P. 1
Heizer

Heizer

|Views: 46|Likes:
Published by Anth5334

More info:

Categories:Types, School Work
Published by: Anth5334 on Nov 20, 2010
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less

11/21/2010

pdf

text

original

2

132

II
I

First Clear Evidence of Ancient

Man in North America

133

Despite a great deal of theorizing (which goes back to the lime of Columbus) over the question oj how old man in North America was (Wilmsen 1965), it was not unti11926 that a discovery was made which established once and for ali the fact that man had been present in the New World at a time when animals of now extinct species were living. The announcement of that discovery is presented below. Since this historic event oj nearly a half century ago, an imposing collection oj information on ancient man in the New World has been made (Sellards /952; Wormington 1957; Willey 1966, chap. 2). AI this time there is no acceptable evidence (though (here are numerous claims) that man was present in North America before 10,000 to 11,000 E.C. (Haynes 1965; Graham and Heizer 1967).

r
I

r

THE FIRST CLEAR EVIDENCE OF ANCIENT MAN IN NORTH AMERICA'
J. D, Figgins
. ~hen we analyze the technical opposition to the belief that man has inhabitej America over an enormous period of time we find it is not only restricted to an indi:idual minority, but it also appears to be traceable to the results of .a too circumscribed viewpoint, _ a failure to appreciate properly all th~ ~vldence, and a seeming unwillingness to accept the conclusions of authontIes engaged in related branches of investigation. It is a fact, of course: that .the nature of the material evidence upon which opinions a~e .based .IS an lmportant factor, and when such evidence is not abundant, It IS obvIOUS. that students cannot successfully restrict their studies if they would aVOid the dangers that arise through a lack of continuity in one or more threads of evidence. . This appears to be very well illustrated by individuals learned in phy. slc.al ant~ropology, comparative craniology and racial relationships. The chief deOlals of man's a t' ". . ..' n IqUlty m Ameflca appear to have their oflgm JD those Sources of investigation. Such criticism would doubtless have weight a.nd value were .skeletal evidence abundant. But such evidence, representa. tl.ve of t.he perlO~S ant~dating that which is regarded as "modern," or smce Pleistocene times, IS exceedingly meager. Indeed, it is far too scant
·The Antiquity of Man in NOrlh America, by J. D. Figgins. No.3, 229-239,1927. Excerpt here from pp. 229-234. Natural History, Vol. 27,

(

r ..
(

I

to make possible intelligent comparisons and safely arr!ve at definite conclusions. Therefore, to be of value, it is essential that ~t.be supple~e~ted by those branches of the sciences that are capable of fixing ~eologlC time periods- the sole means of bridging the weaknesses that .oc~ur in t.h~ thread of evidence represented by skeletal remains .. Wit~ou.t this aid.' .0pInlOns are not only venturesome, but distinctly misleading, I~ given pubhclt~. . Readers of the discussions relative to the anuquny of man In Ameflc.a must frequently wonder because of the antipathy for the acceptance of eVIdence of that character, and often they may have inq.uired "W~~ should we not expect to find such evidence, since there are nelth~r CO,~dltlon.s nor facts that interfere in the slightest w.ith such. an expectation? ?bVIOUSI~ then denials of the antiquity of man 10 America, without convmcmg yroo that' we could not expect to find such evidence, are pure~y su~posltlons. However the purpose of the present paper is not a discussion ?f the " 0 relative merits' of arguments previous Iy a d va need '. but a presentation d r new evidence of man's antiquity in A~e~ica. As th~ wnter ?as not ma ~ a special study of this subject, his oprruons regarding the Importance 0 the evidence would be valueless, and for that rea~on ~e expresse~ none He merely views it in the light of substantiating earlier fmds. of a like ad~ "" ISsimilar nature and as pomnng t h e way I00 ther and more Important . .'. task IS the recor di o f th e facts as he knows them. M' h Il covenes HIs mg In '1923 Me. Nelson J. Vaughan, a resi~ent of Colo~ado, ~~s ~n County Texas in a letter to the writer, descnbed a deposit of bo h "U the bank" of Lone Wolf Creek, near his home. pon requ est '. Mr . Vaug dan f m of Natural History or and eforwarded examples to the Co Iora d 0 M useu . bi T d p arts of an exunct locality for rson, termination. These proved to be f OSSIize th the following season, 1924, Me. H. D. Boyes was sent to e

d

r
\

!
i

I,

[
r
r
!

