Slashdot Mirror


Discovery of Early Human Tools Hint at Earlier Start

SternisheFan writes in with a story about early humans passing down their tool making skills. "Sophisticated bladelets suggest that humans passed on their technological skill down the generations. A haul of stone blades from a cave in South Africa suggests that early humans were already masters of complex technology more than 70,000 years ago . The tiny blades — no more than about 3 centimeters long on average — were probably used as tips for throwable spears, or as spiky additions to club-like weapons, says Curtis Marean, an archaeologist at Arizona State University in Tempe who led the team that found the bladelets. Twenty-seven such blades, called microliths by archaeologists, were found in layers of sand and soil dating as far back as 71,000 years ago and representing a time-span of about 11,000 years, showing how long humans were manufacturing the blades. Clever crafters The find lends credence to the idea that early humans were capable of passing on their clever ideas to the next generation of artisans, creating complex technologies that endured over time. John Shea, a palaeoanthropologist at Stony Brook University in New York, says that it also suggests that 'previous hypotheses that 'early' Homo sapiens differed from 'modern' ones in these respects are probably wrong'."

30 of 109 comments (clear)

  1. Clever crafters by richlv · · Score: 2

    cute editing work right there :)

    --
    Rich
    1. Re:Clever crafters by Taco+Cowboy · · Score: 3, Interesting

      The find lends credence to the idea that early humans were capable of passing on their clever ideas to the next generation

      Why is that so surprising ?
       
      Many other types of animal regularly pass on "knowledges" from one generation to the next - humans are not the only one capable of doing that.
       
      I've seen little sparrows squatting on sand so to trap fine grain sand with their down feather and then carrying the sand back to their nests.
       

      --
      Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !
    2. Re:Clever crafters by SternisheFan · · Score: 3, Informative

      Story submitter here, yes, I did do a copy/paste submission (using my smartphone, not exactly easy to do!), and after submitting this story noticed this too. I should've picked up on it. Please accept this alternate story link as a token ... http://news.discovery.com/human/early-human-tools-121107.html

    3. Re:Clever crafters by ColdWetDog · · Score: 4, Funny

      Fool! Smartphones and tablets are for CONSUMPTION only! No document creation or other complex intellectual tasks.

      You kids. In my day, we didn't even TRY to write anything until we had stabilized the CRTs and blown out all of the insects from the CPU (they liked the warmth).

      God, it all went downhill when Jobs allowed cut and paste on the iPhone. What was he thinking!

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
  2. Communication or imitation? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    More food for thought on the evolution of language.

    1. Re:Communication or imitation? by jandersen · · Score: 2

      I think we have to learn to think of language and communication in a broader sense. Strictly speaking, communication is just the transfer of information, and language is whichever means of communication you are capable of using. Hence 'body language' - cats, dogs and if you go wild, even plants, communicate and use language; that's why we can make sense of them.

      OK, so I'm stretching the concept just to be provocative, but I think it is probably wrong to assume that modern, abstract language suddenly appeared X years ago along with a big brain. Language was there long before big brains.

    2. Re:Communication or imitation? by CRCulver · · Score: 2

      Strictly speaking, communication is just the transfer of information, and language is whichever means of communication you are capable of using.

      That's not "strictly speaking" at all, because when linguists use the term "language", it refers to human language, which is distinct from e.g. animal codes of communication. Only human language is capable of things like the ambiguity and contradiction in Chomsky's famous example "Colourless green ideas sleep furiously." Human language did not exist before large brains because it is deeply bound up in the functioning (warts and all) of large brains.

      For anyone interested in the topic of how human language arose and how it differs from other means of communication, I'd highly recommend Guy Deutscher's The Unfolding of Language , probably the best popular introduction to this topic.

  3. Mmmmnnn... by Black+Parrot · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Wikipedia has an interesting article on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Behavioral_modernity , which indicates that there are two schools of thought on this, which I'll call the gradualists and suddenists. The suddenists think Something Wonderful Happened ~50,000 years ago, so this discovery will make them have to move their date earlier. However, the gradualists think there are signs of modern behavior much earlier, so this news won't make them rethink anything. (Most likely they'll just say ITYS.)

