| Revision as of 19:18, 24 August 2011 view sourceParticleMan (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users1,363 editsm Reverted 1 edit by 66.99.190.2 (talk) identified as vandalism to last revision by Fluffernutter. (TW)← Previous edit | Revision as of 19:23, 24 August 2011 view source 66.99.190.2 (talk) ←Replaced content with 'hello'Next edit → | ||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| hello | |||
| {{other uses}} | |||
| ], ], descendant of the Palaeo-Awash, source of the sediments in which the oldest Stone Age tools have been found]] | |||
| {{Stone Age|260}} | |||
| The '''Stone Age''' is a broad ] period, lasting about 2.5 million years (]), during which ]s and their predecessor species in the genus '']'', as well as the earlier partly contemporary genera '']'' and '']'', widely used exclusively ] as their hard material in the manufacture of implements with a sharp edge, a point, or a percussion surface. ] was used during this period as well, but finds of bone tools are rare compared to the millions of stone tools that have been collected from the surface or excavated. Bone is much softer than the two types of hard material used by early man: stone and metals. During the Stone Age, ] was entirely beyond human capability. | |||
| The Stone Age is the first of the ] of ], which divides human technological ] into three periods: | |||
| * The '''Stone Age''' | |||
| * The ] | |||
| * The ] | |||
| == Historical significance == | |||
| The Stone Age is nearly contemporaneous with the evolution of the genus '']'', the only exception possibly being at the very beginning, when species prior to ''Homo'' may have manufactured tools. The cradle of the genus according to the age and location of the current evidence is the ], especially toward the north in ], where it is bordered by ]. The closest relative among the other living ]s, the genus '']'', represents a branch that continued on in the deep forest, where the Primates evolved. The rift served as a conduit for movement into ] and also north down the ] into ] and through the continuation of the rift in the ] to the vast grasslands of ]. | |||
| Starting from about 3 ] a single ] established itself from South Africa through the rift, North Africa, and across Asia to ], which has been called "transcontinental 'savannahstan'" recently.<ref>{{harvnb|Barham|Mitchell|2008|p=106}}</ref> Starting in the grasslands of the rift, the ancestors of man found an ] as a tool-maker and developed a dependence on it. '']'', the predecessor of modern men, became a "tool equipped ] dweller."<ref>{{harvnb|Barham|Mitchell|2008|p=147}}</ref> | |||
| == The Stone Age in archaeology== | |||
| ] ]]] | |||
| ===Beginning of the Stone Age=== | |||
| The oldest known stone tools have been excavated from several sites at Gona, ], on the sediments of the paleo-], which serve to date them. All the tools come from the Busidama Formation, which lies above a ], or missing layer, which would have been from 2.9-2.7 ]. The oldest sites containing tools are dated to 2.6-2.55 ].<ref>{{harvnb|Rogers|Semaw|2009|pp=162–163}}</ref> One of the most striking circumstances about these sites is that they are from the Late ], where previous to their discovery tools were thought to have evolved only in the ]. Rogers and Semaw, excavators at the locality, point out that:<ref>{{harvnb|Rogers|Semaw|2009|p=155}}</ref> | |||
| :"...the earliest stone tool makers were skilled flintknappers .... The possible reasons behind this seeming abrupt transition from the absence of stone tools to the presence thereof include ... gaps in the geological record." | |||
| The excavators are confident that more tools will be found elsewhere from 2.9 mya. The species who made the Pliocene tools remains unknown. Fragments of '']'', '']''<ref>As to whether aethiopicus is the genus '']'' or the genus '']'', broken out to include the more robust forms, anthropological opinion is divided and both usages occur in the professional sources.</ref> and ''Homo'', possibly '']'', have been found in sites near the age of the oldest tools.<ref>{{harvnb|Rogers|Semaw|2009|p=164}}</ref> | |||
| ===End of the Stone Age=== | |||
| Innovation of the technique of ] ] ended the Stone Age and began the ]. The first most significant metal manufactured was ], an alloy of ] and ], each of which was smelted separately. The transition from the Stone Age to the ] was a period during which modern people could smelt copper, but did not yet manufacture Bronze, a time known as the ], or more technically the ], "copper-stone" age. The Chalcolithic by convention is the initial period of the Bronze Age and is unquestionably part of the Age of Metals. The Bronze Age was followed by the ]. During this entire time stone remained in use in parallel with the metals for some objects, including those also used in the Neolithic, such as stone pottery. Civilized man was now an expert stone-worker. | |||
| The transition out of the Stone Age occurred between 6000 BCE and 2500 BCE for much of humanity living in ] and ]. The first evidence of human ] dates to between the 5th and 6th ] BCE in the archaeological sites of ], ] and ] (copper axe from 5500 BCE belonging to the ])<ref>{{cite news | url=http://www.stonepages.com/news/archives/002605.html | title=Neolithic Vinca was a metallurgical culture | date=17 November 2007 | publisher=Archaeo News | agency=Reuters | accessdate=25 January 2011}}</ref> and the ] mine in ]. ], a ] from about ] carried with him a copper axe and a flint knife. | |||
| In regions such as ], the Stone Age was followed directly by the ]. The ] and ] regions progressed past Stone Age technology around 6000 BC. ], and the rest of ] became post–Stone Age ] by about 4000 BC. The ] cultures of ] continued at a Stone Age level until around 2000 BC, when gold, copper and silver made their entrance, the rest following later. ] remained in the Stone Age until the 17th century. Stone tool manufacture continued. In Europe and ], ]s were in use until well into the 20th century, and still are in many parts of the world. | |||
| ===The concept of Stone Age=== | |||
| The term was never meant to suggest that advancement and time periods in prehistory are only measured by the type of tool material, rather than, for example, ], ] exploited, adaptation to climate, adoption of ], ], ] and ]. Like ], the typology of the stone tools combined with the relative sequence of the types in various regions provide a chronological framework for the evolution of man and society. They serve as diagnostics of date, rather than characterizing the men or the society. | |||
| ] is a major and specialised form of archaeological investigation. It involves the measurement of the stone tools to determine their typology, function and the technology involved. It includes scientific study of the ] of the raw materials, examining how the artifacts were made. Much of this study takes place in the laboratory in the presence of various specialists. In ], researchers attempt to create replica tools, to understand how they were made. ]s are craftsmen who use sharp tools to reduce ]stone to a ]. | |||
| ]s]]In addition to lithic analysis, the field prehistorian utilizes a wide range of techniques derived from multiple fields. The work of the archaeologist in determining the paleocontext and relative sequence of the layers is supplemented by the efforts of the geologic specialist in identifying layers of rock over geologic time, of the paleontological specialist in identifying bones and animals, of the palynologist in discovering and identifying plant species, of the physicist and chemist in laboratories determining dates by the Carbon-14, Potassium-Argon and other methods. Study of the Stone Age has never been mainly about stone tools and archaeology, which are only one form of evidence. The chief focus has always been on the society and the physical people who belonged to it. | |||