the purpose of making excavations. . . ( d i d and elsewhere After the removal of the overlying formation stu alaeontology described by Me. Harold J. Coo.k, honorary .cur.ator ~ ~rtions of th~ Colorado Museum of Natural History) and fmdlO g °t tP emove them . . . d ed most expe dlen 0 r skeletal remams associated, It was eem. til th fossils were in sections. This was accomplished by workm~ dow~ ~n I I ethus forming exposed, cutting channels through the deposit .at m ervads," burlap and ' " h . t n bemg encase 10 'blocks" of considerable Size, t ese m ur., ced and when a block plaster of Paris. A heavy crate was t?en mtrodu 'Then with the use was firmly fixed in the latter, undercuttmg t?ok ~Ia:~d turned on edge for of tackle, the blocks were released from their be I k" over the bottoms h . t'x and p an 109 t e purpose of removlOg the excess ma n, I lete skeleton of an of the crates. During these operations, the near YI~omp 'Is lefl side This nl " "Itdandymgo. . adult bison was uncovered, qUite artlcu a e ". . d k P as descnbed above. was dIvided mto sections an ta en u d f the under side of " b " g remove rom When the excess matnx was em . I few dorsals and their Ih f" I " " g the cervlca s, a , e Irst block (the one con amm h d (the term arrowattached ribs, and the forelimbs), a complete arrow ea

1\

134

MAN'S

DISCOVER

Y OF HIS PAST

Firs! Clear Evidence of Ancient

Man in North America

135

i

Fig. 18. The bison bed at Folsom

,

N

. . ew Mexico, during excavations

of 1926.

head is used in a broad sense . . head) was discovered ivi b ' Since th~ artifact may have been a spearin contact with the I ,yt"g Actween the fifth and sixth cervicals and nearly a cr. s the matrix . d of cemented sands g 1 was very hard, being compose ' rave s, and clays and .. o f h arnmer and chisel th ,necessItating the constant use main fragments and nu e arrowhead was detached and broken into two of these parts were recuomerodussmall slivers before it was discovered. Most vere and have s· b r~storation. In removing the sec' mee. ~en assembled without other nbs, a second arrowhead non containing the dorsal vertebrae and its presence was noted b ~a\~ncovered and likewise was detached before figured here. Accounts' hUt IS example later disappeared and cannot be pied was possibly in th' °hwever, suggest that the position which it occue t ora x b '. ?f the last block resulted' th f: ~t It IS not so recorded. The removal . rmme dilately beneath the I In f e mdmg of a poruon of a third arrowhea d ft .. th a t IS, In removing the rna" emur m ctrcum sta nr-ee ! i . e . f' umstances Identical with the first; nx rom the un d er sr e of the block. id Independent of th 1 . e . . t Oleh first, two artifacu ost arrowhead ' w hiic h .. descnbed as very similar IS 'I' were bi n f rom beneath an articulated take snrzed skeleton of an e ti and fosrecognized the full impoXtlnct rson .. That Mr. Boyes seems not to have . h·. r ance and Sl T In IS permilting the loss f h gru rcance of these finds is suggested or otherwise-and the fa 0 h. e seeo.nd example-whether through theft th e~: The first intimationct theat he did no t rna k e an Immediate report 0f fl t wri " e a visitor to the Museum h h Iter had of their discovery came through ,w 0 ad been present when the first arrowhead

