Archaeologica.org

Archeologists digging in the Netherlands have unearthed flint and bone fragments from 200,000 years ago that have remnants of red ochre on them, indicating that Neanderthals were using the material much earlier than was previously thought. The research team has published their findings in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

See: http://www.physorg.com/news/2012-01-tea ... thals.html

It appears that red ochre had many uses during ancient times and ancient just got more ancient with ochre being discovered on flint and bone fragments that was not native to those discoveries ... in other words, they were obtaining their ochre somewhere else ... ... you mean they actually traveled to different locations and communicated?

Red ochre (hematite) for pigment, insect repellant, food preservation, medication, hide tanning and possibly glue. Sounds more and more like a multi-use item (i.e. duct tape for the Pleistocene).

200,00 YBP?
Holland.
No local source?
Ergo trade.
What did they have to trade?

Dried fish, sea shells, Whale bone, Ivory, possibly salt, dyes.

Roy.

No need to suggest trade there was a source of hematite in the Ardennes about 20 miles to the south .


George

OK
But that brings up the question of how big an area would one group cover?
Would 20 miles take you through another’s territory?

Either way, 20 miles is a hike.

Either someone went on a long, purposeful walk.
(That is a two day march for trained military men on an improved surface.)
Or there was some trading going on.

I was gonna raise the same point kb 'cos I see it this way. Red Ochre would appear to be a valuable resource, therefore who ever occupied the site would logically claim 'ownership' of some kind. This brings us back to trade.
We've got it, you want it, how much you prepared to pay?

Roy.

therefore who ever occupied the site would logically claim 'ownership' of some kind.

Assuming that they had the same concept of land ownership as we do. As I recall at the Topper site in South Carolina Al Goodyear does not think the site was inhabited but rather various groups came by to pick up usable stone to make tools.

Our ancestors may not have been as violent as we have become.

That's why I put ownership in inverted commas Min. Trade did eventually occur in Europe, thus it had to have a begining, and trade can only work where there are shortages somewhere and a surplus elsewhere.
If the Ochre of site X is found in site A either it was collected from X or delivered to A, collection means that someone had to take time off from their normal activities, which is an 'economic' loss, so trade eventually becomes automatic once you need, or require, something that you do not have otherwise available to you.

Roy.

I do not think “sharing” is an inborn trait.
Or ever has been.
It is something that has needed to be taught to young ones, of many types, through out the ages.

The “Yeah it is in our backyard. Go help yourself.“
Is much less likely than
“Yeah we have some. What is it worth to you?”

Yep! Giving something then seeing the recipient gain from it will engender trade.

Roy.

I still envision the initiation of commerce as two groups bumping into each other and exchanging curiosities.


That, or one group bashing in the other group's brains and stealing their stuff!

I can see the first working Min but the second more likely to start a war!

Roy.

Kill the men, kidnap the women. War over.

(Call it the Joshua solution!)

kbs2244 wrote:OK
But that brings up the question of how big an area would one group cover?
Would 20 miles take you through another’s territory?

Either way, 20 miles is a hike.

Either someone went on a long, purposeful walk.
(That is a two day march for trained military men on an improved surface.)
Or there was some trading going on.

No need for much of a walk either ,(although 20 miles wouldn't have been much for regular walkers in an area that would be as good as it gets ) most of the journey could be done on the River Meuse which conveniently links both sites just requiring a walk of about 4 miles .
George

Oh boy,

I was expecting mention of how long it would take a Neanderthal to walk 20 miles on their short, bowed, legs.

But now we have them in boats, and even going upstream?