Palanth Forum

Forum Boards. => Prehistory. => : trehinp March 13, 2009, 08:00:30 AM



: Egyptian prehistory
: trehinp March 13, 2009, 08:00:30 AM


The theme was discussed in the more narrow domain of prehistoric art (Click here for more) (http://forum.palanth.com/index.php/topic,1098.0.html) however, I would like to generalize the discussion to the overall subject of prehistory from mid Paleolithic to the Neolithic.

It would seem to me that since the Nile valley was probably one of the trails followed by human being in their journey out of Africa, this part of the world should be rich in prehistoric sites of the various periods.

In addition, since the Egyptian civilization was one of the oldest to reach the level of written documents, it would be fascinating to find some research that would have explored the transition between the Neolithic culture and the first Egyptian dynasties who used hieroglyphic system to memorize various events and transactions.


Is anyone here specializing in Egypt's prehistory? Or at least who knows specialists who do?

Thanks.

Paul


: Re: Egyptian prehistory
: Mikey Brass March 13, 2009, 08:25:20 AM
It would seem to me that since the Nile valley was probably one of the trails followed by human being in their journey out of Africa, this part of the world should be rich in prehistoric sites of the various periods.

It is, most of them open-air surface sites. There are many publications by van Peer, Athony Marks, Veermesch, Wendorf (and Schild) and others analysing the Acheulian and MSA from the Nile Valley and surrounding deserts.

There was a session at last year's SAfA conference in Frankfurt on this. I have notes at home.

In addition, since the Egyptian civilization was one of the oldest to reach the level of written documents, it would be fascinating to find some research that would have explored the transition between the Neolithic culture and the first Egyptian dynasties who used hieroglyphic system to memorize various events and transactions.

A good introductory text is Midant-Reynes'. More detailed examinations of the Predynastic are in the Memoirs to Barbara Adams.

(Saharan archaeology is my particular area of expertise)


: Re: Egyptian prehistory
: trehinp March 13, 2009, 12:38:45 PM
Thanks a lot Mikey,

This is very useful. I will scan the internet with Google to get some precise references and perhaps buy a few books if they aren't too expensive...

I had made the same request on a discussion forum on Egyptian archaeology but most participants there were primarily concerned by later periods of Egyptian history.

Thanks again.

Paul


: Re: Egyptian prehistory
: Mikey Brass March 13, 2009, 01:11:15 PM
Paul, I'll supply references over the weekend. At work.

Mike


: Re: Egyptian prehistory
: Mikey Brass March 14, 2009, 12:01:19 PM
Thanks a lot Mikey,

This is very useful. I will scan the internet with Google to get some precise references and perhaps buy a few books if they aren't too expensive...

VAN PEER, P. 1998. The River Nile corridor and Out of Africa: an examination of the archaeological record. Current Anthropology 39: 115-40
[I have a copy. Feel free to mail me offlist if you don't have access to CA]

Also see the references at
http://www.predynastic.historians.co.uk/html/bibliography.html
particularly the articles co-authored by Vermeersch.

Midant-Reynes, B. 1992. The Prehistory of Egypt: From the First Egyptians to the First Pharaohs. Oxford: Blackwell.

Friedman, R., et al. 2004. Egypt at its Origins. Studies in Memory of Barbara Adams

There are also many more publications which are highly interesting.

Shannon McPherron made a presentation to the 2008 conference of the Society of Africanist Archaeologists entitled "Revisiting the Nile Corridor":

-----------------

Abstract

One of the major routes out of Africa for early modern humans was along the Nile Valley corridor. Previous investigations of Middle Palaeolithic settlement systems focused on a small number of sites in the terraces of the Nile Valley, the desert oases and the Red Sea Mountains. Research suggested the presence of two groups of early modern humans – the Lower Nile Valley Complex and the Nubian Complex. The Nubian Complex, in particular, was interpreted as a radiating settlement system that incorporated specialised point production. Recently, systematic survey by the Abydos Survey for Palaeolithic Sites project has recorded Middle Pleistocene artefact density, distribution, typology and technology across the desert landscape west of the Nile Valley in Middle Egypt. High desert data reflects a circulating, rather than a radiating, settlement system. Moreover, extensive lithic artefact refitting and technological analysis call into question interpretations of specialised point production, the notion that Nubian Type 1 and 2 and radial Levallois techniques represent distinct technologies, and the existence of the Lower Nile Valley Complex.

My notes

Paper in Current Anthropology, under review
Title plays in van Peer’s paper
Land adjacent to Nile Valley near Abydos, up to 15km out
Data from the high desert, 36 000 stone tools
Nubian cores
Low frequencies of Acheulian
Workshops
Most materials on desert pavement surface. No sub-surface deposits found
Work is ongoing
Techno-typological comparisons. No direct dating
MIS 5 – end of stage sees onset of aridity
Van Peer argues Nubian Complex sees modern behavioural spatial activities with specialised activity sites
Methodology: pedestrian survey, took a sample every 100 metres and tagged with GPS to standardise the data set
High density localities had more than 5 tools per square metre
Objects moving across the landscape in their finished form, or at least close to it
Transport of Nubian cores and points
No distance effect on transportation

----------------

Philip van Peer also gave an interesting presentation:

----------------

Abstract

This paper examines the late Middle Stone Age archaeological record in northern Africa from a demographic perspective. It is argued that population dynamics in the context of changing environmental conditions during MIS 5 have laid out the conditions for technological and social change in sequent MIS 4. One particular trajectory of change has led to the emergence of an Upper Palaeolithic lifestyle in the Lower Nile Valley. Consequently, this area is proposed as a core area for the long-term historic processes reflected in the MIS 3 archaeological records of western Eurasia.

My notes

1.   Long-term MSA perspective
2.   Life histories and forces of change
3.   A historical interpretation
Hypothetical scenario
Nubian Complex derived from early MSA around 200 kya
The Last Interglacial – eastern Sahara, central Sahara and Mediterranean coast (Haua Fteah, El Guettar)
Nilotic palaeoenvironment? No occupations associated with interglacial pedogenesis
Early – blade production, Lupemban foliates
Late – Levallois points, T/F pieces
MIS 5a – emergence of the late Nubian Complex, re-occupation of the Nile Valley
MIS 5b – North Africa demographic crisis?
Taramsa 1 – transitional industries, workshop (6 phases. Extraction of chert pebbles. OSL dates), Sector 91/03 ca 60 kya, Sector 91/04 ca 56 – 40 kya, a Levallois production system?

----------------

I had made the same request on a discussion forum on Egyptian archaeology but most participants there were primarily concerned by later periods of Egyptian history.

May I ask which list? EEF?


: Re: Egyptian prehistory
: trehinp March 14, 2009, 06:12:39 PM
Thanks Mikey,

These are very useful references.

I have used this morning the names you mentionned and I have ordered the book of Beatrix  Midant-Reynes. I had ordered it in English through Amazon, but found out that she had written it in French so I cancelled the first order and got the French version: "Aux origines de l'Egypte - Du Néolithique à l'émergence de l'Etat".