was uncovered. Replies to inquiries and later verbal details by Mr. Boyes verified and enlarged upon this account in all particulars. Deeming it of greatest importance that the age of this deposit be determined, the writer requested Mr. Harold 1. Cook to make a detailed investigation, particularly in relation to the geology and association of other fossil species .... As critical studies of the artifacts found associated with the bison remains near Colorado, Texas must be left to the archaeologist, but brief detailed mention of them will be made here. There are two or three private collections of arrowheads that were picked up' on the surface in the vicinity of Lone Wolf Creek, all of which have been examined by Mr. Cook and Mr. Boyes. None contained examples approaching in similarity, either in form or workmanship, those found with the bison skeleton. The latter are of grayish flint, quite thin, and are devoid of evidence of notching, which is distinctly opposed to the forms found on the surface in that locality. Equally distinctive is their superiority of workmanship, which, I am told, also applied to the example that was lost. While there seems to be no doubt that these artifacts represent a cultural stage quite distinct, as compared with that revealed in the arrowheads found on the surface, it is not the writer's intention to discuss such questions ... During the summer of 1925, Messrs. Fred J. Howarth and Carl Schwachheim of Raton, New Mexico, informed the writer of a quantity of bones exposed in the bank of the Cimarron River, near the town of Folsom, Union County, New Mexico. Later those gentlemen forwarded e~amples for examination, which proved them to be parts of an extinct bison and a large deerlike member of the Cervidae. Accompanied by Mssrs. Howarth and Schwachheim, Mr. Cook and the writer visited the locality in April, 1926, and after a study of the deposti, made arrangements with Mr. Schwachheim for the removal of the overlying formation, consisting of some six to eight feet of very tough, hard clays. In June, the writer sent Mr. Frank M. Figgins to supervise the removal of the bones, in which work he was aided by Mr. Schwachheim. Not the least of the writer's interest in this deposit was the possibility that additional evidence of man's antiquity in America might be uncovered, and with that prospect in view, he gave explicit instruction that constant attention be paid to such discoveriesnot with as much expectation of Success, as in the belief that opportunities of that nature should not be ne~lected. It was therefore something in the nature of an anticipated surprise when sueh a find was made. In this case, it was of the greater portion of an arrowhead, similar in its general form to those found .at Colorado, Texas, but decidedly more tapering at the point, and ?f quite superior workmanship. Unfortunately, this artifact had also been dlslodged from the matrix before it was discovered-something the writer was anxious to avoid. However it was directly associated with the remains of an extinct bison, and greater caution was urged in the work of excavating.

136

'fA

.

DISCOVERY

OF HIS PAST

First Clear Evidence of Ancient

Man in North America

137

Not until nearly the close of the season was additional evidence uncovered, thfs proving to be a second arrowhead almost identical with the first in form, and, like the first, having the proximal end missing. The material from which it was fashioned is distinctive, being a very pale gray ground, through which run narrow, diagonal streaks of red. This artifact, too, had been dislodged before its presence was suspected. but at the Spot from which it came, the tool struck a hard substance, which, upon being ex. posed, proved to be a wedge-shaped fragment of Ilim, approximately one. quarter of an inch in width by three quarters of an inch in length, lying in a fixed position, adjacent to a bison rib. This was removed without being disturbed, in the form of a small block and in addition to the flint and rib in close contact, there are also in the' block rwo toe hones and an atlas. ~pon its arrival at the laboratory, immediate attention was given to cleaning the fragment of flint, which proved to be of the same material as that of the larger portion of arrowhead, and suggested that it might be part of the missing proximal end. When a test was made, a perfect contact resulted. The perfection of this contact, together with the peculiar

i

superiority in workmanship is traceable to individual preference and ski,lI the writer does not venture an opinion, He does, however, make compansons with flints found on the surface, in the region about Folsom and Raton New Mexico, and in this connection it is of interest to note that the latter are unlike such surface artifacts from the vicinity of .Co,lorad~, Texas,-being usually very small and evidencing far greater skill In their manufacture. The writer has examined a large part of the Carl Schwachheim collection of flints, from northern New Mexico, and ~r. Schw~chheim verifies his conclusions that it contains nothing resembhng the flints found in association with the bison remains near Folsom. , Until the studies now in progress are completed, the ge~loglcal age of the Folsom bison will not be known. That it is of an exunct race there is no question. , We have, then, in the Folsom arrowheads, the third ',nstance, of a ~ery similar type of artifact being found immediately associated ~,th extmct bison, in circumstances which l~ad geologists and palaeontologists t* c1ude that they belong to the Pleistocene age. , ' .