| Useful as it has been, the concept of the Stone Age has its limitations. The date range of this period is ambiguous, disputed, and variable according to the region in question. While it is possible to speak of a general 'stone age' period for the whole of humanity, some groups never developed metal-] technology, so remained in a 'stone age' until they encountered technologically developed cultures. The term was innovated to describe the ]s of ]. It may not always be the best in relation to regions such as some parts of the ] and ], where ] or ]s used stone for tools until European ] began. | |||
| The archaeologists of the late 19th and early 20th centuries AD, who adapted the ] to their ideas, hoped to combine cultural anthropology and archaeology in such as way that a specific contemporaneous tribe can be used to illustrate the way of life and beliefs of the people exercising a specific Stone-Age technology. As a description of people living today, the term ''stone age'' is controversial. The ] discourages this use, asserting:<ref>{{cite news | title=ASA Statement on the use of 'primitive' as a descriptor of contemporary human groups | newspaper=ASA News | date=2007-08-27 | publisher=Association of Social Anthropologists of the UK and Commonwealth | url=http://www.nomadit.net/asatest/news.htm}}</ref><blockquote>"To describe any living group as 'primitive' or 'Stone Age' inevitably implies that they are living representatives of some earlier stage of human development that the majority of humankind has left behind. For some, this could be a positive description, implying, for example, that such groups live in greater harmony with nature .... For others, ... 'primitive' is a negative characterisation. For them, 'primitive' denotes irrational use of resources and absence of the intellectual and moral standards of 'civilised' human societies.... From the standpoint of anthropological knowledge, both these views are equally one-sided and simplistic."</blockquote> | |||
| ===The three-stage system=== | |||
| In the 1920s, South African archaeologists organizing the stone tool collections of that country observed that they did not fit the newly detailed Three-Age System. In the words of ],<ref>{{harvnb|Clark|1970|p=22}}</ref><blockquote> "It was early realized that the threefold division of culture into Stone, Bronze and Iron Ages adopted in the nineteenth century for Europe had no validity in Africa outside the Nile valley."</blockquote> | |||
| Consequently they proposed a new system for Africa, the Three-stage System. Clark regarded the Three-age System as valid for North Africa; in sub-Saharan Africa, the Three-stage System was best.<ref>{{harvnb|Clark|1970|pp=18–19}}</ref> In practice, the failure of African archaeologists either to keep this distinction in mind, or to explain which one they mean, contributes to the considerable equivocation already present in the literature. There are in effect two Stone Ages, one part of the Three-age and the other constituting the Three-stage. They refer to one and the same artifacts and the same technologies, but vary by locality and time. | |||
| The Three-stage System was proposed in 1929 by Astley John Hilary Goodman, a professional archaeologist, and Clarence van Riet Lowe, a civil engineer and amateur archaeologist, in an article titled "Stone Age Cultures of South Africa" in the journal ''Annals of the South African Museum''. By then, the dates of the Early Stone Age, or Paleolithic, and Late Stone Age, or Neolithic (''neo'' = new), were fairly solid and were regarded by Goodwin as absolute. He therefore proposed a relative chronology of periods with floating dates, to be called the Earlier and Later Stone Age. The Middle Stone Age would not change its name, but it would not mean Mesolithic.<ref>{{harvnb|Deacon|Deacon|1999|pp=5–6}}</ref> | |||
| The duo thus reinvented the Stone Age. In Sub-Saharan Africa, however, it was ended by the intrusion of the Iron Age from the north. The Neolithic and the Bronze Age never occurred. Moreover, the technologies included in those 'stages', as Goodwin called them, were not exactly the same. Since then, the original relative terms have become identified with the technologies of the Paleolithic and Mesolithic, so that they are no longer relative. Moreover, there has been a tendency to drop the comparative degree in favor of the positive: resulting in two sets of Early, Middle and Late Stone Ages of quite different content and chronologies. | |||
| By voluntary agreement, archaeologists respect the decisions of the ], which meets every four years to resolve archaeological business brought before it. Delegates are actually international; the organization takes its name from the topic. ] hosted the first one in ] in 1947. It adopted Goodman and Lowe's 3-stage system at that time, the stages to be called Early, Middle and Later. | |||
| ===The problem of the transitions=== | |||
| The problem of the ]s in archaeology is a branch of the general philosophic ] problem, which examines how ] objects of any sort that are ] in any way can be presumed to have a ] of any sort. In archaeology the relationship is one of ]. If Period B can be presumed to descend from Period A there must be a ] between A and B, the A-B boundary. The problem is in the nature of this boundary. If there is no distinct boundary, then the population of A suddenly stopped using the customs characteristic of A and suddenly started using those of B, an unlikely scenario in the process of ]. More realistically a distinct border period, the A/B transition, existed, in which the customs of A were gradually dropped and those of B acquired. If transitions do not exist, then there is no proof of any continuity between A and B. | |||
| The Stone Age of Europe is characteristically in deficit of known transitions. The 19th and early 20th century innovators of the modern ] recognized the problem of the initial transition, the "gap" between the Paleolithic and the Neolithic. ] provided something of an answer by proving that man evolved in Africa. The Stone Age must have begun there to be carried repeatedly to Europe by migrant populations. The different phases of the Stone Age thus could appear there without transitions. The burden on African archaeologists became all the greater, because now they must find the missing transitions in Africa. The problem is difficult and ongoing. | |||
| After its adoption by the First Pan African Congress in 1947, the Three-Stage Chronology was amended by the Third Congress in 1955 to include a First Intermediate Period between Early and Middle, to encompass the Fauresmith and ] technologies, and the Second Intermediate Period between Middle and Later, to encompass the ] technology and others. The chronologic basis for definition was entirely relative. With the arrival of scientific means of finding an absolute chronology, the two intermediates turned out to be ]s. They were in fact ] and ]. Fauresmith is now considered to be a ] of ], while Sangoan is a facies of ].<ref>{{cite encyclopedia | first=Glynn | last=Isaac | authorlink=Glynn Isaac | title=The Earliest Archaeological Traces | editor-first=J. Desmond | series=Volume | editor-last=Clark | encyclopedia=The Cambridge History of Africa | volume=I: From the Earliest Times to C. 500 BC | page=246 | location=Cambridge | publisher=Cambridge University Press | year=1982 | ref=harv}}</ref> Magosian is "an artificial mix of two different periods."<ref>{{cite book | last=Willoughby | first=Pamela R. | year=2007 | title=The evolution of modern humans in Africa: a comprehensive guide | location=Lanham, MD | publisher=AltaMira Press | page=54}}</ref> | |||