Concerning the discussion forum on Egyptology it is "L'Egypte de ddchampo" a very active discussion on various topics about Egypt's fabulous history, but in French. I had registered to try to get more information about the "Lascaux on the Nile" story.

Thats where I realized that the predynastic Egypt was not much a subject of interest to this group, although the palaeolithic engraving raized some interest on the moment.

Thanks again for the references.

Paul


: Re: Egyptian prehistory
: trehinp March 14, 2009, 06:56:06 PM
(Saharan archaeology is my particular area of expertise)

Ooops, I missed that when I was first reading your post... I have a precise question about Saharan rock art. In his excellent book "The Cambridge Illustrated History of Prehistoric Art", on Page 145 of the Cambridge University Press, 1998 edition, Paul Bahn has a great illustration of a Giraffe scratching her shin with her back hoof. A very realistic representation, showing a tremendous sense of observation by the artist. Unfortunately, Bahn doesn't provide a date estimate nor a precise location. I have searches the internet several times but could never find any more information. I can provide the picture if you can't find it.

Would you have any idea of where I might find more about that picture?

On a more general issue, do you know of other realistic rock art in the Sahara? The Qurta engraving belong also to that realistic style while most Saharan Rock art seems to be more in the Mesolithic or Neolithic style.

Any info will be well appreciated...

On my side I will be glad to help with anything about French Prehistory... I'm lucky enough to live near Nice where two moddle Palaeolithic sites have been discovered "Terra Amatta" and the Lazaret site. Up on th hills there is the famous "Vallee des Merveilles" with fabulous Chalcolithic engravings of the Mont Bego and those of Fontanalba...
There is more to the French Riviera than the beaches... :-)

Also, my sister lives in Dordogne near Lascaux, Rouffignac, Les Combarelles, etc. and she has connections with several specialists of cave art. I visit her often and try not to miss an occasion to visit a new cave... I could get more technical info if you would need some.

Yours.

Paul


: Re: Egyptian prehistory
: Mikey Brass March 15, 2009, 06:21:36 AM
I have used this morning the names you mentionned and I have ordered the book of Beatrix  Midant-Reynes. I had ordered it in English through Amazon, but found out that she had written it in French so I cancelled the first order and got the French version: "Aux origines de l'Egypte - Du Néolithique à l'émergence de l'Etat".

The French version is her own. The English version was translated by an English Egyptologist who was at the British Museum at the time.

Thats where I realized that the predynastic Egypt was not much a subject of interest to this group

Keep in mind there is a big difference of opinion amongst Egyptologists on how much value to place on the Predynastic. Egyptology as a discipline still doesn't encompass much of the Predynastic which is left to prehistorians and archaeologists.


: Re: Egyptian prehistory
: Mikey Brass March 15, 2009, 06:34:04 AM
Ooops, I missed that when I was first reading your post... I have a precise question about Saharan rock art. In his excellent book "The Cambridge Illustrated History of Prehistoric Art", on Page 145 of the Cambridge University Press, 1998 edition, Paul Bahn has a great illustration of a Giraffe scratching her shin with her back hoof. A very realistic representation, showing a tremendous sense of observation by the artist. Unfortunately, Bahn doesn't provide a date estimate nor a precise location.

I don't have the publication to view but I will e-mail Bahn and ask.

On a more general issue, do you know of other realistic rock art in the Sahara?

See Henry Lhote's work on central Saharan rock art (in particular those relating to the pre-Pastoral from the Acacus mountains) and Holl's (late Pastoral also from the Central Sahara but not the Acacus).

(Btw. We don't use Mesolithic and Neolithic anymore for large regions of the Sahara)

Thanks for your offer of help on the French rock art. We haven't visited southern France want to at some point in the future.


: Re: Egyptian prehistory
: Mikey Brass March 21, 2009, 02:16:12 PM
Ooops, I missed that when I was first reading your post... I have a precise question about Saharan rock art. In his excellent book "The Cambridge Illustrated History of Prehistoric Art", on Page 145 of the Cambridge University Press, 1998 edition, Paul Bahn has a great illustration of a Giraffe scratching her shin with her back hoof. A very realistic representation, showing a tremendous sense of observation by the artist. Unfortunately, Bahn doesn't provide a date estimate nor a precise location.

I don't have the publication to view but I will e-mail Bahn and ask.

Dr Joerg Hansen took the photograph and replied to your question via Paul Bahn as follows:
"The giraffe is in Tassili Admer, ca 5°28' E and 20° 10' N."

Bahn added:
"It will appear in a major book he has produced on all the rock art of that region, now in print and to be published late April/.early May."


: Re: Egyptian prehistory
: trehinp March 24, 2009, 03:41:56 AM
Thanks a lot Mikey,

It is really nice of you to have asked that question to real specialists.

I have tried to find additional images of this specific Giraffe representation on the web, using the references that you provided. I have found several other giraffe's images but not this specific one. The other representations, even though beautiful, don't have the realistic character of this one.

Apparently, the date of this representation is not known, in his book, the comment Paul Bahn provides on this picture is: "Date unknown, but certainly prehistoric."

I know dating petroglyph is quite difficult especially in desert areas. For my analysis, even a rough dating would be very useful: Palaeolithic? Neolithic?

We now know, after the discovery of Chauvet Cave paintings, that "style" is no indication of a particular prehistoric period.

This giraffe representation nevertheless look more like Palaeolithic than Neolithic by its realism...  Any clue?

Yours very friendly.

Paul


: Re: Egyptian prehistory
: Mikey Brass March 24, 2009, 05:26:31 AM
Hi Paul,

There are no known Palaeolithic rock art in the Sahara. All the art is post-9000 uncalibrated bp.

The best time-frame I can place, given that it features a giraffe is between 9000-5000 uncalibrated bp.

Mike


: Re: Egyptian prehistory
: E.P. Grondine March 26, 2009, 03:59:09 PM
(Saharan archaeology is my particular area of expertise)

Hi Mike -

I wonder, what do you make of the finds from Pedra Furada in Brazil?

(It looks to me like those people then moved to the north, bringing Clovis with them.
In eastern North America the Savanah River peoples were ethnically and culturally very distinct from other Native American populations, though we have no y mt DNA data for them yet.)

What do you know of early man in the African coastal regions, in particular the west coastal areas just south of the
Atlas Mountains?

Given early HSS boat use, I would expect early HSS on the east coast of Africa as well, with an advanced technology then possibly moving overland to the Nile Valley similar to what occurred later in the mesolithic, say around 12,000 BCE.

So many questions, so little data. Is anybody funding any work in the key African coastal regions at all?

Thanks,
E.P. Grondine
Man and Impact in the Americas




: Re: Egyptian prehistory
: Mikey Brass March 26, 2009, 06:09:36 PM
What do you know of early man in the African coastal regions, in particular the west coastal areas just south of the
Atlas Mountains?

There is very little known of the occupational sequences in Morocco, Western Sahara and Mauritannia. Acheulian materials have been found but it is not contextualised.

