Earliest known cave art by modern humans found in Indonesia

a reply to: MichiganSwampBuck

Chimps have been observed to display ancestor worship by piling rocks around trees (remembering fallen heroes)

a reply to: fromtheskydown

Even if that language consisted of just animated gestures, it would still represent a language - much as sign language is.

But they probably had verbal languages too...our physiology is pretty much unchanged since those times and much further back, so we know they had the physical equipment with which to speak, so i'd say it's more likely they used verbal communication in addition to written (this art work is such an example of conveying written information) and gesticulation than not.

On the question regarding why ancient Humans seem to depict themselves (at least in art, but also probably in ritualistic acts / dances etc) as some kind of animal / Human hybrid could be similar to more modern analogues among indigenous peoples..they imitate the creature they revere or respect, or of course, wish to hunt. I believe the general point is to 'become the creature' by imitating it, this the general belief holds, confers an essence or spirit of the quarry or prey into the hunters which allows them to think as the prey would think, to know where it will go and what it would do in a given situation making the prospect of a successful hunt more likely.

Of course, it also acted as a kind of camouflage..if you were a deer and saw a creature wearing a set of antlers similar to your own species antlers, you might assume the creature was a harmless deer and not a hunter about to kill and eat you.

Not everything has an esoteric twist to it, i tend to feel that whilst there was undoubtedly plenty of mystical, spiritual or esoteric thinking going on by ancient peoples, mostly borne i feel, from fear and ignorance of natural events and happenings around them they couldn't otherwise explain or comprehend...when it came to the general day-to-day minutia of surviving by hunting, more prosaic and practical thinking would by necessity be employed, and the seemingly 'animal / Human hybrids' imaged from so long ago, are probably nothing more than depictions of a rudimentary but often successful hunting camouflage, with a little spiritualism (to get 'into the head of the prey) thrown in.

My take anyway.

While it is very old cave art and depicts a very real hunting scene, I think you have to make some pretty gross assumptions with the hybrid leap. It looks like people hunting with animals/dogs maybe. The shapes are crude though, so any real stretch to animal hybrid humans is pure speculation as mentioned prior, masks, skins etc were/are common in aboriginal hunters.

That said, many many pieces of ancient art do show animal-human hybrid looking species (may not be hybrids, just their own species). This cave though seem very speculative at best. Cool, but the hybrid angle seems contrived to get attention.

a reply to: fromtheskydown

What I don't understand...and I admit, I am no expert...is why these early artists would depict the fleeing animals as they saw them, yet the hunters are human/animal hybrids or a case of possible therianthropy, if you wish.

I do not discount any truth on it about the possibility of Human-animal hybrids as we know almost nothing about our past. Take Ancient Greece for example. A centaur was a creature from Greek mythology which was half-man and half-horse. The head, arms and torso were human and joined at the waist to the body and legs of a horse.

Now, these mythical creatures may actually have had a basis in reality as there was a tradition in Thessaly of hunting bulls on horseback and the very word centaur may have originally meant ‘bull-killer’. So perhaps the horsemen of Thessaly were so skilled that they seemed at one with their horse and so the myth of a single creature was born.

Maybe a similar explanation can be applied in those cave paintings and perhaps the hunters depicted were so skilled that animal attributes were given to them. And as result they are depicted as half animal, half man.

Peace

originally posted by: stonerwilliam
a reply to: Silcone Synapse

Back when men had not put one stone on top of another or had clothes on their backs or a language to talk of ,Some men had figured out how to tell a story and what chemicals to play with

Clothing has been used by members of our Genus for at least 170Ka and likely far longer for our Northern relatives the Neanderthal and Denisovans. And they had to have language or else they would t have been able to properly organize to work collectively, hunt, socialize, maintain relationships with others etc...

i noticed it looked very European

Fascinating. Makes it easier to believe the Gunung Padang megalithic site could be as ancient as claimed by some — 22,000 years old. But others think it was built sometime between the 2nd and 6th centuries anno domini, so who knows?

en.m.wikipedia.org...

I think efforts attempting to contextualize art and it’s intentions never are accurate. Only the artists really know what their intent is, but it’s nice to have some communication from our long distant past. a reply to: Silcone Synapse

What makes you think they didn’t have clothes or had never put a stone on top of another stone? That’s a lot of presumptions no? a reply to: stonerwilliam

finally traces of the lost continent MU....!
bet many civiliced "human"races where in front of us in an 1 billion years time ago
lolll oure dynasty exist for only approx 50.000 years… an eyewink in history

a reply to: Rob808

Clothing isn't something that is really possible without needles. As of 50k years ago, humans didn't seem to have needles yet (it was a Denisova n creation).