| Once seriously questioned, the intermediates did not wait for the next Pan African Congress two years hence, but were officially rejected in 1965 (again on an advisory basis) by Burg Wartenstein Conference #29, ''Systematic Investigation of the African Later Tertiary and Quarternary'',<ref>{{harvnb|Barham|Mitchell|2008|p=477}}</ref> a prestigious conference in anthropology held by the Wenner-Gren Foundation, at Burg Wartenstein Castle, which it then owned in Austria, attended by the same key scholars that attended the Pan African Congress, including ] and ], who was delivering a pilot presentation of her typological analysis of Early Stone Age tools, to be included in her 1971 contribution to ''Olduvai Gorge'', "Excavations in Beds I and II, 1960-1963."<ref>{{cite web | title=History: Systematic Investigation of the African Later Tertiary and Quarternary | url=http://wennergren.org/history/conferences-seminars-symposia/wenner-gren-symposia/cumulative-list-wenner-gren-symposia/we-23 | publisher=The Wenner-Gren Foundation | accessdate=3 March 2011}}</ref> | |||
| However, although the Intermediate Periods were gone, the search for the transitions continued. | |||
| == Chronology == | |||
| ] | |||
| In 1859 ] first proposed a division of the Stone Age into older and younger parts based on his work with Danish ]s that began in 1851.<ref>{{cite encyclopedia | title=Worsaae, Jens Jacob Asmussen | encyclopedia=] | ref=harv}}</ref> In the subsequent decades this simple distinction developed into the archaeological periods of today. The major subdivisions of the Three-age Stone Age cross two ] boundaries on the ]: | |||
| * The geologic ]—] boundary (highly glaciated climate) | |||
| ** The ] period of archaeology | |||
| * The geologic ]—] boundary (modern climate) | |||
| ** ] or ] period of archaeology | |||
| ** ] period of archaeology | |||
| The succession of these phases varies enormously from one ] (and ]) to another. | |||
| ===Three-age chronology=== | |||
| {{Main|Paleolithic|Human evolution|Three-age system}} | |||
| The Paleolithic or Palaeolithic (from Greek: παλαιός, ''palaios'', "]"; and λίθος, '']'', "stone" lit. "old stone," coined by archaeologist ] and published in 1865) is the earliest division of the Stone Age. It covers the greatest portion of humanity's time (roughly 99% of "human technological history,"<ref name=Thoth&Schick>{{Cite book |title=Handbook of Paleoanthropology |url=http://www.springerlink.com/content/u68378621542472j/ | first=Nicholas | last=Toth |series=Volume | first2=Kathy | last2=Schick | year=2007 | volume=3 | contribution=21 Overview of Paleolithic Archaeology | editor-first=H.C. Winfried | editor-last=Henke | editor2-first=Thorolf | editor2-last=Hardt | editor3-first=Ian | editor3-last=Tattersall | location=Berlin; Heidelberg; New York | publisher=Springer-Verlag |isbn=978-3-540-32474-4 (Print); 978-3-540-33761-4 (Online) | page=1944 |ref=harv |postscript=<!-- Bot inserted parameter. Either remove it; or change its value to "." for the cite to end in a ".", as necessary. -->{{inconsistent citations}}}}</ref> where "human" and "humanity" are interpreted to mean the genus '']''), extending from 2.5 or 2.6 million years ago, with the first documented use of stone tools by ]s such as '']'', to the end of the ] around 10,000 BCE.<ref name="Thoth&Schick"/> The Paleolithic era ended with the ], or in areas with an early ], the ]. | |||
| ==== Lower Paleolithic ==== | |||
| {{main|Lower Paleolithic}} | |||
| ] from the western Sahara. In the Three-age System it belongs to the Lower Paleolithic. In the Three-stage System it belongs to the Early Stone Age. Since the locality is Northern Africa the archeologist would appear to have a choice, but in this case the argument is entirely semantic, based on a verbal distinction only. In Africa the Lower Paleolithic is the Early Stone Age and they are identical.]] | |||
| The Lower Paleolithic began in Africa. Toward the end of its African phase it propagated in Eurasia, where it remained long after its termination in Africa. Across the whole range Lower Paleolithic in Eurasia may be contemporaneous with Middle and Upper in regions where it had been but was supplanted. | |||
| <!--Tool manufacture is not species-specific. It had been an early Leakey hypothesis at Olduvai that Mode 1 tools implied ''Homo habilis'' and Mode 2, ''Homo erectus''. Subsequent methods of obtaining more precise dates made that hypothesis at least partially obsolete.<ref name=B&M126-127>{{harvnb|Barham|Mitchell|2008|pp=126–127}}.</ref>--> | |||
| =====Oldowan in Africa===== | |||
| {{Commons category|Oldowan}} | |||
| The earliest documented ]s were found in ], manufacturers unknown. They belonged to an ] now known as ], after the type site of ] in ]; however, sites in ] later proved to be older. | |||
| The tools were formed by knocking pieces off a river pebble, or stones like it, with a hammerstone to obtain large and small pieces with one or more sharp edges. The original stone is called a core; the resultant pieces, flakes. Typically, but not necessarily, small pieces are detached from a larger piece, in which case the larger piece may be called the ] and the smaller pieces the ]. The prevalent usage, however, is to call all the results flakes, which can be confusing. A split in half is called bipolar flaking. | |||
| Consequently the method is often called "core-and-flake". As the flakes were relatively small compared to subsequent Acheulean tools, the tradition more recently has been called "small flake:"<ref>{{harvnb|Barham|Mitchell|2008|p=130}}.</ref><blockquote>"The essence of the Oldowan is the making and often immediate use of small flakes."</blockquote> | |||
| Another naming scheme is "Pebble Core Technology (PBC):"<ref>{{harvnb|Shea|2010|p=49}}</ref><blockquote>"Pebble cores are ... artefacts that have been shaped by varying amounts of hard-hammer persussion."</blockquote> | |||
| Various refinements in the shape have been called choppers, discoids, polyhedrons, subspheroid, etc. To date no reasons for the variants have been ascertained:<ref name=Shea50>{{harvnb|Shea|2010|p=50}}</ref><blockquote>"From a functional standpoint, pebble cores seem designed for no specific purpose."</blockquote> | |||
| However, they would not have been manufactured for no purpose:<ref name=Shea50/><blockquote>"Pebble cores can be useful in many cutting, scraping or chopping tasks, but ... they are not particularly more efficient in such tasks than a sharp-edged rock ...."</blockquote> | |||
| The whole point of their utility is that each is a "sharp-edged rock" in locations where nature has not provided any. There is additional evidence that Oldowan, or Mode 1, tools were utilized in "percussion technology"; that is, they were designed to be gripped at the blunt end and strike something with the edge, from which use they were given the name of ]. Modern science has been able to detect mammalian blood cells on Mode 1 tools at ], Member 5 East, in South Africa. As the blood must have come from a fresh kill, the tool users are likely to have done the killing and used the tools for butchering. Plant residues bonded to the ] of some tools confirm the use to chop plants.<ref name="Barham 2008 132">{{harvnb|Barham|Mitchell|2008|p=132}}</ref> | |||
| Although the exact species authoring the tools remains unknown at the current time, Mode 1 tools in Africa were manufactured and used predominantly by '']''. They cannot be said to have developed these tools or to have contributed the tradition to technology. They continued a tradition of yet unknown origin. As ]s sometimes naturally use percussion to extract or prepare food in the wild, and may use either unmodified stones or stones that they have split, creating an Oldowan tool, the tradition may well be far older than its current record. | |||
