I've recently republished my website
http://www.palaeoart.co.uk
It now includes a section on falsification.
I would be grateful for any comments, positive or negative.
Regards
Richard.
Palaeoart integrated in early lithics
Moderators: MichelleH, Minimalist, JPeters
-
Manystones
- Posts: 260
- Joined: Thu Oct 26, 2006 5:21 am
- Location: Watford, England
- Contact:
-
Minimalist
- Forum Moderator
- Posts: 16015
- Joined: Mon Sep 26, 2005 1:09 pm
- Location: Arizona
Certainly coherent and easy to navigate.
I'm the wrong one to ask about this stuff though. I look at something like this "Face" shot....
and it looks exactly like one of Charlie's scraping tools to me. But I'm not a great art lover so don't go by me.
I'm the wrong one to ask about this stuff though. I look at something like this "Face" shot....
and it looks exactly like one of Charlie's scraping tools to me. But I'm not a great art lover so don't go by me.
Something is wrong here. War, disease, death, destruction, hunger, filth, poverty, torture, crime, corruption, and the Ice Capades. Something is definitely wrong. This is not good work. If this is the best God can do, I am not impressed.
-- George Carlin
-- George Carlin
Nice website Richard, and yes, quite coherent. Now, to the issue of whether or not I can see any human art in these lithics. First I have to look for any sign of human agency in the first place, and I'm no expert at that by any means.
But in some of them I certainly do. When I see that I wonder what it was used for. I usually find that there is some utility to these things. In the case of the "bird" for instance, the human agency is obvious. To me, it would serve as an effective awl, to make holes in leather and hides.
And I see the artwork. When that is present, as I believe it to be with the bird, it is evidence of higher human intelligence, and also of a high "standard of living". I think that when a man has time and energy to create artwork it is a sign that he is not living "on the edge".
The question then is to the age of the artifact.
But in some of them I certainly do. When I see that I wonder what it was used for. I usually find that there is some utility to these things. In the case of the "bird" for instance, the human agency is obvious. To me, it would serve as an effective awl, to make holes in leather and hides.
And I see the artwork. When that is present, as I believe it to be with the bird, it is evidence of higher human intelligence, and also of a high "standard of living". I think that when a man has time and energy to create artwork it is a sign that he is not living "on the edge".
The question then is to the age of the artifact.
-
Manystones
- Posts: 260
- Joined: Thu Oct 26, 2006 5:21 am
- Location: Watford, England
- Contact:
Thanks Min,
It's a shame not to get the negative feedback too....(currently 1 polling incoherent)
I'd like to know where I am going wrong and what I can do to improve it.
Richard.
It's a shame not to get the negative feedback too....(currently 1 polling incoherent)
I'd like to know where I am going wrong and what I can do to improve it.
Richard.
Richard
www.palaeoart.co.uk
www.palaeoart.co.uk
paleo art
Richard,
I have visited your site. I am also interested in these types of expressions from the past and what purpose they sure beyound the actual use of the stone. Charlie, Allen, and yourself are in grey areas, and may be for some time as the wheels of progress grind stopped every two or three days. ha ha thats my attempt at humor.
I know much of what i find has some use in pottery making. Polishing stones and such. I have never attempted to try and do more with what i find other than photographs. I give you guys alot of credit. reading other peoples ideas and theories is so helpful thanks for putting it out here. Try not to be discouraged. Your site is great. All anyone can do is keep trying, keep guessing, it is new territory.
im glad the board is up again. wishing you good luck manystones. annieo
I have visited your site. I am also interested in these types of expressions from the past and what purpose they sure beyound the actual use of the stone. Charlie, Allen, and yourself are in grey areas, and may be for some time as the wheels of progress grind stopped every two or three days. ha ha thats my attempt at humor.
I know much of what i find has some use in pottery making. Polishing stones and such. I have never attempted to try and do more with what i find other than photographs. I give you guys alot of credit. reading other peoples ideas and theories is so helpful thanks for putting it out here. Try not to be discouraged. Your site is great. All anyone can do is keep trying, keep guessing, it is new territory.
im glad the board is up again. wishing you good luck manystones. annieo
Hi Manystones et al...