**

Fig 19 H

,

,

.m pomr from the Fohom sue, Nc:,.,'\lC:IliKo.

'

markings and col f h hibi or 0 t e material from which the artifact was fashioned, pro I Its any conclusIOn h d h same artifact F" ) II ot er than that they are parts of one an t e . rg. here] is a very thi n'I ustrates the F a ISam arn 'facts. o. I Irep reduced . a quality of kin tnt ,of a dark reddish-brown color, and represent1n,g wor manshlp the writ h II d 2 IS also very thin and hil " fl er as rarely seen equa e. o. , I displayed in No I w hi e It IS not qUI equa I'm fi ne meness 0 f c hirp ping " as may be, and probably is, due to a difference III the material fro~ ~s h Compared with I~het ey, are fashioned. amples are distinctly artifacts from Colorado, Texas, the Folsom eXd" more Pcmted , but whether this difference in form an

wt/

64

Radiocarbon Doting

65

. The ,.ecentfy developed Tad~ocorbon or Carbon-l technique oj archaeologlcal.dollng was largely conceived and perfected by Willard F Libbv 'h wa~gll'en (~e Nobel A~I'ard 1960 in recognition oj this achi;"eme:/ ~h: in ;:;IIl.le~hhere IS the Jirs~substantive report oj accomplished a~cienl d!~ IS. ere/ore of considerable historical interest In /947 L "bb' an tve aSSOC/Gles published the following statement (The ·Ph . I R' ~ ~ Vol 72 p 936) ,h· h ysrca evrew, pOI~n{ia', ~se oif·'"doIC ~IQY beb,oken as Ihe first precise realization of the a roacnve car on for dati g "S· carbon originates in the t In purposes. mce the radiolife cycle and all I" . op layers of the atmosphere, ,hereby entering the svmg matter and sine Jr " is negligible we ar I d ' e I e neutron mtensuy at sea level living bodie; will c:as: I,~ the ~red~~ion thas Ihe intake oj radiocarbon by since death will be mea; e~/ /e, and IhOl .'he period of lime elapsed of the specimen with Ih;;aofelil'f IreCI com~aTlson of Ihe specific activity we can assume that the '. n~ ~/aller In general. In other words, if statu over the lime tnt ocuvny of living matter has remained con. erva elng meas d . wilt have 5 3 counts oer mt ure . a speClmrn jOOQ years buried . per mmule per g if bo nal 10.5. By inl'oking . . . ram 0 car n ralher Ihan the origi· ISOtOPiC enr/chme I' h j" L_ • samples as old as 40 000 nilS ou U UC" possible 10 measure further enrichmenl, thoug%ea;s. Of cours~ Ihe limil could be eXlended by In most cases. It is I dl e effort requlfed would probably be prohibilil'e p anne 10 measu - d on these conclusions. " re certain OIed samples as a check

e

z:

?

zt:

For further reading on the Ih . . method see Libby (1955 1956 eory and apphcallon of Ihe radiocarbon Willis (1963). Lists oj ;ad. . b1961. 1963). Ai/ken (/96/. Chap. 6). and the tille Radiocarbon S IlDcar on dales are now published annually under 1 1 upp 3 . , 959; Vol. 2 1960 u I ement bY Ih e A mer/can Journal oj Science (Vol. FtInt and W. S.'.Deevey,'0. 1961·et ) Jr.' ,. seq. under Ihe edilorship of R. F.

!

I

RADIOCARBON w. F. Libby, E.

