Emergence of higher thought 3.0-0.2 Ma _B . _P

Abstract

The oldest known probable manuport is the dark reddish jasperite pebble from a layer with Australopithecus at Makapansgat, Transvaal ( ca . 3 Ma). There are indications at two earliest Acheulian sites in east Africa that Homo erectus ol ca . 1.5 Ma B . P .was interested in red mineral pigment. At Terra Amata,near Nice, 75 shaped pieces of red ochre were found with the earliest European Acheulian industry ( ca . 0.3 Ma B . P .). This occurrence indicates that to an Acheulian society red mineral pigment had great symbolic value. Several flint and chert artefacts from Acheulian sites in Britain are described on account of embedded fossils, evidently regarded as symbolic, with a visual pattern stimulating to an aesthetic impulse in the minds of men who selected the material in preference to the more readily available plain flint. Most remarkable are two humanly struck flakes of coral-bearing chert found in the Swanscombe Gravels (0.2Ma B . P. This starry stone, it is inferred, was a manuport carried about 120 miles ( ca . 193 km) from an outcrop of Jurassic (Portlandian) rock at Tisbury in Wiltshire.

Concepts of Time in Quaternary Prehistory

“…Analysis of Acheulean hand-axe assemblages made 300,000 years ago suggests that their makers were fully capable of operational thought (117), which might imply that changes in general level of intelligence were not a factor in later developments . There is also evidence for an aesthetic and symbolic sense at about this time or earlier among Homo erectus populations (55,85). However, the time structures implied by the flaking of a hand-axe are not necessarily the same as those implied by human burial or representational art .…”

The 'Australopithecine' Cobble from Makapansgat, South Africa

“…Its red colour alone would be striking in almost any environment but more particularly so in combination with its distinctive shape. Oakley (1981) emphasised the role of red colour for hominids. But it does not seem likely that it would have been picked up and carried for some considerable distance just for these properties and by far the most conspicuous aspects of this object are its menacing 'eyes' as well as several other, very prominent markings, all of which underline the iconographic properties and make it resemble a face.…”

“…Upon re-examining it in the early 1970s he noticed that, depending on how it is held and lit, several 'faces' can be seen, resembling australopithecines rather than humans (Dart 1974). The object has been briefly discussed by Oakley (1981) and featured in two British television programs, and was thus presented as the oldest apparent 'art find' known to us. Balm examined it in 1996 and reported its history since its excavation (Bahn 1997).…”

“…Balm examined it in 1996 and reported its history since its excavation (Bahn 1997). Nevertheless, for 72 years the cobble was not analysed in detail (Dart 1959;Oakley 1981;Bednarik 1996).…”

Pleistocene Paleoart of Europe

“…However, examination of the object shows that the grooves are of a purely geological nature. Another hand-axe, this one from the Lower Paleolithic of West Tofts, Norfolk, Britain (Oakley 1981) [137], bears a distinctive fossil cast of a shell on one face. It has been suggested that the tool was intentionally knapped around the prominent fossil, in which case it would not necessarily be symbolic, but would be exogrammatic.…”