    IMO the suddenists are following the same kind of thinking that made people think Neanderthals were dumb brutes, that we're a lot more different than animals than we really are, etc. ISTM that there has always been some kind of ... prejudice? conceit? ... that makes a lot of people assume that we're a lot more special than we actually are.

    --
    Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
    1. Re:Mmmmnnn... by SternisheFan · · Score: 4, Informative
      Quoting from your Wikipedia link...

      "Behavioral modernity is a term used in anthropology, archeology and sociology to refer to a set of traits that distinguish present day humans and their recent ancestors from both other living primates and other extinct hominid lineages. It is the point at which Homo sapiens began to demonstrate an ability to use complex symbolic thought and express cultural creativity. These developments are often thought to be associated with the origin of language. [1] There are two main theories regarding when modern human behavior emerged. [2] One theory holds that behavioral modernity occurred as a sudden event some 50 kya (50,000 years ago) in prehistory, possibly as a result of a major genetic mutation or as a result of a biological reorganization of the brain that led to the emergence of modern human natural languages. [3] Proponents of this theory refer to this event as the Great Leap Forward [4] or the Upper Paleolithic Revolution. The second theory holds that there was never any single technological or cognitive revolution. Proponents of this view argue that modern human behavior is the result of the gradual accumulation of knowledge, skills and culture occurring over hundreds of thousands of years of human evolution. [5] Proponents of this view include Stephen Oppenheimer in his book Out of Eden, and John Skoyles and Dorion Sagan in their book Up from Dragons: The evolution of human intelligence."

    2. Re:Mmmmnnn... by antifoidulus · · Score: 4, Funny

      The suddenists think Something Wonderful Happened ~50,000 years ago,

      I think they are off by an order of magnitude, extant evidence shows that brewing alcohol only started about 10,000 years ago.

    3. Re:Mmmmnnn... by Black+Parrot · · Score: 3, Funny

      The suddenists think Something Wonderful Happened ~50,000 years ago,

      I think they are off by an order of magnitude, extant evidence shows that brewing alcohol only started about 10,000 years ago.

      And the first Slashdotter got laid a mere three weeks ago!

      --
      Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
    4. Re:Mmmmnnn... by artor3 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Well that's a very dismissive attitude. You're not arguing with creationists here, so drop the condescension.

      The fact is that there is a (relatively) sudden appearance of things we associate with modern thought (e.g. decoration, advanced tools, explosive population and migration) around 50 kya. I say relatively, because we're still talking about a span of tens of thousands of years. Humanity had been nearly exterminated around 70 kya, so it's entirely reasonable to think that those who survived made major evolutionary leaps -- or, put a better way, those who survived did so because of those leaps.

      That humans were making tools even before then is not "news". For example, we're pretty sure that fire was first mastered not by Homo sapiens, but by Homo erectus, hundreds of thousands of years before anatomically modern humans even existed. Homo erectus lasted for longer than modern humans have, and at the rate we're going, they'll probably end up having lived for longer on Earth than our species. But they never developed a civilization like ours, despite their million years of existence. It seems evident from that that a species can have advanced toolmaking (e.g. fire) without reaching the level of modern human intelligence.

    5. Re:Mmmmnnn... by qbitslayer · · Score: 2

      I don't think the suddenists have flint spearheads in mind when they speak of something wonderful happening some 50,000 years ago. They're more than likely thinking of the kind of sudden explosion of knowledge that gives rise to horse-driven chariots and temple building civilizations. But I could be wrong.

    6. Re:Mmmmnnn... by ozmanjusri · · Score: 2

      a lot of people assume that we're a lot more special than we actually are.

      That's an interesting thought, particularly in the light of the other tool-maker in the news.

      "The use and fashioning of objects as tools has rarely been seen in the animal kingdom. Alice Auersperg and Birgit Szabo, both cognitive biologists at the University of Vienna, have for the first time observed this skill in a Goffin’s Cockatoo: It makes and uses wooden tools to retrieve toys and food."

      http://scienceblog.com/57536/clever-cockatoo-with-skilled-craftmanship/

      That suggest the ability to visualise and create tools isn't the hard bit. Communicating and retaining the knowledge across generations is where the real challenge lies.