Given early HSS boat use, I would expect early HSS on the east coast of Africa as well, with an advanced technology then possibly moving overland to the Nile Valley similar to what occurred later in the mesolithic, say around 12,000 BCE.

Please clarify what you mean in the latter half of your sentence because it is non-sensical, non-factual as it stands.



: Re: Egyptian prehistory
: E.P. Grondine March 26, 2009, 08:02:42 PM
What do you know of early man in the African coastal regions, in particular the west coastal areas just south of the
Atlas Mountains?

There is very little known of the occupational sequences in Morocco, Western Sahara and Mauritannia. Acheulian materials have been found but it is not contextualised.

If anyone ever looks for field workers for coastal surveys there, I would love to go, it sound like great fun.

There appears there was a thriving trade in artifacts from NWA, along with fossils and meteorites.

Given early HSS boat use, I would expect early HSS on the east coast of Africa as well, with an advanced technology then possibly moving overland to the Nile Valley similar to what occurred later in the mesolithic, say around 12,000 BCE.

Please clarify what you mean in the latter half of your sentence because it is non-sensical, non-factual as it stands.

HSS in Australia say 40,000 BCE, and according to one report I referred to here on Okinawa  ca 30,000 BCE.
Given that, I would expect a spread along the SE asian coasts back to Africa, showing up on Africa's east coast with
a marine tool kit.

The dates I had for Nile mesolithic, which were via Andrew Collins citing reputable sources, was around 12,000 BCE, with microlith technologies and harvested grass type plants, a stage which came to an end and did not develop further.

The Libyan Desert Glass microliths are given this date. Is it wrong?





: Re: Egyptian prehistory
: Mikey Brass March 27, 2009, 02:31:33 AM
If anyone ever looks for field workers for coastal surveys there, I would love to go, it sound like great fun.

I can put you in touch with a team if you are interested in surveying for late Neolithic sites in Western Sahara.

There appears there was a thriving trade in artifacts from NWA, along with fossils and meteorites.

The dates I had for Nile mesolithic, which were via Andrew Collins citing reputable sources, was around 12,000 BCE, with microlith technologies and harvested grass type plants, a stage which came to an end and did not develop further.

Andrew Colins and reliable don't belong in the same sentence. See here (http://www.antiquityofman.com/wadi_kubbaniya.html) for an original report on Wadi Kubbaniya and also David Wengrow's book "The Archaeology of Early Egypt: Social Transformations in North-East Africa, 10,000 to 2650 BC" for a good overview. You can also read Midant-Reynes's book as well.

However, Your original sentence made it sound like you believe the Nile Valley was re-populated by peoples from the East African cost 12kya; it is this which I questioned.


: Re: Egyptian prehistory
: Marc Washington March 27, 2009, 09:56:29 PM
Mikey. I think that one approach showing perhaps not only the transition from the mesolithic to neolithic but from the paleolithic to the neolithic insofar as addressing the emergence of hieroglphyics might be found in the following ideas copied below from the web page following it:

With the exception of the central steala of Thera, 1700 BC, all of the above are pre-pastoral rock art throughout the ages [1 - 10] from the Ukraine [1] through Egypt [e.g. 10] is similar in that it is of black, brown, and red stick figures [3, 4, 6, 8] and populations were also red and black [see 11]. Until inscribed in rock [10] a new medium, this form was painted from Thera (centerpiece) to the Ukraine [1] where the figure slain by a buffalo lies next to a spear-thrower (showing the early sophistication of these people. Art [1 - 10] imitates reality [11, 12] and resembles the subjects [e.g. 11, 12] who apparently created it. When Egyptologists discuss the early hieroglyphics [8, 9, 10], virtually no recognition is given about the fact that hieroglyphics are not more than the continuation of the way the human body has been used to express actions [e.g. 1 - 7], thoughts, and intentions for tens of thousands of years and is a local flowering of that tradition found in the Neolithic throughout North Africa. Brown [10], red, and black stick figures in hieroglyphics existed even 25,000 years ago [1]. Hieroglphics advanced the art as rather than presenting separate pictures or a collage of activity, the early scribes presented images linerally making sentences; sentences together forming speech and thought.

(http://www.beforebc.de/Made.by.Humankind/Human.Animal.RockArt/01-17-800-00-08.jpg)
http://www.beforebc.de/Made.by.Humankind/Human.Animal.RockArt/01-17-800-00-08.html

.
.


: Re: Egyptian prehistory
: E.P. Grondine March 27, 2009, 10:39:51 PM
Andrew Colins and reliable don't belong in the same sentence.

I found Collin's book "From the Ashes of Angels" to be pretty entertaining, and his citations in it were pretty good.
His "Gateway to Arlantis" relied mostly on Thor Hyerdahl's groups materials, and his map and manuscript work in it seemed okay, though I disagree with his conclusions. As I haven't looked at his "pyramid" book yet, I'll keep your warning in mind.

I can tell you about the real lunatic fringe archaeology in depth, if you'd care to know about it. You will be amazed.

I can put you in touch with a team if you are interested in surveying for late Neolithic sites in Western Sahara.

By "Western Sahara", are you talking about the region or the "country"? Do you mean southern Morocco?

I'm interested in sites along the coast, or along the former rivers, in that area around 40,000 BCE to early Neolithic, rather earlier than what these folks are looking for.  Despite my stroke, complete lack of money, and long since lapsed passport, I actually have this daydream of little walks up now dry aroyos, followed by a nice swim at the beach and sunsets hanging out drinking hot tea or coffee, smoking a tobacco hookah, and playing trac on some tiled ocean side veranda.

See here (http://www.antiquityofman.com/wadi_kubbaniya.html) for an original report on Wadi Kubbaniya and also David Wengrow's book "The Archaeology of Early Egypt: Social Transformations in North-East Africa, 10,000 to 2650 BC" for a good overview. You can also read Midant-Reynes's book as well.

Thanks, that's what I was looking for - the barley tech.

However, Your original sentence made it sound like you believe the Nile Valley was re-populated by peoples from the East African cost 12kya; it is this which I questioned.

Tech and population must always be considered separately.

I think it is possible that the barley technology may have come in from the east coast of Africa, and not the drying Sahara. In any case, I think that there was movement from the drying Sahara to the Nile valley, in response to the climate changes starting after 10,900 BCE, but I would set them later, with the cattle herders. Note the end dates for the early Nile barley tech around 10,000 BCE.

If that is not heretical enough, how about this: I think that an advanced Erectus, let us call him Heidelbergensis, left out of Africa say around 2 mya. There was a massive impact at Zamanshan 1 mya, and the western group evolved into HSN, while the eastern group evolved into HSS in SE Asia. HSS then returned to Africa along coastal margins. Out of Africa and then back again. By BOAT. That's for all HSS in Africa.

Why?

