There’s a complicated multi faceted style of art that goes unrecognized by modern humans. Citizens all over the country are sharing this. People are becoming more aware-academia will catch up soon ❤
Didn't ancient man use soft rocks such as soapstone, gypsum, and dolomite about a million times more than chert or hardstone? That's what the books say. Didn't ancient man remove flakes from chert from the center of the piece outward for a couple million years before the advent of lapidary knapping? Again, just what the books say. These are questions
Good questions! This video is a good flintknapping demonstration -- shows that it is an edge-focused technique: www.google.com/search?q=flint-knapping+demonstration&rlz=1C1GCEA_enUS1042US1042&oq=flint-knapping+demonstration&aqs=chrome..69i57j0i22i30l3j0i390i512i650l4.7034j0j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8#fpstate=ive&vld=cid:c7f9baee,vid:f2CcHYuOEsE,st:0 Softer rocks would definitely have been used for items like pipes and pendants that were produced by grinding rather than flaking. Harder rocks like chert are suitable for making durable cutting edges.
Hi, I have a question about authenticity of statues and artefacts. How can archaeologists determine the age of a statue discovered at a site? Is it possible to tell whether it is genuinely "old" or a fake? For example , a statue carved from rocks 🪨 is claimed to be from 5000 bce. How can we prove this is true? Please help me. Thank you.
Archaeologists focus on time, space, and form and it is the combination of data about space and form that help establish age of an item (time). Context is the most valuable information available for ascertaining the age of an item or artifact. This is why archaeologists dig very carefully and record as much information about stratigraphy (layering) and the spatial positioning of artifacts and features. Often when an item is removed from its context it makes determining age very challenging or even impossible. But, comparisons can also be effective, as in the case of projectile points that conform closely to the same type -- for example if one is found in association with datable organic material at a site (perhaps from a hearth) it can then be used as a reference for projectile points of the same type that are found out of context, such as the surface of a plowed field.
There’s a complicated multi faceted style of art that goes unrecognized by modern humans. Citizens all over the country are sharing this. People are becoming more aware-academia will catch up soon ❤
Need verbal description for those if us old people that can't see well enough to read only...you miss the pics trying to read
Didn't ancient man use soft rocks such as soapstone, gypsum, and dolomite about a million times more than chert or hardstone? That's what the books say. Didn't ancient man remove flakes from chert from the center of the piece outward for a couple million years before the advent of lapidary knapping? Again, just what the books say. These are questions
Hi TOA I was about to leave a snarky remark ❤
Good questions!
This video is a good flintknapping demonstration -- shows that it is an edge-focused technique: www.google.com/search?q=flint-knapping+demonstration&rlz=1C1GCEA_enUS1042US1042&oq=flint-knapping+demonstration&aqs=chrome..69i57j0i22i30l3j0i390i512i650l4.7034j0j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8#fpstate=ive&vld=cid:c7f9baee,vid:f2CcHYuOEsE,st:0
Softer rocks would definitely have been used for items like pipes and pendants that were produced by grinding rather than flaking. Harder rocks like chert are suitable for making durable cutting edges.
Hi,
I have a question about authenticity of statues and artefacts. How can archaeologists determine the age of a statue discovered at a site? Is it possible to tell whether it is genuinely "old" or a fake? For example , a statue carved from rocks 🪨 is claimed to be from 5000 bce. How can we prove this is true? Please help me. Thank you.
Archaeologists focus on time, space, and form and it is the combination of data about space and form that help establish age of an item (time). Context is the most valuable information available for ascertaining the age of an item or artifact. This is why archaeologists dig very carefully and record as much information about stratigraphy (layering) and the spatial positioning of artifacts and features. Often when an item is removed from its context it makes determining age very challenging or even impossible. But, comparisons can also be effective, as in the case of projectile points that conform closely to the same type -- for example if one is found in association with datable organic material at a site (perhaps from a hearth) it can then be used as a reference for projectile points of the same type that are found out of context, such as the surface of a plowed field.