      --
      "I've got more toys than Teruhisa Kitahara."
    7. Re:Mmmmnnn... by chrismcb · · Score: 2

      The suddenists think Something Wonderful Happened ~50,000 years ago,

      Isn't there another school of thought, that Something Wonderful Happened about 6,000 years ago?

    8. Re:Mmmmnnn... by MysteriousPreacher · · Score: 2

      In the case of Yahweh it's more traditionally turtles all the way down. This complicated universe of ours required a creator, but its far more complex creator has always existed. Thus sayeth Hovind during prison visiting hours.

      --
      -- Using the preview button since 2005
  4. Re:You lost your election again to the two party s by Black+Parrot · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I wonder if Teh Management would consider truncating AC posts to a shorter "Read the rest of this comment" than the above.

    Like maybe, 10 lines. If they're actually saying something relevant and interesting (which they often do), it would still be easy enough to click the link.

    --
    Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
  5. Really well organized by symbolset · · Score: 3, Funny

    They only lost one bladelet every 400 years. Maybe they could help me find my car keys.

    --
    Help stamp out iliturcy.
  6. Re:Common Sense? by iluvcapra · · Score: 2

    I mean what about 'standing on the shoulders of giants' concept.

    Strictly speaking, early hominids learned toolmaking from the Colonials and Gaius Baltar, so you have a point.

    (He used to be a farmer, you know. Changed his Aerilon accent to hide his past, but... )

    --
    Don't blame me, I voted for Baltar.
  7. The future version by thisisauniqueid · · Score: 2

    A few thousand years from now, archaeologists will make the same observations about collections of quaint crude programming languages (the ones we use today) that they find in "digital caves"...

  8. Time perspective by RedBear · · Score: 5, Interesting

    More and more in the last decade or so I have seen things that lead me to believe that humans have been basically modern humans for approximately 200,000 years. That's how far back our ancestors have been traced through our mitochondrial DNA. I have no doubt that in coming decades there will be new discoveries that will keep pushing the dates of "modern" human behavior further and further back.

    This is a fascinating concept to me because it means the human race and basic forms of human civilization have been around for an incredibly long time. Basic concepts like languages, writing systems, trading, counting, money, philosophy, astronomy, martial arts and many other things have probably been invented, forgotten and reinvented hundreds of times by individual geniuses over the course of those 200,000 years. All the sci-fi stories I've ever read where it's seen as some amazing thing that an alien race has been around for more than a hundred thousand years... Well, the human race proves that's really not that amazing. Or, conversely, that the human race is equally as amazing as those "ancient" alien races. In fact, we could be considered one of those "ancient" alien races, from the perspective of an alien race.

    When I was younger, the concept was that just a few thousand years ago we were retarded cave men, and then suddenly civilization happened. Nowadays what I picture is more like endless millennia of fairly intelligent people living like Native Americans in many different ways, with pockets of even more modern cultures that rose and fell through the ages, until finally a few thousand years ago a few things like writing and math were (re)discovered and remembered and propagated to enough other humans that modern civilization exploded into being and had enough momentum and population to finally stick around, where it hadn't been able to "stick" before. I think it was basically luck that things didn't develop either ten thousand years earlier or ten thousand years later. All the basic elements seem to have been there for a looooooong time.

    Just my pet theory. I am not an anthropologist, obviously, just fascinated by the things that may have happened during early modern human history, which seems to extend much further back than what I was taught in grade school.

    1. Re:Time perspective by Coisiche · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Yes, I have often made the point about oil to friends making this claim because it seems unlikely that the civilizations could reach, or as some claim exceed, current technology levels without using fossil fuel.

      Those speculative civilizations also don't seem to have used nuclear fission for energy. Not just because there's no evidence of uranium sources being depleted before we discovered it, but it doesn't seem that the by-products from it have ever found as "naturally occurring".

    2. Re:Time perspective by Intrepid+imaginaut · · Score: 2

      The main evidence against this idea is that there's still oil in the ground, and no indication it was deliberately placed there for us. It would seem that a previous culture would need energy as badly as we do, and oil didn't take us that much technology (initially) to get at and start consuming.

      You're assuming that oil and petroleum use are neccessary steps for civilisation to arise. Who's to say that a hypothetical civilisation wouldn't have skipped the few decades of gasoline and just gone straight to wind farms plus electric engines? By comparison the effort involved in finding, drilling, pumping, refining, transporting through giant pipes or container ships, storing, pumping again, then setting oil on fire in elaborate internal combustion engines would seem pretty stupid to an outside observer. Just hook up some windmills and wires, done.