Your website is very well done, and the huge amount of effort that went into it is quite evident. I certainly need to restructure my own and provide a concise and cogent statement of the hypotheses with arguments pro and con. Mine started in 2003 with a simple presentation of finds, and quickly/randomly expanded into something rather unwieldy as the material revealed itself. For the moment, I'm faced with keeping promises to people in the USA and in Europe that have contributed some fine material, along with posting more of my own stuff like the nonlocal flints that have appeared by the spring in the past year (not to mention the everyday responsibilities we all have).
Minimalist makes a good point, though, in that not everything that is evident (or probable) to you and me looking at the actual stones is readily visible to someone looking at a photo. I know I need to purge and replace some of the pieces I show to get things across effectively.
I might suggest not presenting relatively arcane terminology like "visual ambiguity" and "pareidolia" right up front without a definition. (I know I am not without sin in this regard...)
From Beagle's comments, there are a couple observations I would like to make. I don't think it was a matter of specifically allocating time to "artwork" as we understand this thousands of years later, but of routinely incorporating simple/crude zoomorphic/anthropomorphic imagery into much or maybe most of the at least potentially utilitarian stones that they worked - likely the expression of a primal animistic belief system. I think I have pontificated on this ad nauseam in at least one thread in this forum, citing the persistence of this practice even into modern times among the Inuit/Yupik ("Eskimos"), whose iconography clearly reflects thematically that in the very old stones. (See http://www.daysknob.com/Inuit.htm .) Specifically in North America, the vast presence of such (unrecognized) iconographic lithic material suggests to me not so much people with a lot of leisure time (although probably more than we have been led to believe) as just a lot more people here probably over a longer period of time than we have been taught to imagine.
Annieo11's comment about the wheels of progress grinding to a stop from time to time is quite pertinent, of course. The old archaeological paradigms are so ingrained and defended by the "establishment" with a vested interest in them that even physical evidence and logical debate will not prevail for quite some time. But we must not give up. After all, Boucher de Perthes, who a century and a half ago persisted and proved with the help of geologists that Europe was inhabited by humans (or protohumans) in the Pleistocene, saw in addition to the hand axes, etc. exactly the iconographic stones (his pierres figures) that Manystones, I, and others are seeing. His "figure stones" were and remained rejected, and since his time others (including some professionals like Prof. Walther Matthes) have been down the same road. Many people, on an individual level, have since been ridiculed and/or intellectually intimidated into abandoning their pursuit of this line of investigation. But the internet now allows us to quickly compare and correlate our finds and observations, and to present them to the public at large (what the establishment sneeringly refers to as "the court of public opinion") - and we common mortals are not as dumb or naive as the academics like to believe.
Anyway, Manystones, you're doing a great job. And you've gotten verification of artificiality by a couple professional geologists already, so please keep working on this aspect of the project.
Regards, Alan
http://www.daysknob.com
Your website is very well done, and the huge amount of effort that went into it is quite evident. I certainly need to restructure my own and provide a concise and cogent statement of the hypotheses with arguments pro and con. Mine started in 2003 with a simple presentation of finds, and quickly/randomly expanded into something rather unwieldy as the material revealed itself. For the moment, I'm faced with keeping promises to people in the USA and in Europe that have contributed some fine material, along with posting more of my own stuff like the nonlocal flints that have appeared by the spring in the past year (not to mention the everyday responsibilities we all have).
Minimalist makes a good point, though, in that not everything that is evident (or probable) to you and me looking at the actual stones is readily visible to someone looking at a photo. I know I need to purge and replace some of the pieces I show to get things across effectively.
I might suggest not presenting relatively arcane terminology like "visual ambiguity" and "pareidolia" right up front without a definition. (I know I am not without sin in this regard...)
From Beagle's comments, there are a couple observations I would like to make. I don't think it was a matter of specifically allocating time to "artwork" as we understand this thousands of years later, but of routinely incorporating simple/crude zoomorphic/anthropomorphic imagery into much or maybe most of the at least potentially utilitarian stones that they worked - likely the expression of a primal animistic belief system. I think I have pontificated on this ad nauseam in at least one thread in this forum, citing the persistence of this practice even into modern times among the Inuit/Yupik ("Eskimos"), whose iconography clearly reflects thematically that in the very old stones. (See http://www.daysknob.com/Inuit.htm .) Specifically in North America, the vast presence of such (unrecognized) iconographic lithic material suggests to me not so much people with a lot of leisure time (although probably more than we have been led to believe) as just a lot more people here probably over a longer period of time than we have been taught to imagine.