Once needles spread to humans, we began being able to make bags for transport and clothing, among many other highly usable items.

originally posted by: Rob808
What makes you think they didn’t have clothes or had never put a stone on top of another stone? That’s a lot of presumptions no? a reply to: stonerwilliam

Well they were living in caves and had not figured out building and for the clothes you only have to look at Australia and Africa where bushmen still wander about with a horn covering the private parts in modern times

a reply to: Hanslune

If that is what they say fine and well but it is very 2 dimensional thinking like the figures , But some people are Bat # crazy and mix it up , some like Ed Leiskin ? can move mountains , And a simple guy like me thinks it is about working stone , i certainly think the artists back then had a sense of humour and were way smarter than people think maybe into 4 d thinking

www.stolenhistory.org...

Some would pull the hair out of their heads and get all bloody thinking how to tell a story

originally posted by: stonerwilliam

Okay so no actual response to my question....however you did bring up something unrelated about fake granite.

Hmmm so what were all those ancient quarries for? Grins and giggles?

Here is a link for you about ancient quarries. Odd the Romans, Greeks and Egyptian wrote and showed images of making stone statues using tools not casting them.....

www.eeescience.utoledo.edu...
You might also find it of interest to read Vitruvius’s treatise, De architectura - the Rome view of how to make granite columns for portico....

That’s an assumption, and why would you assume all ancient people dressed like the bushmen of today? The science is hardly settled on issues like this, wouldnt this discovery posted show we have much to learn about our ancient selves? Needles are well quite small and fine, it’s not a stretch of the mind to think they wouldn’t survive through time, along with clothing for example. Couldn’t clothing be hand weaved? As in no needles all together? You know what they say when you assume, they make an ass out of you and me... a reply to: stonerwilliam

originally posted by: stonerwilliam

originally posted by: Rob808
What makes you think they didn’t have clothes or had never put a stone on top of another stone? That’s a lot of presumptions no? a reply to: stonerwilliam

Well they were living in caves and had not figured out building and for the clothes you only have to look at Australia and Africa where bushmen still wander about with a horn covering the private parts in modern times

Every one of the above claims is nothing more than anachronistic stereotypes. There is evidence that Homo Erectus was building shelters a million years ago. And while they may not have had a lithics kit that allowed for stone work, to claim that they were incapable of building structures is ludicrous when you look at sites like Gobekli Tepe,
Catalhayouk or numerous others in Anatolia and the Levant.

As for clothing, while they may not have been stitching with a needle, the evolutionary loss of body louse and the advent of head and pubic louse 170,000 years ago indicates that humans We’re at least covering up with animal skins for warmth. Do you seriously believe that Neanderthal or Denisovan we’re wandering around the Ivey landscapes of Europe and Northern Asia while wearing a cod piece to cover their genitals and nothing else?
It’s a pretty narrow approach to the history of our Genus.

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
a reply to: Rob808

Clothing isn't something that is really possible without needles. As of 50k years ago, humans didn't seem to have needles yet (it was a Denisova n creation).

Once needles spread to humans, we began being able to make bags for transport and clothing, among many other highly usable items.

Do you think it's possible for them to cut a hole in an animal hide and drape it about their neck like a cape? Or even cutting a larger hole in it and pulling it up to their waste and then securing it with gut as a belt? They wouldn't need needles for that.
Just a thought.

originally posted by: peter vlar

originally posted by: stonerwilliam

originally posted by: Rob808
What makes you think they didn’t have clothes or had never put a stone on top of another stone? That’s a lot of presumptions no? a reply to: stonerwilliam

Well they were living in caves and had not figured out building and for the clothes you only have to look at Australia and Africa where bushmen still wander about with a horn covering the private parts in modern times

Every one of the above claims is nothing more than anachronistic stereotypes. There is evidence that Homo Erectus was building shelters a million years ago. And while they may not have had a lithics kit that allowed for stone work, to claim that they were incapable of building structures is ludicrous when you look at sites like Gobekli Tepe,
Catalhayouk or numerous others in Anatolia and the Levant.

As for clothing, while they may not have been stitching with a needle, the evolutionary loss of body louse and the advent of head and pubic louse 170,000 years ago indicates that humans We’re at least covering up with animal skins for warmth. Do you seriously believe that Neanderthal or Denisovan we’re wandering around the Ivey landscapes of Europe and Northern Asia while wearing a cod piece to cover their genitals and nothing else?
It’s a pretty narrow approach to the history of our Genus.

This might explain why the site was covered up

ps will not be back to answer any more questions

a reply to: stonerwilliam

But what does the epicure mean?