T W A U ... The Chase....today's...
Film, Media & TV6 mins ago
No best answer has yet been selected by MangoPete. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.Jericho is really only a town (though I suppose its currrent population would have seemed comparatively huge 10,000 years ago). Damascus remains a growing city. Machu Picchu and Great Zimbabwe are just ruins - once cities perhaps, but no longer so. If the requirements are city size, age, and continuous existence, I vote Damascus.
(Remember that 'neolithic' or 'new stone age' describes a period of development, not a particular time - Zimbabwe was at the neolithic stage centuries after Europe.)
If you mean continually inhabited city then yeah, Jericho or Damascus, but Tiahuanaco in Bolivia was originally built so long ago that there are stone carvings of long extinct animals see here.
dunno about that link spudqueen - most archaeologists date the sphinx and great pyramid to somewhere around 2,500BC; it says 10,500BC, which seems pretty far out.
Do you have a link for Zimbabwean aircraft, MangoPete? I've seen Great Zimbabwe and it's rather beautiful (early European settlers insisted it must have been created by white men, because they couldn't believe blacks could have done it), but I don't think there's really anything very mysterious about how it was built.
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.