One "problem" that I face is that the Oconachee and Yuchi peoples of SE North America looked like Berbers, but with a maximum male adult height of around 5 feet.  Another "problem" is the Pedra Furada  artifacts at 35,000 BCE. Another "problem" is that folsom technology appears to have spread from the south coastal regions of North America, and an even bigger "problem" is that the spread seems to have been from the eastern trans-caribean south coastal region, in other words across the Caribbean by the islands.

PS - many of the people here took a lot of grief for speaking about pre-clovis Native Americans, and were often treated as "eccentrics". You may notice that Paul was tolerant of the clovis comet impact hypothesis when it was still a hypothesis.





 


: Re: Egyptian prehistory
: Mikey Brass March 28, 2009, 03:45:52 AM
Mikey. I think that one approach showing perhaps not only the transition from the mesolithic to neolithic but from the paleolithic to the neolithic insofar as addressing the emergence of hieroglphyics might be found in the following ideas copied below from the web page following it

Tell the owner of the website to write up his/her ideas and submit them for peer-review. I am distinctly underwhelmed by his/her nonsense and have no wish to discuss it further.


: Re: Egyptian prehistory
: Mikey Brass March 28, 2009, 03:58:55 AM
I found Collin's book "From the Ashes of Angels" to be pretty entertaining, and his citations in it were pretty good.

I have read it. He mis-represents the data. I would recommend reading David Wengrow and Charles Maisels to get a more accurate feel for the raw data.

I can tell you about the real lunatic fringe archaeology in depth, if you'd care to know about it. You will be amazed.

I've been involved against pseudoscience for 13 years. I can cite the arguments in my sleep:}

By "Western Sahara", are you talking about the region or the "country"?

The country.

I'm interested in sites along the coast, or along the former rivers, in that area around 40,000 BCE to early Neolithic, rather earlier than what these folks are looking for.

Still, you may be interested in:
http://www.cru.uea.ac.uk/~e118/Publications_Brooks.html

I think it is possible that the barley technology may have come in from the east coast of Africa, and not the drying Sahara.

Barley came from the Near East along with select methods for harvesting it which were then adapted; one can trace the spread down the Valley (or, rather, "up the Nile"). Techniques for harvesting were around in the Nile Valley and surrounds for thousands of years beforehand.

In any case, I think that there was movement from the drying Sahara to the Nile valley, in response to the climate changes starting after 10,900 BCE,

The movement was in the opposite direction.

but I would set them later, with the cattle herders. Note the end dates for the early Nile barley tech around 10,000 BCE.

No, the dates for the earliest barley in the Valley are thousands of years later than 10kya.

If that is not heretical enough, how about this: I think that an advanced Erectus, let us call him Heidelbergensis,

Er no you cannot call H. erectus "H. heidelbergensis".


: Re: Egyptian prehistory
: trehinp March 28, 2009, 10:02:36 AM
Hi Mark,

I agree with your over all statement
I think that one approach showing perhaps not only the transition from the mesolithic to neolithic but from the paleolithic to the neolithic

There is a dire need to understand the Egyptian middle and upper palaeolithic period. MostEgyptologists have been fascinated by the exceptional development of Egyptian culture and too few are interested in the predynastic periods.

Concerning the link that you provided, it is obvious that the data presented contains major errors:

Just one example: Figure [1] is definitely not "from the Ukraine", it is a famous scene from the Lascaux Cave. Furthermore the dates for that painting is about 17 K BP, not 25 K BP. (The use of TYA meaning Thousand Years Ago is not commonly used and I doubt that many readers would have understood it without the reference note on the website.)

This makes the whole reference in that website quite dubbious.

It remains that the development of advanced cultures along the Nile was probably rooted in palaeolithic times. Qurta rock engravings, dated about 15 K years BP, is an example of very advanced rock art on the Nile River during the upper Palaeolithic. I am convinced that other such art manifestations will be discovered in the future.

Yours.

Paul


: Re: Egyptian prehistory
: E.P. Grondine March 28, 2009, 06:00:31 PM
I found Collin's book "From the Ashes of Angels" to be pretty entertaining, and his citations in it were pretty good.

I have read it. He mis-represents the data. I would recommend reading David Wengrow and Charles Maisels to get a more accurate feel for the raw data.

Thanks for the pointer. My problem is that we have the X mt DNA haplogroup showing up on the Canadian coast at 8,350 BCE, along with polished stone tool and serated edge technologies - the same things that show up along the Atlantic coast of Africa. One group had a male height of about 7 and a half feet, and other peoples held traditions that these people had cultural affinities similar to those catalogued by Collins. We also have X mt DNA haplogroup survival in the Levant.

I can tell you about the real lunatic fringe archaeology in depth, if you'd care to know about it. You will be amazed.

I've been involved against pseudoscience for 13 years. I can cite the arguments in my sleep:}

Not all of them, since you haven't read my guide inside the cult archaeology industry yet. Email me.

By "Western Sahara", are you talking about the region or the "country"?

The country.


I'm interested in sites along the coast, or along the former rivers, in that area around 40,000 BCE to early Neolithic, rather earlier than what these folks are looking for.

Still, you may be interested in:
http://www.cru.uea.ac.uk/~e118/Publications_Brooks.html

Thanks much. I found among that mention of earlier humid periods, close to the 35,000 BCE dates I'm looking for.

I think it is possible that the barley technology may have come in from the east coast of Africa, and not the drying Sahara.

Barley came from the Near East along with select methods for harvesting it which were then adapted; one can trace the spread down the Valley (or, rather, "up the Nile"). Techniques for harvesting were around in the Nile Valley and surrounds for thousands of years beforehand.

The "Near East" is a pretty big place. I am wondering if the entire technology did not develop in India first, then was carried by boat to the west.

One problem here is with barley showing up at the first cataract of the Nile, and then disappearing ca 10,000 BCE.

In any case, I think that there was movement from the drying Sahara to the Nile valley, in response to the climate changes starting after 10,900 BCE,

The movement was in the opposite direction.

Let's see. Desert gets drier, and cattle herders move into it?

but I would set them later, with the cattle herders. Note the end dates for the early Nile barley tech around 10,000 BCE.

No, the dates for the earliest barley in the Valley are thousands of years later than 10kya.

Not according to Wendorff and Associates - their dates for Kubbaniya 15,100 BCE latest.

If that is not heretical enough, how about this: I think that an advanced Erectus, let us call him Heidelbergensis,

Er no you cannot call H. erectus "H. heidelbergensis".

It would sure make this easier for me if you folks could agree on your taxonomy.


: Re: Egyptian prehistory
: Mikey Brass March 29, 2009, 02:53:42 AM
My problem is that we have the X mt DNA haplogroup showing up on the Canadian coast at 8,350 BCE, along with polished stone tool and serated edge technologies - the same things that show up along the Atlantic coast of Africa.

This doesn't convince me at all and suggest you get to grips with theory and method in archaeology.

http://evolutsioon.ut.ee/publications/Reidla2003.pdf is a good genetic paper.

One problem here is with barley showing up at the first cataract of the Nile, and then disappearing ca 10,000 BCE.

What problem? Barley never appears in the archaeological record of Africa that early.

