• Choose a category
• All
• Classic-Fiction

But here we run into a problem. There are many Middle and Early Pleistocene sites at which scientists have found stone tools but no hominid bones. The artifacts at these sites, mostly of a type called Acheulian, are nevertheless attributed to Homo erectus. But from a strictly objective point of view, in the absence of hominid fossils, the Acheulian artifacts could just as well be attributed to Homo sapiens sapiens. This is true regardless of the level of sophistication of the tools, since anatomically modern humans are known to make and use tools of the crudest sort.

Let us now review some cases demonstrating the difficulties one encounters in determining who made artifacts found at a site. In Section 5.4.3, we considered Acheulian tools from Timlin, New York. Mainstream authorities would surely attribute these to anatomically modern humans. The same is true the Acheuliantype tool from at Black’s Fork River, Wyoming, U.S.A. (Section 4.8). Likewise, it should be possible to attribute European Acheulian tools to Homo sapiens sapiens at sites with no hominid skeletal remains.

In Chapter 3, we discussed the Alabama pebble tools from the U.S.A., which are similar to the crude Oldowan tools of Africa (Section 3.8.5). The pebble tools at Olduvai Gorge are said to be the work of Homo habilis and are considered to be close to 2 million years old. Mainstream authorities, if they recognized the Alabama tools at all, would say they were not more than 12,000 years old and would attribute them to Homo sapiens sapiens.

We have also discussed the Late Pleistocene site at Monte Verde, Chile, where scientists found Oldowan-type tools hafted to wooden handles, along with other cultural remains typical of modern humans (Section 3.8.6). The preservation of wood in such circumstances is rare. It is therefore possible that the tools could have been found without the wooden handles and other perishable artifacts indicating a high level of culture. By analogy, we should be open to the possibility that at other sites where Oldowan tools are found, perishable artifacts typical of humans with a high degree of culture have been lost. This may be true even for Early Pleistocene sites. Normally, Oldowan tools, if found alone in an Early Pleistocene context, would not be attributed to anatomically modern humans. But the example of Monte Verde demonstrates that for sites where Oldowan tools alone are discovered it is possible that a variegated Homo sapiens sapiens culture was originally present but was not entirely preserved.

But even when signs of higher culture are present, scientists with strongly held preconceived ideas often fail to imagine that beings on the level of Homo sapiens sapiens might have been responsible for them. This is true for the Middle Pleistocene site of Terra Amata in southern France. Here, according to the discoverer, Henry de Lumley (1969, p. 42), campsites were established by bands of hominids 300,000 years ago. An account of the Terra Amata finds in a Time-Life book (The Emergence of Man) gave a date of 400,000 years.

At the ancient seashore site, de Lumley found oval patterns of post holes and stone circles indicating that the hominids erected temporary shelters and built fires. Also found were bone tools. Among them was one apparently used as an awl, perhaps to sew skins. Impressions found in the old land surface at the site were said to demonstrate that the hominids slept or sat on hides. Stone implements were also found, including an object described as a projectile point, made from volcanic rock obtained from the Esterel region, 30 miles away.

Significantly, no hominid fossils were found at the Terra Amata site in France. De Lumley (1969, p. 45) did, however, report “the imprint of a right foot, 9.5 inches long, preserved in the sand of a dune.” The print was described as “human” in the Time-Life book. It was also said that the foot of the Terra Amata hominid was “arched to support his whole weight” and “had lost all