Annieo11's comment about the wheels of progress grinding to a stop from time to time is quite pertinent, of course. The old archaeological paradigms are so ingrained and defended by the "establishment" with a vested interest in them that even physical evidence and logical debate will not prevail for quite some time. But we must not give up. After all, Boucher de Perthes, who a century and a half ago persisted and proved with the help of geologists that Europe was inhabited by humans (or protohumans) in the Pleistocene, saw in addition to the hand axes, etc. exactly the iconographic stones (his pierres figures) that Manystones, I, and others are seeing. His "figure stones" were and remained rejected, and since his time others (including some professionals like Prof. Walther Matthes) have been down the same road. Many people, on an individual level, have since been ridiculed and/or intellectually intimidated into abandoning their pursuit of this line of investigation. But the internet now allows us to quickly compare and correlate our finds and observations, and to present them to the public at large (what the establishment sneeringly refers to as "the court of public opinion") - and we common mortals are not as dumb or naive as the academics like to believe.
Anyway, Manystones, you're doing a great job. And you've gotten verification of artificiality by a couple professional geologists already, so please keep working on this aspect of the project.
Regards, Alan
http://www.daysknob.com
-
Minimalist
- Forum Moderator
- Posts: 16015
- Joined: Mon Sep 26, 2005 1:09 pm
- Location: Arizona
Minimalist makes a good point, though, in that not everything that is evident (or probable) to you and me looking at the actual stones is readily visible to someone looking at a photo. I know I need to purge and replace some of the pieces I show to get things across effectively.
Frankly, Alan, I could look at the Mona Lisa and not see the face so I'm really not the one to judge by.
Something is wrong here. War, disease, death, destruction, hunger, filth, poverty, torture, crime, corruption, and the Ice Capades. Something is definitely wrong. This is not good work. If this is the best God can do, I am not impressed.
-- George Carlin
-- George Carlin
-
Minimalist
- Forum Moderator
- Posts: 16015
- Joined: Mon Sep 26, 2005 1:09 pm
- Location: Arizona
Minimalist makes a good point, though, in that not everything that is evident (or probable) to you and me looking at the actual stones is readily visible to someone looking at a photo. I know I need to purge and replace some of the pieces I show to get things across effectively.
Frankly, Alan, I could look at the Mona Lisa and not see the face so I'm really not the one to judge by.
Something is wrong here. War, disease, death, destruction, hunger, filth, poverty, torture, crime, corruption, and the Ice Capades. Something is definitely wrong. This is not good work. If this is the best God can do, I am not impressed.
-- George Carlin
-- George Carlin
-
archer95446
- Posts: 5
- Joined: Thu Jul 12, 2007 4:39 pm
cool website
This is really cool. I am just an ammuture backyard wannabe archealogist, but this is exactly like the "stuff" that is all over my front and back yards and the dry creek bed right behind my house. I really need to get some pics up of what I've found. It's really amazing to see what these ancient people created, the thought that went into it, and I am in awe of the intelligence that such an ancient human mind held.
-
Minimalist
- Forum Moderator
- Posts: 16015
- Joined: Mon Sep 26, 2005 1:09 pm
- Location: Arizona
Lots of amateurs here so welcome aboard and don't be shy about chipping in.
Something is wrong here. War, disease, death, destruction, hunger, filth, poverty, torture, crime, corruption, and the Ice Capades. Something is definitely wrong. This is not good work. If this is the best God can do, I am not impressed.
-- George Carlin
-- George Carlin
-
Sam Salmon
- Posts: 349
- Joined: Sun Mar 12, 2006 9:30 am
- Location: Vancouver-by-the-Sea
I put up the negative but am now afflicted with a virulent influenza of the most painful type-cannot do much more that type few words then return to the couch.Manystones wrote:Thanks Min,
It's a shame not to get the negative feedback too....(currently 1 polling incoherent)
I'd like to know where I am going wrong and what I can do to improve it.
Richard.
-
Forum Monk
- Posts: 1999
- Joined: Wed Dec 27, 2006 5:37 pm
- Location: USA
-
Minimalist
- Forum Moderator
- Posts: 16015
- Joined: Mon Sep 26, 2005 1:09 pm
- Location: Arizona