| Towards the end of Oldowan in Africa a new species appeared over the range of ''Homo habilis'': ''Homo erectus''. The earliest "unambiguous" evidence is a whole ], KNM-ER 3733 (a find identifier) from ] in ], dated to 1.78 mya.<ref name=B&M126-127>{{harvnb|Barham|Mitchell|2008|pp=126–127}}.</ref> An early skull fragment, KNM-ER 2598, dated to 1.9 mya, is considered a good candidate also.<ref name=B&M128>{{harvnb|Barham|Mitchell|2008|p=128}}</ref> Transitions in paleoanthropology are always hard to find, if not impossible, but based on the "long-legged" limb morphology shared by ''H. habilis'' and ''H. rudolfensis'' in East Africa, an evolution from one of those two has been suggested.<ref name=B&M145>{{harvnb|Barham|Mitchell|2008|p=145}}</ref> | |||
| The most immediate cause of the new adjustments appears to have been an increasing aridity in the region and consequent contraction of parkland savanna, interspersed with trees and groves, in favor of open grassland, dated 1.8-1.7 mya. During that transitional period the percentage of grazers among the fossil species increased from 15-25% to 45%, dispersing the food supply and requiring a facility among the hunters to travel longer distances comfortably, which ''H. erectus'' obviously had.<ref>{{harvnb|Barham|Mitchell|2008|p=146}}.</ref> The ultimate proof is the "dispersal" of ''H. erectus'' "across much of Africa and Asia, substantially before the development of the Mode 2 technology and use of fire ...."<ref name=B&M145/> ''H. erectus'' carried Mode 1 tools over Eurasia. | |||
| According to the current evidence (which may change at any time) Mode 1 tools are documented from about 2.6 mya to about 1.5 mya in Africa,<ref>{{harvnb|Barham|Mitchell|2008|p=112}}</ref> and to 0.5 mya outside of it.<ref>{{harvnb|Shea|2010|p=57}}</ref> The genus Homo is known from ''H. habilis'' and ''H. rudolfensis'' from 2.3-2.0 mya, with the latest habilis being an upper jaw from Koobi Fora, Kenya, from 1.4 mya. ''H. erectus'' is dated 1.8-0.6 mya.<ref>{{harvnb|Barham|Mitchell|2008|p=73}}</ref> | |||
| According to this chronology Mode 1 was inherited by ''Homo'' from unknown Hominans, probably '']'' and '']'', who must have continued on with Mode 1 and then with Mode 2 until their extinction no later than 1.1 mya. Meanwhile living contemporaneously in the same regions ''H. habilis'' inherited the tools around 2.3 mya. At about 1.9 mya ''H. erectus'' came on stage and lived contemporaneously with the others. Mode 1 was now being shared by a number of Hominans over the same ranges, presumably subsisting in different niches, but the archaeology is not precise enough to say which. | |||
| =====Oldowan out of Africa===== | |||
| Tools of the Oldowan tradition first came to archaeological attention in Europe, where, being intrusive and not well defined, compared to the Acheulean, they were puzzling to archaeologists. The mystery would be elucidated by African archaeology at Olduvai, but meanwhile, in the early 20th century, the term "Pre-Acheulean" came into use in ]. C.E.P, Brooks, a British climatologist working in the United States, used the term to describe a "chalky boulder clay" underlying a layer of gravel at ], central England, where Acheulean tools had been found.<ref>{{citation | first=Charles E.P. |last=Brooks | contribution=The Correlation of the Quarternary Deposits of the British Isles with Those of the Continent of Europe | title=Annual Report of the Board of Regents of the Smithsonian Institution 1917 | year=1919 | location=Washington | publisher=Government Pronting Office | page=277}}</ref> Whether any tools would be found in it and what type was not known. ], a contemporary German archaeologist working in Spain, quipped:<blockquote>"Unfortunately, the stage of human industry which corresponds to these deposits cannot be positively identified. All we can say is that it is pre-Acheulean...."</blockquote> This uncertainty was clarified by the subsequent excavations at Olduvai; nevertheless, the term is still in use for pre-Acheulean contexts, mainly across Eurasia, that are yet unspecified or uncertain but with the understanding that they are or will turn out to be pebble-tool.<ref>{{cite book | author=Hugo Obermaier | authorlink=Hugo Obermaier | coauthors=Christine Matthew; Henry Osborne | title=Fossil Man in Spain | location=New Haven | publisher=Yale University Press for the Hispanic Society of America | year=1924 | page=272}}</ref> | |||
| There are ample associations of Mode 2 with ''H. erectus'' in Eurasia. ''H. erectus'' — Mode 1 associations are scantier but they do exist, especially in the Far East. One strong piece of evidence prevents the conclusion that only ''H. erectus'' reached Eurasia: at ], Israel, Mode 1 tools have been found dating to 2.4 mya,<ref>{{harvnb|Barham|Mitchell|2008|pp=106–107}}</ref> about 0.5 my earlier than the known ''H. erectus'' finds. If the date is correct, either another Hominan preceded ''H. erectus'' out of Africa or the earliest ''H. erectus'' has yet to be found. | |||
| After the initial appearance at Gona in Ethiopia at 2.7 mya, pebble tools date from 2.0 mya at ], Member 5, South Africa, and from 1.8 mya at El Kherba, Algeria, North Africa. The manufacturers had already left pebble tools at ], Israel, at 2.4 mya, ], Pakistan, at 2.0 mya, and Renzidong, South China, at over 2 mya.<ref name=Shea55-57>{{harvnb|Shea|2010|pp=55–57}}</ref> The identification of a fossil skull at Mojokerta, Pernung Peninsula on ], dated to 1.8 mya, as ''H. erectus'', suggests that the African finds are not the earliest to be found in Africa, or that, in fact, erectus did not originate in Africa after all but on the plains of Asia.<ref name=B&M145/> The outcome of the issue waits for more substantial evidence. Erectus was found also at ], Georgia, from 1.75 mya in association with pebble tools. | |||
| Pebble tools are found the latest first in southern Europe and then in northern. They begin in the open areas of Italy and Spain, the earliest dated to 1.6 mya at Pirro Nord, Italy. The mountains of Italy are rising at a rapid rate in the framework of geologic time; at 1.6 mya they were lower and covered with grassland (as much of the highlands still are). Europe was otherwise mountainous and covered over with dense forest, a formidable terrain for warm-weather savanna dwellers. Similarly there is no evidence that the Mediterranean was passable at Gibraltar or anywhere else to ''H. erectus'' or earlier hominans. They might have reached Italy and Spain along the coasts. | |||
| In northern Europe pebble tools are found earliest at ], United Kingdom, from 0.65 mya. The last traces are from ], dated 0.5 mya. By that time ''H. erectus'' is regarded as having been extinct; however, a more modern version apparently had evolved, '']'', who must have inherited the tools.<ref>{{harvnb|Barham|Mitchell|2008|p=24}}</ref> He also explains the last of the Acheulean in Germany at 0.4 mya. | |||
| In the late 19th and early 20th centuries archaeologists worked on the assumptions that a succession of Hominans and cultures prevailed, that one replaced another. Today the presence of multiple hominans living contemporaneously near each other for long periods is accepted as proved true; moreover, by the time the previously assumed "earliest" culture arrived in northern Europe, the rest of Africa and Eurasia had progressed to the Middle and Upper Paleolithic, so that across the earth all three were for a time contemporaneous. In any given region there was a progression from Oldowan to Acheulean, Lower to Upper, no doubt. | |||
| =====Acheulean in Africa===== | |||
| {{Commons category|Acheulean}} | |||
| ] | |||
| The end of Oldowan in Africa was brought on by the appearance of ], or Mode 2, ]s. The earliest known instances are in the 1.7-1.6 mya layer at ], West Turkana, Kenya.<ref name=B&M128/> At ], South Africa, they are in Member 5 West, 1.7-1.4 mya.<ref name="Barham 2008 132"/> The 1.7 is a fairly certain, fairly standard date. Mode 2 is often found in association with ''H. erectus''. It makes sense that the most advanced tools should have been innovated by the most advanced Hominan; consequently, they are typically given credit for the innovation. | |||