Let's see. Desert gets drier, and cattle herders move into it?

http://www.antiquityofman.com/sahara.html - obtain and read the references given (along with the earlier works I have cited), and then come back to this discussion again after you have obtained a semi-decent overview of the existing geological and archaeological datasets.

Not according to Wendorff and Associates - their dates for Kubbaniya 15,100 BCE latest.

Er. no barley at WK.

Er no you cannot call H. erectus "H. heidelbergensis". It would sure make this easier for me if you folks could agree on your taxonomy.

Get a copy of Richard Klein's forthcoming 3rd edition of "The Human Career". No one subsumes H. heidelbergensis into H. erectus.


: Re: Egyptian prehistory
: E.P. Grondine March 29, 2009, 10:57:43 AM
My problem is that we have the X mt DNA haplogroup showing up on the Canadian coast at 8,350 BCE, along with polished stone tool and serated edge technologies - the same things that show up along the Atlantic coast of Africa.

This doesn't convince me at all and suggest you get to grips with theory and method in archaeology.
http://evolutsioon.ut.ee/publications/Reidla2003.pdf is a good genetic paper.

That's the X mt DNA distribution data, from multiple reputable sources. 

If the theory can't account for the data, then the theory is wrong, as was the "Clovis First" theory, and the "asteroid and comet impacts don't happen all that often" theory.

If the "method" is to ignore the data when it upsets the "theory", then the "method" is wrong as well.

By the way, see Peiser and Payne's paper:
http://users.tpg.com.au/users/tps-seti/bioastr2002.pdf
as massive impacts apparently separated hominid groups, and appear to account for not only gross physical differences
among hominids but DNA differentiation as well.

Also, watch NOVA this week. The impacts at 10,900 BCE apparently had an effect on the North Pacific current, ultimately leading to your final drying out in the Sahara.

One problem here is with barley showing up at the first cataract of the Nile, and then disappearing ca 10,000 BCE.

What problem? Barley never appears in the archaeological record of Africa that early.

Fred Wendorff et al., Science CCV/4431, September, 1979 "Use of Barley in the Egyptian Late Paleolithic"

Let's see. Desert gets drier, and cattle herders move into it?

http://www.antiquityofman.com/sahara.html - obtain and read the references given (along with the earlier works I have cited), and then come back to this discussion again after you have obtained a semi-decent overview of the existing geological and archaeological datasets.

I am taking a look - the usual archaeology situation: no money, little academic base, limited research. I'm not all that interested in the Sahara River proper; the America are pretty big.

Nice map though. Tan tan and La Y'oun are the areas of interest to me.

The only things I looked at earlier were the Nabtean henges and pre-Dynastic, and I've had a stroke, so my efforts have to be focused now.

Not according to Wendorff and Associates - their dates for Kubbaniya 15,100 BCE latest.

Er. no barley at WK.

Fred Wendorff et al., Science CCV/4431, September, 1979 "Use of Barley in the Egyptian Late Paleolithic"
Or has that work been shown wrong?

It would sure make this easier for me if you folks could agree on your taxonomy.

Get a copy of Richard Klein's forthcoming 3rd edition of "The Human Career". No one subsumes H. heidelbergensis into H. erectus.

So then what exactly are they calling the HSN and HSS common ancestor now? Or what do you prefer to call him?

PS - Your crank page is excellent, but you do not know the financials of this stuff. My guide inside the cult archaeology industry is available to you for free by writing. Do you know who Augustus Le Plongeon was?

Another point: Your interest in this appears to come from the aquatic ape theory - you're trying to lump the rock hard early fossil data from SE Asia with the other nonsense - but at some point you're going to have to modify your theory to account for it.


: Re: Egyptian prehistory
: Mikey Brass March 29, 2009, 11:30:44 AM
If the theory can't account for the data, then the theory is wrong,

AGE101: data is not independent of theory.
There is *major* debate within geneticists engaging with popular history; the current majority view is that haplotype history does not equal populational history.
Anyways, your response does not engage with the premise of my reply which was that you cannot link Atlantic Africa with the Americas 10kya.

[quote author] Fred Wendorff et al., Science CCV/4431, September, 1979 "Use of Barley in the Egyptian Late Paleolithic"[/quote]

I thought you said you had read http://www.antiquityofman.com/wadi_kubbaniya.html . I am debating with myself whether you merely lied or whether you think a Saharan archaeologist would not know something as basic as the debates & data over domestication in North Africa? Which is it?

Let's see. Desert gets drier, and cattle herders move into it?

You're failing to address my answer to your inaccurate statement in your response, again.

So then what exactly are they calling the HSN and HSS common ancestor now? Or what do you prefer to call him?

Homo erectus was the ancestor of Homo heidelbergensis.


: Re: Egyptian prehistory
: E.P. Grondine March 29, 2009, 11:50:52 AM
If the theory can't account for the data, then the theory is wrong,

AGE101: data is not independent of theory.

That's a classic.

In the case of impacts, the theory used to study them is geological, and entirely independent of anthropological theory.

There is *major* debate within geneticists engaging with popular history; the current majority view is that haplotype history does not equal populational history.
Anyways, your response does not engage with the premise of my reply which was that you cannot link Atlantic Africa with the Americas 10kya.

We have this clovis technology, and a distribution of points found. Clovis appears to have come from the eastern
hemisphere. That leaves Europe or Africa, but the distribution would point to Western Africa.

We have a nice radio carbon dated site in Brazil, a matter of fact two of them, early.

[quote author] Fred Wendorff et al., Science CCV/4431, September, 1979 "Use of Barley in the Egyptian Late Paleolithic"[/quote]

I thought you said you had read http://www.antiquityofman.com/wadi_kubbaniya.html . I am debating with myself whether you merely lied or whether you think a Saharan archaeologist would not know something as basic as the debates & data over domestication in North Africa? Which is it?

I am reading it now, and haven't come to the mesolithic yet. PS, I always enjoy being called a liar or fool, it makes
me suspect your own security in your knowledge. Are you insecure? Me, I'm just trying to work my way through it all.

Let's see. Desert gets drier, and cattle herders move into it?

You're failing to address my answer to your inaccurate statement in your response, again.

If the early barley and microlith dates are wrong, then simply point me to a precise statement, instead of
spending time insulting me.

So then what exactly are they calling the HSN and HSS common ancestor now? Or what do you prefer to call him?

Homo erectus was the ancestor of Homo heidelbergensis.

In your taxonomy, and theory, then, erectus leads to heidelbergensis, which leads to neanderthal.
Separately, erectus leads to sapiens, who migrate out of Africa.

Problem: VERY early HSS fossils in SE Asia.


: Re: Egyptian prehistory
: E.P. Grondine March 29, 2009, 12:13:59 PM
I seem to have found the relevant work:

http://www.antiquityofman.com/cattle_domestication_wendorf1994.html

and I will take a look this afternoon.

Wendorf and Schild again. If their Wadi Kabbniya dates were the result of bad lab work, then please, please
just be civil and say so, leaving out the insults. But at first glance, there are those microliths once more.