    3. Re:Time perspective by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      When I was younger, the concept was that just a few thousand years ago we were retarded cave men, and then suddenly civilization happened. Nowadays what I picture is more like endless millennia of fairly intelligent people living like Native Americans in many different ways until finally a few thousand years ago a few things were (re)discovered and remembered and propagated to enough other humans that modern civilization exploded into being and had enough momentum and population to finally stick around, where it hadn't been able to "stick" before.

      I always thought the main jump to civilization we know today was agriculture. This allows sedentary people which in turn makes time to cultivate land: Not just the farmland but also the farms and any other buildings. This type of culture is obviously easier to find and spot because it's bigger.
      Cultural items for a roaming people would have to be far smaller and probably consist of more organic materials as stone and metallic items would just be to heavy to carry around.

      I think some decades back we may have believed that people suddenly became intelligent at the same time they became sedentary because that was the only archaeological stuff we were finding back then.

  9. Re:Complex Technology? by voidphoenix · · Score: 2

    Blades are a form of wedge, one of the six simple machines. Miniaturization of technology is generally considered an advancement. In this case, "complex technology" is a comparison between these miniature blades and an unshaped rock or stick. The topic is early (i.e. Paleolithic) humans, right? So yes, for that time-frame, based on what was previously known about their technology, these small blades are rather advanced. The "masters" bit comes in when you consider that they were able to consistently use this technology over a period of over 10k years.

  10. But stone tools are much older by Zorpheus · · Score: 4, Interesting

    According to wikipedia the oldest stone tools are 2.6 to 1.7 million years old: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oldowan
    So what is so special about this?

  11. Weapons, Military Advantage, War? by foma84 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    After reading TFA there is one thing that leaves me mighty confused.
    The only hypothesis made for these artifacts is that they were weapons or parts of bigger weapons, and that they led to a military advantage over neanderthals.
    TFA doesn't even consider any other possibile use for the bladelets, like being tools for skinning, carving or sculpting. Even the requirement of having developed complex language is secondary to the craftsmanship necessary for the bladelets.

    I've seen it is common among some anthropologists to consider the history of humanity in the same terms as the most recent history (last 6.000 years): in terms of war and contending parties. Is there anyone informed enough (more than me) about this topic that can tell if it is actually a trait of human history or an ideological bias?
    Thanks in advance.

  12. passed on their technological skill by Hognoxious · · Score: 3, Funny

    Sophisticated bladelets suggest that humans passed on their technological skill down the generations.

    Og: Ug look happy.
    Ug: Ug is happy!
    Og: Why Ug happy?
    Ug: Ug finish pay off student loan!

    --
    Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
  13. Re:Yes I did by drinkypoo · · Score: 3, Funny

    It's nice that you call that horse a woman.

    Wait, does one hoofbeat mean yes, or no?

    --
    "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  14. Writing was invented just twice. by 140Mandak262Jamuna · · Score: 2

    Basic concepts like languages, writing systems, trading, counting, money, philosophy, astronomy, martial arts and many other things have probably been invented, forgotten and reinvented hundreds of times by individual geniuses over the course of those 200,000 years

    Trading is really old, so it was never forgotten. It evolved just once, in East Africa before we got out of Africa. It was never forgotten

    Spoken language is something we evolved into. We have the language instinct at birth. It is not something to be taught to children. They naturally try to communicate via spoken language. They know objects have names, and actions have names, and they can be strung together to express concrete events (cup-broke!) or express intent (want-juice) . So laungages were never fogotten.

    Writing was invented only twice. Looking at the effort we need to undertake to teach children to write, it is clear, it is not instinctive. It was invented. There are only two instances of independent invention of writing. The linear-b alphabet found in the Mediterranean island and the pictographic glyphs of the Incas. All the writing systems of the Old World were either derived from linear-b or inspired by it. Some minor record keeping aids probably existed long back, notches on a stick or knots on a vine or shells strung up. But it probably did not blossom into full fledged writing based on symbols standing in for phonemes or words.

    --
    sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact