Systematic production of stone tools dated to 200-400,000 BCE

Archaeology has long associated advanced blade production with the Upper Palaeolithic period, about 30,000-40,000 years ago, linked with the emergence of Homo Sapiens and cultural features such as cave art. Now researchers at Tel Aviv University have uncovered evidence which shows that "modern" blade production was also an element of Amudian industry during the late Lower Paleolithic period, 200,000-400,000 years ago as part of the Acheulo-Yabrudian cultural complex, a geographically limited group of hominins who lived in modern-day Israel, Lebanon, Syria and Jordan.

Link

Industrial production of steel blades 300k-400k BC!?!?! Holy cow, now thats a serious news, if confirmed and peer reviewed. You have to realize, that it was long time before homo sapiens sapiens had stepped onto stage!
And the implications!! Mining, other industries, transport.

Mindboggling, if real.

reply to post by Hanslune

So, shouldn't we have found evidence of tools between the previously known date of 40,000 BC and the tools from 400,000 BC.
It might just be an error with the method of dating.
I guess it's possible though

Originally posted by stainlesssteelrat
Industrial production of steel blades 300k-400k BC!?!?! Holy cow, now thats a serious news, if confirmed and peer reviewed. You have to realize, that it was long time before homo sapiens sapiens had stepped onto stage!
And the implications!! Mining, other industries, transport.

Mindboggling, if real.

'Industrial' in the sense of systematic production, not using machinery. They probably used similar sized cores from a known source - in stone tool making stone of a certain type is easier to work as you know how it will fracture. They then proceeded to produce a lot of similar sized tools. I've made a lot of stone tools and once you get proficient and have a known source you can knock a lot of blades off a core fairly rapidly - but then what do you do with them?

reply to post by Hanslune

I think the production of excess goods beyond what can be used by the makers is indicative of a system of trade.
If you are spending time making so many blades you are not using the time to gather food or hunt. So maybe you are using the goods you have fashioned to trade for food or other items from other ares.

As I've said many times, I think that the history of man goes much farther back then the academics can document.

Our brains haven't changed that much in the past 100,000 years. How hard would it be to create a good home, decent cloths, and a good standard of living without leaving much evidence?

To my way of thinking, we've been living on this planet for a long time and we've been living pretty well.

Remember when they found the Iceman and the academics were surprised by how well made his cloths and shoes were. That didn't surprise me.

Originally posted by Wildbob77
As I've said many times, I think that the history of man goes much farther back then the academics can document.

Which is why they are working on documenting it! The history of mankind goes back 8 million years and even that is fuzzy endpoint - of course the critical question is when did we start acting 'human'.

Our brains haven't changed that much in the past 100,000 years. How hard would it be to create a good home, decent cloths, and a good standard of living without leaving much evidence?

'Much' is the key word, that is why the stone tools are often the study point, they survive

To my way of thinking, we've been living on this planet for a long time and we've been living pretty well.

Hunter-gather groups can survive very well on minimal technology but it would depends on your definition of 'living pretty well".

Remember when they found the Iceman and the academics were surprised by how well made his cloths and shoes were. That didn't surprise me.

Since you brought it up. However I think the term surprize should be more 'delighted'.

Iceman's clothes

Originally posted by stainlesssteelrat
Industrial production of steel blades 300k-400k BC!?!?!

Easy there, tiger! They talk about flint blades, not steel blades. While the implications are still fascinating - including the suggestion that a trading and/or specialisation/divided-labour economy of some kind might have been in place to support a production line approach - it's not quite the same as the metallurgical knowledge needed to manufacture steel!

Originally posted by GmoS719
reply to post by Hanslune

 

So, shouldn't we have found evidence of tools between the previously known date of 40,000 BC and the tools from 400,000 BC.

There are lots of them. They are, as Hans and others point out, stone tools.