DATING

I I

C. Anderson, and J. R. Arnold

matlOn by R d· carbon" b W . a locarbon Co March '4 i949' F. Libby, E. C. Anderson n~t: World·Wide Auay of Natural Radiothe edito~of PP' 227-228. Reprinted ban ].~. ~mold. Scinace, Vol. 109, No. 2827 lence. Y pennlUIOQ of Profeuor 'V. F. Libby and

Some time a 0 h dissol d g t e occurrence f d· ve Ocean carbonate 0 ra locarbon in living matter and as a result of researches Wasleported (see references 1 2 4 5 on p. 60) oo~w. h •• , . "Age Detenn' . e mel ane gas {rom the City of BaItI<

(

more. The postulated origin (see reference 5)--eosmic ray neutrons reacting with atmospheric nitrogen to give radiocarbon at high altitudesdearly predicted that all material in the life cycle and all material exchangeable with atmospheric carbon dioxide, such as carbonate dissolved in sea water. would be radioactive. The long half-life of radiocarbon, 5,720 -+- 47 years (see reference 3), further seemed to ensure that the mixing processes would have ample time to distribute the radiocarbon uniformly throughout the world. Since completing the first tests using isotopic enrichment with Dr. Grosse and his associates, an improvement in counting technique has enabled us to investigate materials without enrichment to about 5-10% error. The samples are counted in the form of elementary carbon in a screen wall counter (see reference 6). Six grams of carbon are spread uniformly over an area of 300 ems. to give an "infinitely thick" layer; about 5.9% of the disintegrations register in this arrangement. The background of the counter has been reduced from ISO cpm (when shielded by 2 inches of lead) to 10 cpm by means of anticoincidence shielding and the addition of a 4 inch iron liner inside the lead shield. The technique will be described in detail elsewhere. A world-wide assay has been completed. and the uniformity apparently established. The data are presented in Table 1. The numbers quoted are intended to be absolute disintegration ~ates per gram of carbon. It musl be said, however, that our absolute caltbra~ion of the counters used may have as much as 10% error. ''''e hope to Improve this in tbe near future. Since all the samples were measured wi~h the same technique, the relative comparison does not. involve this pOInt. With the exception of the Antarctic seal sample, whIch has been run only once to date, the uniformity is well within experimental error. Since one expects the arctic samples if anything to be high, because the net..llron intensity is lowest at the equator and rises towards the pole~ (see reference 9), and since the deviation of the seal oil from the mean IS not much larger than the error of the measurement, it is believed that further measurements will show this sample to be normal also. The result on the sea shell sample is interesting. It has been shown (see refere~ces 7 an.d 8) that en occurs in higher abundance in carbonates than III organIc material. The result we find for radiocarbon in sea shells versus wood 13 and other organic material is in line with this earlier finding f?r C . It is true, however, that the difference may be somewhat larger III our case than that predicted from the earlier results, though the e~or of our measurement is so large at present as to well overlap the predIcted value.
AGE DETERMINATION

S}:

Having established the world-wide uniformity ~f the rad~ocarbon assay at the present time, it seems a logical assumpuon that thiS would

66

MA
TABLE I

'S 01 COVER Y OF HIS PAST

Radiocarbon DOling
TABLE 2 Age Determination on the Ancient Egyptian Samples

67

World-Wide Assa) of Radiocarbon
Sample

A""f
(cpm/gm

Samples carbon)
Zoser Zoser Sneferu

or

Specific gravity found (cpm/g"1ll of carbon) 7.H8 7.36 6.95 7.42 6.26 7.04 7.15

Baltimore sewage methane (I. 2)
Ironwood Irom Marshall I.5landi

105:::!::: 1.0

± O.H
± ± ± ± ±
0.53 0.40 0.38 OAI 0.20 + 0.15

Ironwood from Marshall Island! Elmwood. Chicago Campos Elmwood, Chicago Campus
Pine, 1\11. Wilson, New Mexico (1O,000' altitude) Bolivian wood Bolivian wood Ceylon wood Tierra del Fuego wood Panamanian wood Palestinian wood Swedish wood New South Wales wood North African wood

