Archaeologica.org

.
.

From an astounding 800,000 ago, from Africa, watercraft are reported in the journal Science: Ann Gibbons, Ancient Island Tools Suggest Homo erectus Was a Seafarer, 279:5357, pp. 1635-1637, Issue of Science, 13 Mar 1998. The archeological record preserves a history of the dug-out canoe - at the beginning, just a log without tapered ends - i.e. sort-of a square-ended canoe. Archeologists give us dates starting around 6000 BC for specimen of this water craft found buried at sites in Drenthe in the Netherlands, Korea, England, Japan - and, of course, Africa, reported by scientists to be its home of the boat and boating. This web page shows some of the most ancient such vessels known to man. Many canoes from 6000 BC have been excavated.


http://www.beforebc.de/Related.Subjects ... 1d-01.html


__________________________

While dug-out canoes were humankinds first ships, the sewed-plank ships began appearing in North Africa and Egypt near 6500 BC and soon became worldwide - likely with African ship-builders and crews in the earliest millennium.


http://www.beforebc.de/Related.Subjects ... 11-04.html

___________________________


Were the Phoenicians and Canaanites the ancestors of the Moors and yet Capsa and African as well? And, were the ships of the Spanish Armada of Moorish origin?


http://www.beforebc.de/all_europe/700_m ... 00-05.html

.
.

PaulMarcW wrote:From an astounding 800,000 ago, from Africa watercraft [...] the dug-out canoe [...] dates starting around 6000 BC

So in 794,000 years boating had advanced from what to dug-out canoes?

Whatever that first steerable floating thing was (a fallen tree?), if it took 794,000 years to 'advance' that technology to the stage of square-ended dug-out canoes, I have to say I'm singularly unimpressed...

If it worked to their satisfaction what 'advance' was required. The desire for ownership of the latest computer controlled tooth brush only exists in some, not all of us.

Roy.

Digit wrote:If it worked to their satisfaction what 'advance' was required.

What makes you think "it worked to their satisfaction"?

The fact by your statement that they didn't change the design! I would also point out that the suggestion of a blunt ended canoe should be viewed with considerable suspicion, as the act of felling/cutting a tree with a stone implement auotomatically produces a point! Both ends!

Roy.

Digit wrote:The fact by your statement that they didn't change the design!

That was PaulMarc's statement, if you recall. Not mine.

I would also point out that the suggestion of a blunt ended canoe should be viewed with considerable suspicion, as the act of felling/cutting a tree with a stone implement auotomatically produces a point! Both ends!

Pointed or square, that, according to PaulMarc, happened only after 794,000 years. The subject here is what happened during those preceding 794,000 years. Apparently nothing. Again: according to PaulMarc. And considering that 99% of people drown when they sail a rolling tree trunk to the next island I think you may assume there definitely was a need for progress, advancement of the technology. Yet there wasn't any IRL. For 794,000 years!
According to PaulMarc, of course.

Which is why PaulMarc's hypothesis that there were no sailing/boating technology advancements seems highly unlikely to me.
Unless there wasn't a need to advance it. For instance because they could walk to the next island and didn't need boating/sailing!

Actually all the OP implies is that earliest recovered example is from some 6000 yrs ago. Nothing more.
To suggest that those recovered examples were the first produced is like finding a bullet in Flanders and dating firearms from the first world war!

Roy.

Digit wrote:To suggest that those recovered examples were the first produced is like finding a bullet in Flanders and dating firearms from the first world war!

If you don't find any that are older you have no grounds for other assumptions.

However, if 6,000 years ago the state of boat building was square-ended dug-out canoes, then the evolution of boating must have gone into super high gear from that point onwards. Consider the sophistication of Chefren's planked afterlife boats of 4,500 years ago, found next to the pyramids. A measly 1,500 years later!
A very unlikely scenario.

A very unlikely scenario.

Exactly, thus denying this.

If you don't find any that are older you have no grounds for other assumptions.

So there was no development, they sprang fully developed at the stage they were discovederd at?
Does that sound sensible to you?

Roy.

Rokcet Scientist wrote:

Digit wrote:To suggest that those recovered examples were the first produced is like finding a bullet in Flanders and dating firearms from the first world war!

If you don't find any that are older you have no grounds for other assumptions.

The likelihood is that there were older examples some lost forever and others yet to be found .
Simply , what is the chances that any find is oldest example ? Remember taphonomic logic ?
George

Since Bednarik's work about HE's seafaring capabilities ( c. 800,000 BC coincidentally ) I submit that any group of humans who found themselves on a sea coast, lake or decent sized river would quickly develop some sort of navigational capacity as a survival technique. In order to be a "boat" all any water craft has to do is float and carry people and/or cargo across the surface of the water. There are a finite number of means to attain that goal.

Minimalist wrote:In order to be a "boat" all any water craft has to do is float and carry people and/or cargo across the surface of the water.

I disagree. In order to be a "boat" it doesn't just have to float and carry people/cargo. It has to be steerable too, assuming propulsion was by current or wind, as otherwise it would have been useless.

Min's definition implied steering.

Roy.

Poles, ropes, paddles, oars, bare hands......

But you forget one thing Min, as we haven't found any ropes. oars or paddles they hadn't been invented according to RS's views.
Just as the earliest bows were found without arrows, so quite what the bows were for I can only wonder!

Roy.