| A Mode 2 tool is a biface consisting of two concave surfaces intersecting to form a cutting edge all the way around, except in the case of tools intended to feature a point. More work and planning go into the manufacture of a Mode 2 tool. The manufacturer hits a slab off a larger rock to use as a blank. Then large flakes are struck off the blank and worked them into bifaces by hard-hammer percussion on an anvil stone. Finally the edge is retouched: small flakes are hit off with a bone or wood soft hammer to sharpen or resharpen it. The core can be either the blank or another flake. Blanks are ported for manufacturing supply in places where nature has provided no suitable stone. | |||
| Although most Mode 2 tools are easily distinguished from Mode 1, there is a close similarity of some Oldowan and some Acheulean, which can lead to confusion. Some Oldowan tools are more carefully prepared to form a more regular edge. One distinguishing criterion is the size of the flakes. In contrast to the Oldowan "small flake" tradition, Acheulean is "large flake:"<ref>{{harvnb|Barham|Mitchell|2008|p=130}}</ref><blockquote>"The primary technological distinction remaining between Oldowan and the Acheulean is the preference for large flakes (>10 cm) as blanks for making large cutting tools (handaxes and cleavers) in the Acheulean."</blockquote> | |||
| "Large Cutting Tool (LCT)" has become part of the standard terminology as well.<ref name="Shea50"/> | |||
| In North Africa, the presence of Mode 2 remains a mystery, as the oldest finds are from Thomas Quarry in ] at 0.9 mya.<ref name=Shea55-57/> Archaeological attention, however, shifts to the Jordan Rift Valley, an extension of the East African Rift Valley (the east bank of the Jordan is slowly sliding northward as East Africa is thrust away from Africa). Evidence of use of the Nile Valley is in deficit, but Hominans could easily have reached the palaeo-] from ] along the shores of the ], one side or the other. A crossing would not have been necessary, but it is more likely there than over a theoretical but unproven land bridge through either ] or ]. | |||
| Meanwhile Acheulean went on in Africa past the 1.0 mya mark and also past the extinction of ''H. erectus'' there. The last Acheulean in East Africa is at ], Kenya, dated to about 0.9 mya. Its owner was still ''H. erectus'',<ref name=Shea55-57/> but in South Africa, Acheulean at ], 1.0-0.6 mya, is associated with ], classified as ''H. heidelbergensis'', a more advanced, but not yet modern, descendant most likely of ''H. erectus''. The Thoman Quarry Hominans in ] similarly are most likely ],<ref>{{cite journal | journal=Quaternary International | issue=223-224 | year=2010 | pages=369–382 | title=Hominid Cave at Thomas Quarry I (Casablanca, Morocco): Recent findings and their context | author=Jean-Paul Raynal | coauthors=et al. | url=http://www.eva.mpg.de/evolution/staff/hublin/pdf/Raynal%20et%20al%202010%20Quat%20Intl.pdf}}</ref> in the same evolutionary status as ''H. heidelbergensis''. | |||
| <!--''H. erectus'' learned to control fire and created more complex chopper tools, as well as expanding ] to reach Asia, as shown by sites such as ] in ]. By 1 million years ago, the earliest evidence of humans in Europe is known, as well as use of the more advanced ] tool.--> | |||
| =====Acheulean out of Africa===== | |||
| Mode 2 is first known out of Africa at {{nowiki|'}}], Israel, a site now on the ], then frequented over the long term (hundreds of thousands of years) by ] on the shore of a variable-level palaeo-lake, long since vanished. The geology was created by successive "transgression and regression" of the lake<ref>{{harvnb|Belmaker|2006|p=9}}</ref> resulting in four cycles of layers. The tools are located in the first two, Cycles Li (Limnic Inferior) and Fi (Fluviatile Inferior), but mostly in Fi. The cycles represent different ecologies and therefore different cross-sections of fauna, which makes it possible to date them. They appear to be the same faunal assemblages as the Ferenta Faunal Unit in Italy, known from excavations at Selvella and Pieterfitta, dated to 1.6-1.2 mya.<ref>{{harvnb|Belmaker|2006|pp=119–120}}</ref> | |||
| At {{nowiki|'}}Ubeidiya the marks on the bones of the animal species found there indicate that the manufacturers of the tools butchered the kills of large predators, an activity that has been termed "scavenging."<ref>{{harvnb|Belmaker|2006|p=149}}</ref> There are no living floors, nor did they process bones to obtain the marrow. These activities cannot be understood therefore as the only or even the typical economic activity of Hominans. Their interests were selective: they were primarily harvesting the meat of ]s,<ref>{{harvnb|Belmaker|2006|p=147}}</ref> which is estimated to have been available without spoiling for up to four days after the kill. | |||
| The majority of the animals at the site were of "Palaearctic biogeographic origin."<ref>{{harvnb|Belmaker|2006|p=67}}</ref> However, these overlapped in range on 30-60% of "African biogeographic origin."<ref>{{harvnb|Belmaker|2006|p=21}}</ref> The ] was Mediterranean, not savanna. The animals were not passing through; there was simply an overlap of normal ranges. Of the Hominans, ''H. erectus'' left several cranial fragments. Teeth of undetermined species may have been ''H. ergaster''.<ref>{{harvnb|Belmaker|2006|p=20}}</ref> The tools are classified as "Lower Acheulean" and "Developed Oldowan." The latter is a disputed classification created by ] to describe an Acheulean-like tradition in Bed II at ]. It is dated 1.53-1.27 mya. The date of the tools therefore probably does not exceed 1.5 mya; 1.4 is often given as a date. This chronology, which is definitely later than in Kenya, supports the "out of Africa" hypothesis for Acheulean, if not for the Hominans. | |||
| From Southwest Asia, as the Levant in now called, the Acheulean extended itself more slowly eastward, arriving at ], India, about 1.2 mya. It does not appear in China and Korea until after 1mya and not at all in Indonesia. There is a discernable boundary marking the furthest extent of the Acheulean eastward before 1 mya, called the ], after its proposer, ]. On the east side of the line the small flake tradition continues, but the tools are additionally worked Mode 1, with flaking down the sides. | |||
| The cause of the Movius Line remains speculative, whether it represents a real change in technology or a limitation of archaeology, but after 1 mya evidence not available to Movius indicates the prevalence of Acheulean. For example, the Acheulean site at Bose, China, is dated 0.803±3K mya.<ref>{{cite web | title=Bose, China | work=What Does It Mean to be Human? | publisher=Smithsonian National Museum of Natural History | url=http://humanorigins.si.edu/research/asian-research/bose-china}}</ref> The authors of this chronologically later East Asian Acheulean remain unknown, as does whether it evolved in the region or was brought in. | |||
| There is no named boundary line between Mode 1 and Mode 2 on the west; nevertheless, Mode 2 is equally late in Europe as it is in the Far East. The earliest comes from a rock shelter at Estrecho de Quípar in Spain, dated to greater than 0.9 mya. Teeth from an undetermined Hominan were found there also.<ref>{{cite journal | first=Rex | last=Dalton | title=Europe's oldest axes discovered | journal=Nature News | publisher=Nature | date=2 September 2009 | url=http://www.nature.com/news/2009/090902/full/news.2009.878.html}}</ref> The last Mode 2 in Southern Europe is from a deposit at Fontana Ranuccio near ] in Italy dated to 0.45 mya, which is generally linked to '']'', a "late variant of ''H. erectus''," a fragment of whose skull was found at Ceprano nearby, dated 0.46 mya.<ref>{{cite journal | journal=Earth and Planetary Science Letters | issue=286 | year=2009 | pages=255–268 | author=Giovanni Muttoni | coauthors=et al. | title=Pleistocene magnetochronology of early hominin sites at Ceprano and Fontana Ranuccio, Italy | url=http://www.rci.rutgers.edu/~dvk/dvk_REPRINTS/Muttoni+2009b.pdf}}</ref> | |||