Once again, the areas that I am interested in are around Tan Tan and La Y'oun.


: Re: Egyptian prehistory
: Mikey Brass March 29, 2009, 12:49:30 PM
In the case of impacts, the theory used to study them is geological, and entirely independent of anthropological theory.

Please stop playing around. We are talking about *genetic* and *archaeological* data; in fact, it was in response to your comments regarding haplotypes.

Clovis appears to have come from the eastern hemisphere.

With the exception of two archaeologists, the vast majority of archaeologists dealing with American prehistory regard Clovis as an indigenious development.

If the early barley and microlith dates are wrong, then simply point me to a precise statement,

I gave you a link to the article. You then repeated your assertion. Are you really suprised I am annoyed.

In your taxonomy, and theory, then, erectus leads to heidelbergensis, which leads to neanderthal.
Separately, erectus leads to sapiens, who migrate out of Africa.

Problem: VERY early HSS fossils in SE Asia.

Homo heidelbergensis is in both Euroasia, the Fast East and Africa.

There is no problem.


: Re: Egyptian prehistory
: E.P. Grondine March 29, 2009, 03:16:44 PM
Please stop playing around. We are talking about *genetic* and *archaeological* data; in fact, it was in response to your comments regarding haplotypes.

One item I was referring to was X mt DNA haplogroup distribution in regards to Andrew Collin's work, and contact from
Europe about 8,350 BE.
The other item I referred to concerned Savanah river peoples and contact from Africa through South America about 35,000 BCE.
Now what is your problem that doesn't permit you to keep these two concepts separate? I myself have had a stroke,
so I've learned how to live with mistakes.

By the way, we have been treated about every other week to a new startling DNA differentiation claim.
Massive comet and asteroid impacts allow pretty accurate settings for the rates of DNA differentiation.

Clovis appears to have come from the eastern hemisphere.

With the exception of two archaeologists, the vast majority of archaeologists dealing with American prehistory regard Clovis as an indigenious development.

While the fluting is "American", I had been led to think that the Solutrean origin of the overstrike technology was more widely considered than by 2 people.

If the early barley and microlith dates are wrong, then simply point me to a precise statement,

I gave you a link to the article. You then repeated your assertion. Are you really suprised I am annoyed.

Yes, I find your insults both annoying and distracting. Why not just repeat the link, and save the insult? For some reason I seem to have missed the specific citation to Kubbinaya, but only saw the link for your site in general, which is a fine site, by the way, though it has no materials on the Tan Tan and La Y'ouan areas, as near as I can see yet. The Western Sahara is the area of interest for me.

While Wendorf concluded the Kubbaniya barley dates were wrong, note that he is still puzzled how this came about. Surface microliths may show oxidation layers which might clarify this. Personally, I'm still puzzled by the sequence, especially with the Libyan desert glass microliths.

I also learned that the earlier dates for the Nabtaen "henges" were wrong as well, and I learned that man would move from the Nile as the eastern desert got wet, which occured in spurts, and that the Holocene drying was not continuous.

In your taxonomy, and theory, then, erectus leads to heidelbergensis, which leads to neanderthal.
Separately, erectus leads to sapiens, who migrate out of Africa.

Problem: VERY early HSS fossils in SE Asia.

Homo heidelbergensis is in both Euroasia, the Fast East, and Africa.
There is no problem.

Thank you. Now that the taxonomy is clear,
there is still a problem: VERY early HSS fossils in SE Asia.
In other words not the "Aquatic Ape",  which you mistakenly lump with cult archaeology, IMO, but rather an Aquatic hominid.

E.P. Grondine
Man and Impact in the Americas, and
Amazing Stories - a guide inside today's cult archaeology industry






: Re: Egyptian prehistory
: E.P. Grondine March 29, 2009, 03:38:00 PM
Please stop playing around. We are talking about *genetic* and *archaeological* data; in fact, it was in response to your comments regarding haplotypes.

One item I was referring to was X mt DNA haplogroup distribution in regards to Andrew Collin's work, and contact from
Europe about 8,350 BE.

The other item I referred to concerned Savanah river peoples and contact from Africa through South America about 35,000 BCE.

Now what is your problem that doesn't permit you to keep these two concepts separate?

By the way, we have been treated about every other week to a new startling DNA differentiation claim.
Massive comet and asteroid impacts allow pretty accurate settings for the rates of DNA differentiation.

Clovis appears to have come from the eastern hemisphere.

With the exception of two archaeologists, the vast majority of archaeologists dealing with American prehistory regard Clovis as an indigenious development.

While the fluting is "American", I had been led to think that the Solutrean origin of the overstrike technology was more widely considered than by 2 people.

If the early barley and microlith dates are wrong, then simply point me to a precise statement,

I gave you a link to the article. You then repeated your assertion. Are you really suprised I am annoyed.

Yes, I find your insults both annoying and distracting. Why not just repeat the assertion and the link, and save the insult? For some reason I seem to have missed Wendorf's retraction, but only saw the initial charcoal rc dates, and not the revision of the grain dates. You have a fine site,  though it has no materials on the Tan Tan and La Y'ouan areas, as near as I can see yet. The Western Sahara/Atlantic Coast is the area of interest for me.

While Wendorf concluded the Kubbaniya barley dates were wrong, note that he is still puzzled how this came about, and ascribing the grinding stones to tuber use. Surface microliths may show oxidation layers which might clarify this. Personally, I'm still puzzled by the sequence, especially with the Libyan desert glass microliths. Do we have a firm sequence of these blades moving down from the "Fertile Crescent"?

I also learned that the earlier dates for the Nabtaen "henges" were wrong as well, and I learned that man would move from the Nile as the eastern desert got wet, which occurred in spurts, and that the Holocene drying was not continuous.

In your taxonomy, and theory, then, erectus leads to heidelbergensis, which leads to neanderthal.
Separately, erectus leads to sapiens, who migrate out of Africa.

Problem: VERY early HSS fossils in SE Asia.

Homo heidelbergensis is in both Euroasia, the Fast East, and Africa.
There is no problem.

Thank you. Now that the taxonomy is clear,
there is still a problem: VERY early HSS fossils in SE Asia.
In other words not the "Aquatic Ape",  which you mistakenly lump with cult archaeology, in my opinioin,
but rather an Aquatic hominid.

E.P. Grondine
Man and Impact in the Americas, and
Amazing Stories - a guide inside today's cult archaeology industry







: Re: Egyptian prehistory
: Mikey Brass March 29, 2009, 05:47:36 PM
I am not going to go back over the history of this discussion. Anyone who is suitably bored can trace it for themselves.

There have been very convincing refutations of the Soluterean idea. You can find citations in this board's archives.

Why not just repeat the assertion and the link,

It's standard to read any recommended articles and links, and then comment. You might also have stopped to think why a Saharan archaeologist was saying you are wrong and not repeat the asserttion without asking for additional clarification.