11.5 :!: 0.6 12.6 ± 1.0 12.7 ± 0.8 11.9 ± 0.1 12.5 ± 0.6 1'5 ± 0.6 II.!::!:: 0.8

Sncfcru
Sneferu

weigtued a\·erage (bolh samples)
Expected value

12.5:0.7 12.8 ± 0.5 1'.0 ± 05 12.4 ± 0.• 12.6 ± 0.5
15.3 ± 0." 11.9 ± 0.1 125 -+ 0.2

The data on both samples were averaged since the error in ages almost overlaps the difference. and the weighting was taken according to the error quoted in each run. The errors quoted here and in Table I abo are standard deviations determined strictly from the statistical counting

"[

Weighted average
Sea shell, Florida west coast Sea shell, Florida west coast

SAMPLES

OF KNOWN

AGE

Sea shell, Florida west coast Weighted average
Seal oil, Antarctic

I,.!:± 0.5 14.9 ± 0_1
14.6::t: 05 14.1 ± 0..5

10_4

-+-

0.7

i
~13

+

TREE RING (""

'.0)

have been true in ancient t i A . of radiocarbon. 5.720 -+- 4- rmes. ssumlllg this. and using the half-life specific activity t b - I years (see reference 2), one can calculate the since the removat of :nexpeCted after any gi~'en time inl_e~\'a_1 eJ.ap~d the life cycle F I" Y carb~naceous material from equilibrium With or I . of death' for .carb IVtng' materr as t hiIS probably coincides with the nme • onates H would . . n (assuming no further : ( correspond to the time of CT)'Stalltz3uo dilOX Ide to Occur). On tnterchange with 1 hi' SO uuon or atmospheric. car to n . er h i b . e samples of well est bit ," das1s we have undertaken examination of wood . . such samples wer a ISIe age Ir am t h'e ancient Egyptian tombs, T \\0 d (furnished by Froeli hR " one from the tomb of neferu at ;l.le)'dum Philadelphia) who ,IC alney, of the Universirv of Pennsvlvania Museum, IC1was4575+7 ' of Zoser at Sakkara (f " 5 years old; the other from the tomb M urOished b A b' . useum of New York) 'h' y III rose Lansmg, of the ;\[etropo!t(an sample is cypress wood, (\\ lch w~s 4,650 ± 75 }'ears old, The f0011er ]nstitute of the U . ' .he lauer IS acacia, John 'Vilson of the Oriental nl\'ersny a f CI llcago, has given the dates quoted, a( ' ' th e behest of a com' co ' . mtnee of the \ ' . ' nSlstlllg of Frede' k J .1.menCan Anthropological A3SOClallon. ell' flc assa f n, cI· ohoso o ler. The expected 1alrman, Froelich Rainey, and Dona II ( be 7.15 -+- 0.15 cpm/ m ,or 4,600 year material is easil)' calculated to g the half-life, Table 2 . carbon on the basis o[ the pre5ent assa} and p1esents th e {ata 0 lamed on these materials. lb'

~ ~ s ~ ';;i 12
o

a -c
I
l
oc

PTOtUrf

(2oo:!: 150 ac)

ul

;;

TAYINAT(675 ± 50 ac.) REDWOOD(979 ±52

f

ac)

:;: ~
SESOSTRIS (1800 ac) CURVE CALCULATED fROII! PRESENT DAY POINT AND HAlf UfE Of RADIOCARBON 5568 ± 30 YEARS

t

ZOSER (2700!758.C..) SN[fERU (2625± 75

r
I

a.c)

{

7L_--J=-~h-."k""..."i,,,--.;-Joo"61,oliioo),,;ffiooo,,-J 1000 2000 )000 4000 50 .
HISTORICAL AGE (YEARS) Fig. 7, Specific radiocarbon activities for samples of known age. (After Libby 1952, fig. I.) For the same samples correlated with radiocarbon half-life of 5720 ± 47 years see Arnold and Libby (1949. fig. I).