| ==== Middle Palaeolithic ==== | |||
| {{main|Middle Palaeolithic}} | |||
| This period is best known as the era in Europe and the Near East during which the ]s lived (c. 300,000–28,000 years ago). Their technology is mainly the ] but Neanderthal physical characteristics have been found also in ambiguous association with the more recent ] archeological culture in Western Europe and several local industries like the Szeletian in Eastern Europe/Eurasia. There is no evidence for Neanderthals in Africa, Australia or the Americas. | |||
| Neanderthals nursed their elderly and practised ] burial indicating an organised society. The earliest evidence (]) of settlement in ] dates ] when modern humans likely crossed from Asia by island-hopping. Evidence for symbolic behavior such as body ornamentation and burial is ambiguous for the Middle Paleolithic and still subject to debate. The ] exhibit the earliest traces of human life in ], some of which are approximately 30,000 years old. | |||
| ==== Upper Palaeolithic ==== | |||
| {{main|Upper Palaeolithic}} | |||
| From 50,000 to 10,000 years ago in Europe, the Upper Paleolithic ends with the end of the Pleistocene and onset of the Holocene era (the end of the ]). Modern humans spread out further across the ] during the period known as the Upper Palaeolithic. The Upper Paleolithic is marked by a relatively rapid succession of often complex stone artefact technologies and a large increase in the creation of art and personal ornaments. During period between 35 and 10 kya evolved: from 38 to 30 kya ], 40–28 ], 28–22 ], 22–17 ], and 18–10 ]. All of these industries except the Châtelperronian are associated with anatomically modern humans. Authorship of the Châtelperronian is still the subject of much debate. | |||
| The Americas were colonised via the ] which was exposed during this period by lower sea levels. These people are called the ], and the earliest accepted dates are those of the ] sites, some 13,500 years ago. Globally, societies were ]s but evidence of regional identities begins to appear in the wide variety of stone tool types being developed to suit very different environments. | |||
| ==== Epipalaeolithic/Mesolithic ==== | |||
| :''Main articles: ], ]'' | |||
| The period starting from the end of the last ice age, 10,000 years ago, to around 6,000 years ago was characterized by rising sea levels and a need to adapt to a changing environment and find new food sources. The development of Mode 5 (]) tools began in response to these changes. They were derived from the previous Palaeolithic tools, hence the term Epipalaeolithic, or were intermediate between the Paleolithic and the Neolithic, hence the term ] (Middle Stone Age). The choice of a word depends on exact circumstances and the inclination of the archaeologists excavating the site. Microliths were used in the manufacture of more efficient composite tools, resulting in an intensification of hunting and fishing and with increasing social activity the development of more complex settlements, such as ]. Domestication of the ] as a hunting companion probably dates to this period. | |||
| The earliest known battle occurred during the Mesolithic period at a site in Egypt known as ]. | |||
| ==== Neolithic ==== | |||
| {{Main|Neolithic}} | |||
| ] temples, ]. Some of the world's oldest free-standing structures.]] | |||
| ], ]. ]'s most complete ] village]] | |||
| The ], New Stone Age, was approximately characterized by the adoption of ],the shift from food gathering to food producing in itself is one of the most revolutionary changes in human history so-called ], the development of ], polished stone tools and more complex, larger settlements such as ] and ]. Some of these features began in certain localities even earlier, in the transitional Mesolithic. The first Neolithic cultures started around 7000 BCE in the ] and spread concentrically to other areas of the world; however, the Near East was probably not the only nucleus of agriculture, the cultivation of ] in Meso-America and of ] in the Far East being others. | |||
| Due to the increased need to harvest and process plants, ground stone and polished stone artifacts became much more widespread, including tools for grinding, cutting, and chopping. ] located on ] island off ] is one of ]'s best examples of a Neolithic village. The community contains stone beds, shelves and even an indoor toilet linked to a stream. The first large-scale constructions were built, including settlement towers and walls, e.g., ] and ceremonial sites, e.g.: ]. The ] temples of Gozo in the Maltese archipelago are the oldest surviving free standing structures in the world, erected c. 3600-2500 BCE. The earliest evidence for established ] exists in the ] with newly settled people importing exotic goods over distances of many hundreds of miles. | |||
| These facts show that there were sufficient resources and co-operation to enable large groups to work on these projects. To what extent this was a basis for the development of elites and social hierarchies is a matter of on-going debate.<ref>{{Cite book | first=Ian | last=Kuijt | editor-first=Ian |editor-last=Kuijt | year=2000 | title=Life in Neolithic Farming Communities: Social Organization, Identity, and differentiation | contribution=Chapter 13: Near Eastern Neolithic Research: Directions and Trends | series=Fundamental Issues in Archaeology | page=317 | location=New York | publisher=Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers | ref=harv | postscript=<!-- Bot inserted parameter. Either remove it; or change its value to "." for the cite to end in a ".", as necessary. -->{{inconsistent citations}}}}</ref> Although some late Neolithic societies formed complex stratified chiefdoms similar to Polynesian societies such as the ]ans, based on the societies of modern tribesmen at an equivalent technological level, most Neolithic societies were relatively simple and ].<ref>{{Cite book |title=Evolutionary Origins of Morality: Cross-disciplinary Perspectives | editor-first=Leonard D. | editor-last=Katz |url= http://books.google.com/?id=inmTyPPdR5oC&pg=RA1-PA158&dq=Neolithic+egalitarianism | year=2000 | first=Christopher | last=Boehm | contribution=The Origin of Morality as Social Control | location=Thorverton | page=158 | publisher=Imprint Academic | series=Journal of Consciousness Studies Volume 7 | isbn=0719056128 |ref=harv |postscript=<!-- Bot inserted parameter. Either remove it; or change its value to "." for the cite to end in a ".", as necessary. -->{{inconsistent citations}}}}</ref> A comparison of art in the two ages leads some theorists to conclude that Neolithic cultures were noticeably more hierarchical than the ] cultures that preceded them.<ref>{{cite book | url=http://books.google.com/?id=3u6JNwMyMCEC&pg=PA422&lpg=PA422&dq=paleolithic+history+violence#PPA420,M1 | title=The Nature of Paleolithic Art | first=Russell Dale | last=Guthrie | pages=419–420 | location=Chicago | publisher=University of Chicago Press | year=2005 | isbn=9780226311265}}</ref> | |||
| ===Three-stage chronology=== | |||
| ====The Earlier or Early Stone Age (ESA)==== | |||
| {{main|Paleolithic|Lower Paleolithic}} | |||
| ] made of obsidian.]] | |||
| This period is not to be identified with "Old Stone Age", a translation of Paleolithic, nor with Paleolithic, nor with the "Earlier Stone Age" that originally meant what became the Paleolithic and Mesolithic. In the initial decades of its definition by the Pan-African Congress of Prehistory, it was parallel in Africa to the ] and ]. However, since then ] has shown that the Middle Stone Age is in fact contemporaneous with the ].<ref>{{cite encyclopedia | first=J. Desmond | last=Clark | authorlink=J. Desmond Clark | title=The Culture of the Middle Paleolithic/MIddle Stone Age | editor-first=J. Desmond | series=Volume | editor-last=Clark | encyclopedia=The Cambridge History of Africa | volume=I: From the Earliest Times to C. 500 BC | page=248 | location=Cambridge | publisher=Cambridge University Press | year=1982 | ref=harv}}</ref> The Early Stone Age therefore is contemporaneous with the ] and happens to include the same main technologies, ] and ], which produced Mode 1 and Mode 2 ]s respectively. A distinct regional term is warranted, however, by the location and chronology of the sites and the exact typology. | |||