You have a fine site,

Thank you.

though it has no materials on the Tan Tan and La Y'ouan areas, as near as I can see yet. The Western Sahara/Atlantic Coast is the area of interest for me.

The site is in need of updating. I have put it on the back burner between my job, my revisiting the site of Jebel Moya (south-central Sudan) and other matters. There are many sites which I would like to eventually include.

While Wendorf concluded the Kubbaniya barley dates were wrong, note that he is still puzzled how this came about

I cannot verify this independently: I was told by a reliable source that the seeds were planted in the collection in the lab as a joke (not by any senior member of the team) which subsequently got out of hand.

especially with the Libyan desert glass microliths

From http://www.saharaadventurecompany.com/gilf.html:
"Libyan Desert Glass (LDG) is the purest form natural silica glass to be found on earth. It is usually a light green in colour and can be found in a small oval area about 120km long by 50km wide which is (despite the name) on the Egyptian side of the border with Libya. It is found laying on the sand in amongst burnt igneous rocks on the floor of the corridors between the dunes."

I also learned that the earlier dates for the Nabtaen "henges" were wrong as well, and I learned that man would move from the Nile as the eastern desert got wet, which occurred in spurts, and that the Holocene drying was not continuous.

Do you have access to an university library? If so, got more references to give you on the climate.

there is still a problem: VERY early HSS fossils in SE Asia.

Are you referring to Lujang? If so, it isn't a problem.


: Re: Egyptian prehistory
: E.P. Grondine March 29, 2009, 09:27:51 PM
There have been very convincing refutations of the Soluterean idea. You can find citations in this board's archives.

Which still leaves the site at Pedra Furada in Brazil, the distribution of clovis points, and the Savanah River proples' physical traits to explain.

Why not just repeat the assertion and the link,

It's standard to read any recommended articles and links, and then comment. You might also have stopped to think why a Saharan archaeologist was saying you are wrong and not repeat the asserttion without asking for additional clarification.

Watch out for the typos - they're a sure sign your blood pressure is going up, and that can have really nasty results.
I've been told many things by many people. Some of them have even turned out to be true occasionally. Speaking of boring, when I started on Wendorf's retraction last night, I hit the first radio carbon date and sacked out.

While Wendorf concluded the Kubbaniya barley dates were wrong, note that he is still puzzled how this came about

I cannot verify this independently: I was told by a reliable source that the seeds were planted in the collection in the lab as a joke (not by any senior member of the team) which subsequently got out of hand.

That would be something of an understatement.
I am still making the assumption that Wendorf found the microliths in the same strata as the grinding stones.
While he now ascribes the grinding stones to tuber utilization, one would have to take a very close look again at this, as many pre-clovis researchers faced intense pressure to retract.

though it has no materials on the Tan Tan and La Y'ouan areas, as near as I can see yet. The Western Sahara/Atlantic Coast is the area of interest for me.

The site is in need of updating. I have put it on the back burner between my job, my revisiting the site of Jebel Moya (south-central Sudan) and other matters. There are many sites which I would like to eventually include.

Something somewhere is needed for west coastal Africa.

especially with the Libyan desert glass microliths

From http://www.saharaadventurecompany.com/gilf.html:
"Libyan Desert Glass (LDG) is the purest form natural silica glass to be found on earth. It is usually a light green in colour and can be found in a small oval area about 120km long by 50km wide which is (despite the name) on the Egyptian side of the border with Libya. It is found laying on the sand in amongst burnt igneous rocks on the floor of the corridors between the dunes."

The LDG microliths have formation and manufacture ages as well, if memory serves, isotopically determined by European laboratories, again if memory serves. But then it sometimes doesn't.

I also learned that the earlier dates for the Nabtaen "henges" were wrong as well, and I learned that man would move from the Nile as the eastern desert got wet, which occurred in spurts, and that the Holocene drying was not continuous.

Do you have access to an university library? If so, got more references to give you on the climate.

No. My driving ability is limited now, sadly. The main data I'm interested in is the climate of the west coastal regions,
and I was quite pleased when the Brooks link you graciously provided me with led to a paper showing some wet periods in the range say 70,000-9,000 BCE.

there is still a problem: VERY early HSS fossils in SE Asia.

Are you referring to Lujang? If so, it isn't a problem.

Not only Lujang.


: Re: Egyptian prehistory
: Mikey Brass March 30, 2009, 06:20:21 AM
Which still leaves the site at Pedra Furada in Brazil, the distribution of clovis points, and the Savanah River proples' physical traits to explain.

I would, again, recommend going through the archives on this message board, follow up the references provided and return for a new discussion when you have digested and integrated the information.

Watch out for the typos

There are none in my previous (and reposted below) paragraph and I would - yet again - recommend following the advice:
It's standard to read any recommended articles and links, and then comment. You might also have stopped to think why a Saharan archaeologist was saying you are wrong and not repeat the asserttion without asking for additional clarification.

I am still making the assumption that Wendorf found the microliths in the same strata as the grinding stones.

There are different horizons at the site. You will need to obtain a copy of the original, published site report and go through it if you want that level of detail.

While he now ascribes the grinding stones to tuber utilization,

...and rightly so.

Something somewhere is needed for west coastal Africa.

There are more urgent priorities for my site. The archaeology in the Sudanese Sahelian belt is rapid, a section is needed on Gobero in Niger, etc etc.

No. My driving ability is limited now, sadly.

I am happy to provide whatever pdfs I can if you find a reference you would like to follow up.

Not only Lujang.

Which other sites do you have in mind?


: Re: Egyptian prehistory
: E.P. Grondine March 31, 2009, 02:50:34 PM
You might also have stopped to think why a Saharan archaeologist was saying you are wrong and not repeat the asserttion without asking for additional clarification.

I believe assertion is spelled with one "t". As my stroke progressed before finally bursting, typos came more often, followed by the failure of my left hand entirely.

I am happy to provide whatever pdfs I can if you find a reference you would like to follow up.

Thank you. I would appreciate simply a nice chart of precipitation in the Sahara in the paleo, and any materials concerning The Tan Tan and La Y'ouan areas from any period. I really couldn't handle anything more.

Which other sites do you have in mind?

Here's a nice one for very early man in SE Asia:
http://researchsea.com/html/article.php/aid/3937/cid/6/research/usm_discovers_concrete_evidence_that_can_chance_the_history_of_early_man.html

Impacts are a really useful new tool for clearing up some of the mysteries of mankind's past.  For example:

>To (meteorite) List:

>       Does anybody know of a good reference (preferably a web site) that
>discusses stone tools made from Libyan Desert Glass (i.e. most common
>occurrences, tool types, etc..)?
>
Hello Randy and list,

there is quite some reference material regarding prehistoric artifacts
recovered from the sahara deserts. I did not yet step over a website
covering your particular subject but the following publications refer
to LDG, standard tool types as well as to the other materials that have
been used. If you roughly know what period your tools belong to
(paleo-, epipaleo- or neolithic) classification is indeed much easier.
You may as well have a look at the prehistoric finds inventory at our
website:
 http://www.niger-meteorite-recon.de/praehist.htm
The classifications are also in english, so some of it may be of use
for you. In march 03 we recovered some 120 artifacts, about 20% are
already listed in the inventory catalogue.

