these features.
The temple by the Sphinx which was made from the stone quarried from around the Sphinx must belong to the same people who built the Sphinx. Ergo, if the Sphinx is 11,000 years old ... so is the temple.
This structure is is made from plain large blocks of stone with no inscriptions. Therefore, it is more than likely that they had no written language.
If they could not write words, certainly they could not write mathematical calculations. In short, these people had no "shorthand" conceptual symbols with which to convey knowledge. They therefore used spoken language to impart wisdom from one generation to another.
To count, then, they used the "pebble" method. To count one goat ... put one pebble in the bowl. Two goats ... two pebbles. More likely, for every ten things put one pebble in the bowl. See? Analog math. It works just fine.
To do construction work, they took a length of cord and doubled it and doubled it again, etc. then ... laid out the foundation of their buildings.
To keep a calendar, they simply observed the stars carefully. Visual inspection is good enough to estimate say 1/10th the diameter of the moon. Thus, their astronomical accuracy could easily have been on the order of 1 part in 10,000 (360x2x10 moon is 1/2 degree). Over the span of a lifetime (40 years observing) one could easily discern the precession of the equinoxes (2000yrs/72o= 27 years per degree of change = two moon widths in 27 years)
Now, they line up stars with mountain tops or other stable geologic features and voila! astronomy is born without mathematical knowledge.
They could easily have been aware that the Earth was a ball that revolved around the Sun and the Moon around the Earth and that the seasons were caused by (or at least corresponded to) the tilt of the Earth relative to the plane of the ecliptic. Such observations were made by the Greeks and could have been made by others. Especially by those unencumberred by religion.
This culture did not know the "gods".
The lion is the age of Leo which occurred at about the time the Sphinx was built. It is the representation of that age in stone. These people invented the Zodiac to transmit to the next generation ... by stories ... their accumulated astronomical knowledge.
There is a war between the mathematical base "10" and base "12". Base ten is best for quantities since it multiplies our "digits" (fingers) which we can readily comprehend. Base twelve is best for cyclic things like circles, angles and years and days where we don't need quantity so much as "divisibility" and 12 has two extra divisors. In a perfect world we would have been made with 12 fingers. Metric will never overcome the English system completely. Hence, the Zodiac has twelve figures and not ten.The figures of the Zodiac are not gods but rather the animals of the day. They made the star constellations out of these figures (even though the constellations don't look anything like those animals). The associations are for story-telling, memorization purposes. They have nothing to do with worshipping the gods.
That came later when their burgeoning civilization crumbled due to the desertification of the Sahara. The people (and-or knowledge) dispersed and became Egyptians, Druids, and just about everyone else (perhaps even Americans).
Along the way, the constellations became vengeful Gods and the plain, rational knowledge of the movements of the heavens in correspondence with the seasons became largely lost. The memorization stories lived on as fanciful histories of the Gods whose original animal natures are replaced with "human-like" intentions.
No problem = no god
Without catastrophic occurrences human beings will not look to the stars and see "intent". They see rather simple predictable movement. The descendants of the Sahara culture needed an explanation for their impoverished state and found it in the intent of nature ... where there is no intent.
Conceptual man needs a philosophy. The Sahara Culture had either a weak, nascent "natural" (observational) philosophy or none at all. That was replaced with the harsh order of religion to match the new harsh conditions.
Religion is self-perpetuating. Once started, it will not stop unless fully rational beings give it the "boot" in favor of ... what???
Today, almost all people take religion for granted as something inevitable. Even those who oppose it on intellectual-scientific grounds accept it as a necessary roadblock on the way to full rationality. It is not. We are unlucky. Other planets must have developed without gods or religions. In fact, that may well be the norm.