| ====The Middle Stone Age (MSA)==== | |||
| {{main|Middle Stone Age}} | |||
| The Middle Stone Age was a period of ]n prehistory between Early Stone Age and Late Stone Age. It began around 300,000 years ago and ended around 50,000 years ago.<ref>McBrearty and Brooks 2000</ref> It is considered as an equivalent of European ].<ref></ref> It is associated with anatomically modern or almost modern '']''. Early physical evidence comes from Omo <ref>McDougall et al. 2005</ref> and Herto,<ref>White et al. 2003</ref> both in Ethiopia and dated respectively at c. 195 ka and at c. 160 ka. | |||
| ====The Later Stone Age (LSA)==== | |||
| {{main|Later Stone Age}} | |||
| The Later Stone Age (LSA, sometimes also called the '''Late Stone Age''') refers to a period in African prehistory. Its beginnings are roughly contemporaneous with the European Upper Paleolithic. It lasts until historical times and thus includes cultures corresponding to Mesolithic and Neolithic in other regions. | |||
| == Material culture == | |||
| === Tools === | |||
| ]s were made from a variety of stone. For example, ] and ] were shaped (or '']'') for use as cutting tools and ]s, while ] and ] were used for ] tools, such as ]s. ], ], ], ] (deer) and other materials were widely used, as well. During the most recent part of the period, ]s (such as ]) were used to make ]. ] was developed and certain animals were ]. | |||
| Some species of non-]s are able to use stone tools, such as the ], which breaks ] shells with them. ]s can both use and manufacture stone tools. This combination of abilities is more marked in ]s and men, but only men, or more generally ]s, depend on tool use for survival.<ref>{{harvnb|Barham|Mitchell|2008|p=74}}</ref> The key anatomical and behavioral features required for tool manufacture, which are possessed only by Hominans, are the larger thumb and the ability to hold by means of an assortment of grips.<ref>{{harvnb|Barham|Mitchell|2008|p=108}}</ref> | |||
| === Food and drink === | |||
| {{main|Paleolithic diet|Paleolithic#Diet and nutrition|l2=Paleolithic diet and nutrition}} | |||
| ] sources of the Palaeolithic ]s were wild plants and animals harvested from the ]. They liked animal ] meats, including the ]s, ]s and ]s. Large seeded ]s were part of the human diet long before the ], as is evident from archaeobotanical finds from the ] layers of ], in Israel.<ref name="doi10.1016/j.jas.2004.11.006">{{cite journal |author=Efraim Lev | coauthors=Mordechai E. Kislev; Ofer Bar-Yosef |title=Mousterian vegetal food in Kebara Cave, Mt. Carmel |journal=Journal of Archaeological Science |volume=32 |issue=3 |pages=475–484 |month=March | year=2005 |doi=10.1016/j.jas.2004.11.006 |ref=harv}}</ref> Moreover, recent evidence indicates that humans processed and consumed wild cereal grains as far back as 23,000 years ago in the ].<ref name="pmid15295598">{{cite journal |author=Dolores R. Piperno | coauthors=Ehud Weiss; Irene Holst; Dani Nadel |title=Processing of wild cereal grains in the Upper Palaeolithic revealed by starch grain analysis |journal=Nature |volume=430 |issue=7000 |pages=670–3 | date=August 5, 2004 |pmid=15295598 |doi=10.1038/nature02734 |url=http://anthropology.si.edu/archaeobio/Ohalo%20II%20Nature.pdf |ref=harv}}</ref> | |||
| Near the end of the ], 15,000 to 9,000 years ago, mass extinction of ] such as the ] occurred in ], ], ] and ]. This was the first ]. It possibly forced modification in the dietary habits of the humans of that age and with the emergence of ], plant-based foods also became a regular part of the diet. A number of factors have been suggested for the extinction: certainly over-hunting, but also deforestation and climate change.<ref>{{Cite book | editor-first=Samuel T. | editor-last=Turvey | first=Samuel T. |last=Turvey | title=Holocene Extinctions | contribution=Chapter 2: In the shadow of the megafauna: prehistoric mammal and bird extinctions across the Holocene | series=Oxford Biology | location=Oxford | publisher=Oxford University Press | year=2009 | pages=16–17 | ref=harv | postscript=<!-- Bot inserted parameter. Either remove it; or change its value to "." for the cite to end in a ".", as necessary. -->{{inconsistent citations}}}}</ref> The net effect was to fragment the vast ranges required by the large animals and extinguish them piecemeal in each fragment. | |||
| === Shelter and habitat === | |||
| ] in ], ]]] | |||
| Around 2 million years ago, '']'' is believed to have constructed the first man-made structure in ], consisting of simple arrangements of stones to hold branches of trees in position. A similar stone circular arrangement believed to be around 380 thousand years old was discovered at ], near ], ]. (Concerns about the dating have been raised, see ]). Several human habitats dating back to the Stone Age have been discovered around the globe, including: | |||
| * A tent-like structure inside a cave near the ], ], ]. | |||
| * A ] with a roof supported with timber, discovered in ], The ], dates to around 23,000 BCE. The walls were made of packed clay blocks and stones. | |||
| * Many huts made of ] bones were found in ] and ]. The people who made these huts were expert mammoth hunters. Examples have been found along the ] river valley of ], including near ], in ], ] and in southern ]. | |||
| * An animal hide tent dated to around 15000 to ], in the ], was discovered at Plateau Parain, ]. | |||
| * ]s, multichambered, and ]s, single-chambered, were ] with a huge stone slab stacked over other similarly large stone slabs; they have been discovered all across ] and ] and were built in the ] and the ]. | |||
| === Art === | |||
| ] is visible in the artifacts. ] is inferred from found instruments, while ] can be found on rocks of any kind. The latter are petroglyphs and rock paintings. The art may or may not have had a ] function. | |||
| ==== Petroglyphs ==== | |||
| {{main|Petroglyph}} | |||
| ]s appeared in the ]. A Petroglyph is an ] abstract or symbolic image engraved on natural stone by various methods, usually by prehistoric peoples. They were a dominant form of pre-writing symbols. Petroglyphs have been discovered in different parts of the world, including ] (]), ] (]), ] (], ]), and Europe (]). | |||
| ==== Rock paintings ==== | |||
| ], India, a ]]] | |||
| ] from the ] ceiling, one of the most famous paintings in the cave.]] | |||
| {{main|Cave painting}} | |||
| In paleolithic times, mostly animals were painted, in theory ones that were used as food or represented strength, such as the ] or large ] (as in the ]). Signs such as dots were sometimes drawn. Rare human representations include handprints and half-human/half-animal figures. The Cave of Chauvet in the ] '']'', France, contains the most important cave paintings of the paleolithic era, dating from about 31,000 BCE. The ] cave paintings in ] were done 14,000 to 12,000 BCE and show, among others, ]s. The hall of bulls in ], ], France, dates from about 15,000 to 10,000 BCE. | |||
| The meaning of many of these paintings remains unknown. They may have been used for seasonal rituals. The animals are accompanied by signs that suggest a possible magic use. Arrow-like symbols in Lascaux are sometimes interpreted as ] or ] use, but the evidence remains interpretive.<ref>{{cite book | first=Amir D. | last=Aczel | title=The Cave and the Cathedral: How a Real-Life Indiana Jones and a Research Scholar Decoded the Ancient Art of Man | location=Hoboken | publisher=John Wiley & Sons Inc. | pages=157–158 | year=2000 | unused_data=year-2000}}</ref> | |||