This is a rich article about LDG tools recovered from the Great Sand
Sea in the one and only Bulletin for Archaeoastronomy:
Carlson, John B., ed., Archaeoastronomy: The Bulletin of the Center for
Archaeoastronomy, Volume V, no. 2, April-June 1982. Olsen, John W.,
``Libyan Desert Glass and the Prehistory of the Great Sand Sea,'' p. 11.

The paleolithics are best covered by: Francois Bordes: Lecons sur le
Paleolithique, Vol II, Paris 1984.

This is probably the most suitable tool for your research because it
covers most of the published finds in all North Africa until the 1980s.
Each entry goes along with various sources for further research.
Alphabetical order allows to search either for special tool types or
for the location your tools have been found at:
Andre Léroi-Gourhan: Dictionaire de la prehistoire, foreword by José
Garanger, Paris 1986

This is a German standard reference guide for recognition and
classification of prehistoric tools:
Hansjuergen Mueller Beck (ed.): Erkennen und Bestimmen von Stein und
Knochenartefakten, Tuebingen 1993. With an online dictionary
classifications can easyly be translated.

At: http://www.oxbowbooks.com/browse.cfm?&CatID=360&StartRow=11
you will find an english research report of the Olduvai excavation in
Northern Tansania. It contains a complete tool inventory of the
"average Atérien hunter clan" and is also representative for the
Atérien in Libya resp. the northeastern Africa.

If somebody else comes across any reference website I would be thankful
for a link as well.

best wishes
Svend"

Unfortunately the link is not working, but if my memory serves, when the LDG tools underwent isotopic analysis, some very old ages were arrived at. 

Thanks,
E.P.












: Re: Egyptian prehistory
: Mikey Brass March 31, 2009, 03:02:24 PM
I believe assertion is spelled with one "t".

Yes. Just goes to show I have never learnt to proof-read my non-work and non-academic writings before hitting "post". Still: You might also have stopped to think why a Saharan archaeologist was saying you are wrong and not repeat the assertion without asking for additional clarification.

Thank you. I would appreciate simply a nice chart of precipitation in the Sahara in the paleo, and any materials concerning The Tan Tan and La Y'ouan areas from any period. I really couldn't handle anything more.

Send me an e-mail with your address to send across what I have: mike@antiquityofman.com

Here's a nice one for very early man in SE Asia:
http://researchsea.com/html/article.php/aid/3937/cid/6/research/usm_discovers_concrete_evidence_that_can_chance_the_history_of_early_man.html

Aahhhh, you were confusingly referring to early Homo and not early Homo sapiens sapiens.



: Re: Egyptian prehistory
: E.P. Grondine March 31, 2009, 03:16:06 PM
My apologies for the duplicate post.

But then there's this also:
http://www.fjexpeditions.com/frameset/SG.htm, where LDG microliths were found in a a clearly
neolithic context.

See also, somewhat alarmingly:
http://www.libyan-desert-glass.net/artefact_stone_age_palaeolithicum.html
for a nice assortment. I assume these were collected and exported before the
practice was put a stop to.

Ahhh... Homo... but what Homo, erectus or heidelbergensis or.... something else?
Say early "Homo aquaticus".

E.P. Grondine
Man and Impact in the Americas













: Re: Egyptian prehistory
: Mikey Brass April 01, 2009, 04:53:04 AM
http://www.libyan-desert-glass.net/artefact_stone_age_palaeolithicum.html

Some may be authentic (looting still occurs) but yet more will be replicas (a more common practice).

Ahhh... Homo... but what Homo, erectus or heidelbergensis or.... something else?

The excavators have designated the earliest Homo remains from the site as being a separate species, Homo georgicus. Personally, I regard them as Homo erectus.

Either way, keep in mind that the earliest remains designated as Homo sapiens sapiens are dated ca. 160kya.


: Re: Egyptian prehistory
: E.P. Grondine April 07, 2009, 10:55:14 AM
The excavators have designated the earliest Homo remains from the site as being a separate species, Homo georgicus. Personally, I regard them as Homo erectus.

Either way, keep in mind that the earliest remains designated as Homo sapiens sapiens are dated ca. 160kya.

And therein lies the problem that I ran into when I wrote "Man and Impact in the Americas" - a lack of agreement on taxonomy. I was a space journalist, so this lack of agreement  made it very difficult to write about the effects of massive impacts on man's evolution - we're talking impacts up to 88,000,000,000 hiroshimas in force. You can imagine how those  "nuclear winter"'s effected the hominids.

This rather complete lack of agreement left me in a position where I was sure to be in disagreement with someone.













: Re: Egyptian prehistory
: Mikey Brass April 07, 2009, 10:58:06 AM
And therein lies the problem that I ran into when I wrote "Man and Impact in the Americas"

Can you elaborate, please? Homo sapiens sapiens have been the only hominins in the Americas.


: Re: Egyptian prehistory
: E.P. Grondine April 09, 2009, 05:54:36 AM
Hi Mike -

I greatly expanded on Peiser and Paine's paper:
users.tpg.com.au/horsts/bioastr2002.pdf

for "Getting to the Crossings", Chapter 2 of "Man and Impact in the Americas", and that's where I hit the
palaeoanthropology community's taxonomic disagreements. (Write me off list for the palaeoanthropology
special on signed first editions.)

"You see, you can't please everyone, so you have to please yourself." Take everyone that holds differing opinions about taxa than yourself, and you can see what I ran into. In other words, it was a certainty that I would greatly upset someone. Now if I could just get you and those you disagree with together in a room, and watch the feathers fly, hell, that might be right entertaining and a whole lot more humane than a cockfight.

When I first hit the problem I mentioned it in a footnote, which originally I had planned to stream on each page below the text,  but after my stroke this proved impossible.

By the way, it is appearing that within HSS, impacts led to population isolations and mt DNA differentiation. The A/C split may be linked to either a large Siberian or a large Alaskan iron impactor, both of which are well dated, by the way. Does this hold for many mt DNA haplogroups? Sadly, that kind of work is beyond me now.

E.P. Grondine
Man and Impact in the Americas





: Re: Egyptian prehistory
: E.P. Grondine December 01, 2009, 01:52:22 PM
http://www.rocksfromspace.org/December_1_2009.html

Thought you might enjoy this. Is that a core at the top right, a chopperto mid center, with a flaked piece to the left below it?


: Re: Egyptian prehistory
: trehinp December 08, 2009, 03:08:05 AM
Difficult to tell just from one picture...

It could well be that such hard stones were used by the palaeolithic human beings given that they were very hard and provided sharp cutting edges. But thia is pure spéculation...

Paul


Sorry, the copyright must be in the template.
Please notify this forum's administrator that this site is missing the copyright message for SMF so they can rectify the situation. Display of copyright is a legal requirement. For more information on this please visit the Simple Machines website.