01

68

MA

'S DISCOVERY

OF HIS PAST

error, and since the data agree within these errors, we believe that no other appreciable error is involved in the measurement. It is gratifying that the mean ~£t.hedet:nninalions agrees with the expected "aloe within I standard deviation um t. An error of 0.4 cpm/gm in the specific activity corresponds to an error of 450 years in a 4,600 )'car old sample. On this basis we feel encouraged. to proceed with further tests on younger s~mples of known age. This work is now in prog'Tess. It is hoped that certa~n ~nknowns can be measured in the near future. A large ther~al diffusion column similar to the one used b Dr. Crosse and his ~SSOCiateshas been installed in the laboratory and a con iderable increase 10 accuracy should result, permitting the measurement of samples as old as 20,000 to 25,000 years.

Unit II

Refttttlcrs
I. Anderson, E. C., Libby, W. F., Weinboust, S., R~d. A. F., IJnbenbaum. A. D., and Grosse, A. V. Phys. Rr:v. 1947 72 9"1 ' 2 Ad' • ,,~ . . n erson, E. C., ~Ibby, W. r., wetnhcuse, S., Reid, A. F K.inbenbaum. A. D., and Grosse, A. V. SCIence. 1947,105,576. .. 3. Engelkemeir A G H "II H 1ished.) , . ., ami, . ., Ingraham, M. C .. and Libby, W. F. (To be pub-

Ancient

Implements

w

4. G.rosse, A. V., and Libby, W. r, Science, 1947 106 88 5. Libby, W. F. Phys. Rev. 1946 69 671 ". 6 L'bb ' " . ",' I y, W. r., and Lee, D. D. Phys. Rev. 1939 55 2"5 ~. ~.urphey, B. Y., and Nier, A. O. Phys. 19..1' 59 • 1 rer, A. 0., and Gulbransen E >\ J A ., " . 9. Simpson, J. A., Jr. Phys. R~., ~7.Cht:m. oc., 1939. 6J, fHl. S

Rev 1948. 75.

171

***
I

!
I
r

Although the Greek and Roman writers were aware that some peoples made and used Slone implements, this knowledge became quite lost during the Dark Ages after (he fall of Rome and had to be rediscovered. After Mercatus' appreciation of the fact that stone implements were made by man, a number of observers made similar, and probably independent, statements (cf. Heizer 1962). Once the true nature of ancient stone tools was established, it was only a matter of time and chance until some intelligent mind would recognize, in a deposit of obvious geological antiquity, stone implements which were inescapably of the same age as the deposit and the materials contained in it. A London pharmacist, Conyers, who found a chipped flint hand axe associated with elephant bones near Grays Inn Lane about 1690, made just this sort of discovery, but it was later explai?ed as an ancient British weapon used to tip a spear which had served to kill one of the elephants used by the Roman army under Claudius.' At almost the same time, Steno was explaining the occurrence of fossilized elephant. bones he found in Tuscany as originating with Hannibal's army (Toulmin and Goodfield 1965:91). The lime was not yet ripe, apparently, for the eleph~nt to be recognized as dating from Pleistocene times. Stilt earlier, the English antiquary William Dugdale wrote in 1656 of finding wha~ were. p~obably Neolithic celts which he recognized as "made by the native Brnams ... for weapons, inasmuch as they had not then attained to the knowledge of Working iron or brass to such uses" (Salzman 1951). In 1790, just one hundred years after Conyers, John Frere found In
IJohn Leland, in his Cottecranae (1770). wrote of this find: "How l~is Elephant came Ihere? is the Question I know some will have it to have lain there ever Since the Ij niver sal Deluge. For my ow~ part. I take it to have been Brought over w.ith ~any othe~s by the Romans in the time of Claudius, and conjecture ... that It was killed In some fight with a Britain."

69

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
scribd
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->