| Some scenes of the Mesolithic, however, can be typed and therefore, judging from their various modifications, are fairly clear. One of these is the battle scene between organized bands of archers. For example, "the marching Warriors," a rock painting at Cingle de la Mola, ] in Spain, dated to about 7,000–4,000 BCE, depicts about 50 bowmen in two groups marching or running in step toward each other, each man carrying a bow in one hand and a fistful of arrows in the other. A file of five men leads one band, one of whom is a figure with a "high crowned hat." In other scenes elsewhere, the men wear head-dresses and knee ornaments but otherwise fight nude. Some scenes depict the dead and wounded, bristling with arrows.<ref>{{cite book | pages=48–51 | title=Rock art of the Spanish Levant | first=Antonio Beltrán | last=Martínez | series=The Imprint of Man | location=Cambridge | publisher=Cambridge University Press | year=1982 | origyear=1979}}</ref> One is reminded of ], a Copper Age mummy revealed by an Alpine melting glacier, who collapsed from loss of blood due to an arrow wound in the back. | |||
| === Stone Age rituals and beliefs === | |||
| {{main|Paleolithic religion|Prehistoric religion|Mother goddess}} | |||
| Modern studies and the in-depth analysis of finds dating from the Stone Age indicate certain ]s and ]s of the people in those prehistoric times. It is now believed that activities of the Stone Age humans went beyond the immediate requirements of procuring food, body coverings, and shelters. Specific ]s relating to death and ] were practiced, though certainly differing in style and execution between cultures. {{Citation needed|date=November 2008}} | |||
| == Modern popular culture and the Stone Age == | |||
| ]. The oil painting is dated 1882-1885.]] | |||
| The image of the ] is commonly associated with the Stone Age. For example, the 2003 ] showing the evolution of humans through the Stone Age was called '']'', although only the last programme showed humans living in caves. While the idea that human beings and ]s coexisted is sometimes portrayed in popular culture in cartoons, films and computer games, such as '']'', '']'' and '']'', the notion of hominids and non-avian dinosaurs co-existing is not supported by any scientific evidence. | |||
| Other depictions of the Stone Age include the best-selling '']'' series of books by ], which are set in the ] and are loosely based on archaeological and ] findings. The 1981 ] '']'' by ] tells the story of a group of neanderthals searching for their lost fire. A twenty first century series, "Chronicles of Ancient Darkness" by Michelle Paver tells of two New Stone Age children fighting to fulfill a prophecy and save their Clans from the evil Soul Eaters. | |||
| A reference to the Stone Age was made by then ], ] General ], when in 1965, he made the statement concerning the North Vietnamese, during the ]; "They've got to draw in their horns and stop their aggression, or ''we're going to bomb them back into the stone age.''" The gist of that statement implies a fierce aerial bombardment intended to utterly destroy the nation's ], forcing its survivors to revert to primitive technology in order to survive. The same concerns over a nuclear attack impelled the construction of bomb shelters, underground headquarters and caches for food and water during the 1950s. | |||
| == See also == | |||
| {{Div col|colwidth=30em|small=yes}} | |||
| * ] | |||
| * ] | |||
| * ] | |||
| * ] | |||
| * '']'' | |||
| * ] | |||
| {{div col end}} | |||
| == Notes == | |||
| {{Reflist|colwidth=30em}} | |||
| ==References== | |||
| {{Div col|colwidth=30em|small=yes}} | |||
| * {{cite book | ref=harv | first=Lawrence | last=Barham | first2=Peter | last2=Mitchell | title=The First Africans: African Archaeology from the Earliest Toolmakers to Most Recent Foragers | year=2008 | location=Oxford | publisher=Oxford University Press | series=Cambridge World Archaeology}} | |||
| * {{cite book | ref=harv | first=Miriam | last=Belmaker | title=Community Structure through Time: 'Ubeidiya, a Lower Pleistocene Site as a Case Study (Thesis) | month=March | year=2006 | publisher=Paleoanthropology Society | url=http://www.paleoanthro.org/dissertations/Miriam%20Belmaker.pdf}} | |||
| * {{cite book | ref=harv | first=J. Desmond | last=Clark | title=The Prehistory of Africa | series=Ancient People and Places, Volume 72 | location=New York; Washington | publisher=Praeger Publishers | year=1970}} | |||
| * {{cite book | ref=harv | last=Deacon | first=Hilary John | first2=Janette | last2=Deacon | year=1999 | title=Human beginnings in South Africa: uncovering the secrets of the Stone Age | location=Walnut Creek, Calif. | publisher=Altamira Press}} | |||
| * {{Cite book | ref=harv |editor-last=Camps i Calbet |editor-first=Marta | editor2-first=Parth R. | editor2-last=Chauhan |year=2009 | title=Sourcebook of paleolithic transitions: methods, theories, and interpretations | location=New York | publisher=Springer |first=Michael J. | last=Rogers | first2=Sileshi | last2=Semaw | contribution=From Nothing to Something: The Appearance and Context of the Earliest Archaeological Record | postscript=<!-- Bot inserted parameter. Either remove it; or change its value to "." for the cite to end in a ".", as necessary. -->{{inconsistent citations}}}}. | |||
| * {{Cite book| ref=harv |last=Schick|first=Kathy D.|coauthors=Nicholas Toth|title=Making Silent Stones Speak: Human Evolution and the Dawn of Technology|publisher=Simon & Schuster|location=New York|year=1993|isbn=0-671-69371-9}} | |||
| * {{Cite book | ref=harv | first=John J. | last=Shea | contribution=Stone Age Visiting Cards Revisited: a Strategic Perspective on the Lithic Technology of Early Hominin Dispersal | pages=47–64 | editor-first=John G. | editor-last=Fleagle | editor2-first=John J. | editor2-last=Shea | editor3-first=Frederick E. | editor3-last=Grine | editor4-first=Andrea L. | editor4-last=Boden | editor5-first=Richard E, | editor5-last=Leakey | title=Out of Africa I: the First Hominin Colonization of Eurasia | year=2010 | location=Dordrecht; Heidelberg; London; New York | publisher=Springer | postscript=<!-- Bot inserted parameter. Either remove it; or change its value to "." for the cite to end in a ".", as necessary. -->{{inconsistent citations}}}} | |||
| {{div col end}} | |||
| ==Further reading== | |||
| *{{Cite book|last=Scarre|first=Christopher (ed.)|year=1988|title=Past Worlds: The Times Atlas of Archaeology|publisher=Times Books|location=London|isbn=0-7230-0306-8}} | |||
| == External links == | |||
| {{Commons category}} | |||
| * {{cite web | title=The Stone Age | url=http://history-world.org/stone_age.htm | first=Robert A. | last=Giusepi | year=2000 | publisher=History World International | accessdate=22 February 2011}} | |||
| * {{cite web | title=Stone Age Hand-axes | url=http://www.aerobiologicalengineering.com/wxk116/StoneAge/Handaxes/ | first=D.R. | last=Kowalski | publisher=AerobiologicalEngineering.com | accessdate=22 February 2011}} | |||
| * {{cite web | title=Stone Age Habitats |url=http://www.aerobiologicalengineering.com/wxk116/StoneAge/Habitats/ | first=D.R. | last=Kowalski | publisher=AerobiologicalEngineering.com | accessdate=22 February 2011}} | |||
| * {{cite web | title=PanAfrican Archaeological Association | url=http://www.panafprehistory.org/index.php/ | accessdate=28 February 2011}} | |||
| * {{cite web | title=Society of Africanist Archaeologists | url=http://www.safa.rice.edu/ | accessdate=3 March 2011}} | |||
| * {{cite web | title=The ASA | url=http://www.theasa.org/ | publisher=Association of Social Anthropologists of the UK and Commonwealth}} | |||
| <br> | |||
| {{Three-age system of Archaeology}} | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| {{Link GA|de}} | |||
| {{Link GA|es}} | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
Revision as of 19:23, 24 August 2011
hello