NormalizeHEADmain

66 files changed, 17 insertions, 15373 deletions

diff --git a/.gitattributes b/.gitattributes
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..d7b82bc
--- /dev/null
+++ b/.gitattributes
@@ -0,0 +1,4 @@
+*.txt text eol=lf
+*.htm text eol=lf
+*.html text eol=lf
+*.md text eol=lf
diff --git a/LICENSE.txt b/LICENSE.txt
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..6312041
--- /dev/null
+++ b/LICENSE.txt
@@ -0,0 +1,11 @@
+This eBook, including all associated images, markup, improvements,
+metadata, and any other content or labor, has been confirmed to be
+in the PUBLIC DOMAIN IN THE UNITED STATES.
+
+Procedures for determining public domain status are described in
+the "Copyright How-To" at https://www.gutenberg.org.
+
+No investigation has been made concerning possible copyrights in
+jurisdictions other than the United States. Anyone seeking to utilize
+this eBook outside of the United States should confirm copyright
+status under the laws that apply to them.
diff --git a/README.md b/README.md
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..d2a3a25
--- /dev/null
+++ b/README.md
@@ -0,0 +1,2 @@
+Project Gutenberg (https://www.gutenberg.org) public repository for
+eBook #52664 (https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/52664)
diff --git a/old/52664-0.txt b/old/52664-0.txt
deleted file mode 100644
index e859106..0000000
--- a/old/52664-0.txt
+++ /dev/null
@@ -1,7213 +0,0 @@
-The Project Gutenberg eBook, Prehistoric Men, by Robert J. (Robert John)
-Braidwood, Illustrated by Susan T. Richert
-
-
-This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and most
-other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no restrictions 
-whatsoever.  You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms of
-the Project Gutenberg License included with this eBook or online at 
-www.gutenberg.org.  If you are not located in the United States, you'll have
-to check the laws of the country where you are located before using this ebook.
-
-
-
-
-Title: Prehistoric Men
-
-
-Author: Robert J. (Robert John) Braidwood
-
-
-
-Release Date: July 28, 2016  [eBook #52664]
-
-Language: English
-
-Character set encoding: UTF-8
-
-
-***START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK PREHISTORIC MEN***
-
-
-E-text prepared by Stephen Hutcheson, Dave Morgan, Charlie Howard, and the
-Online Distributed Proofreading Team (http://www.pgdp.net)
-
-
-
-Note: Project Gutenberg also has an HTML version of this
-      file which includes the original illustrations.
-      See 52664-h.htm or 52664-h.zip:
-      (http://www.gutenberg.org/files/52664/52664-h/52664-h.htm)
-      or
-      (http://www.gutenberg.org/files/52664/52664-h.zip)
-
-
-Transcriber's note:
-
-      Some characters might not display in this UTF-8 text
-      version. If so, the reader should consult the HTML
-      version referred to above. One example of this might
-      occur in the second paragraph under "Choppers and
-      Adze-like Tools", page 46, which contains the phrase
-      “an adze cutting edge is ∠ shaped”. The symbol before
-      “shaped” looks like a sharply-italicized sans-serif “L”.
-      Devices that cannot display that symbol may substitute
-      a question mark, a square, or other symbol.
-
-
-
-
-
-PREHISTORIC MEN
-
-by
-
-ROBERT J. BRAIDWOOD
-
-Research Associate, Old World Prehistory
-
-Professor
-Oriental Institute and Department of Anthropology
-University of Chicago
-
-Drawings by Susan T. Richert
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-[Illustration]
-
-Chicago Natural History Museum
-Popular Series
-Anthropology, Number 37
-
-Third Edition Issued in Co-operation with
-The Oriental Institute, The University of Chicago
-
-Edited by Lillian A. Ross
-
-Printed in the United States of America
-by Chicago Natural History Museum Press
-
-Copyright 1948, 1951, and 1957 by Chicago Natural History Museum
-
-First edition 1948
-Second edition 1951
-Third edition 1957
-Fourth edition 1959
-
-
-
-
-Preface
-
-[Illustration]
-
-
-Like the writing of most professional archeologists, mine has been
-confined to so-called learned papers. Good, bad, or indifferent, these
-papers were in a jargon that only my colleagues and a few advanced
-students could understand. Hence, when I was asked to do this little
-book, I soon found it extremely difficult to say what I meant in simple
-fashion. The style is new to me, but I hope the reader will not find it
-forced or pedantic; at least I have done my very best to tell the story
-simply and clearly.
-
-Many friends have aided in the preparation of the book. The whimsical
-charm of Miss Susan Richert’s illustrations add enormously to the
-spirit I wanted. She gave freely of her own time on the drawings and
-in planning the book with me. My colleagues at the University of
-Chicago, especially Professor Wilton M. Krogman (now of the University
-of Pennsylvania), and also Mrs. Linda Braidwood, Associate of the
-Oriental Institute, and Professors Fay-Cooper Cole and Sol Tax, of
-the Department of Anthropology, gave me counsel in matters bearing on
-their special fields, and the Department of Anthropology bore some of
-the expense of the illustrations. From Mrs. Irma Hunter and Mr. Arnold
-Maremont, who are not archeologists at all and have only an intelligent
-layman’s notion of archeology, I had sound advice on how best to tell
-the story. I am deeply indebted to all these friends.
-
-While I was preparing the second edition, I had the great fortune
-to be able to rework the third chapter with Professor Sherwood L.
-Washburn, now of the Department of Anthropology of the University of
-California, and the fourth, fifth, and sixth chapters with Professor
-Hallum L. Movius, Jr., of the Peabody Museum, Harvard University. The
-book has gained greatly in accuracy thereby. In matters of dating,
-Professor Movius and the indications of Professor W. F. Libby’s Carbon
-14 chronology project have both encouraged me to choose the lowest
-dates now current for the events of the Pleistocene Ice Age. There is
-still no certain way of fixing a direct chronology for most of the
-Pleistocene, but Professor Libby’s method appears very promising for
-its end range and for proto-historic dates. In any case, this book
-names “periods,” and new dates may be written in against mine, if new
-and better dating systems appear.
-
-I wish to thank Dr. Clifford C. Gregg, Director of Chicago Natural
-History Museum, for the opportunity to publish this book. My old
-friend, Dr. Paul S. Martin, Chief Curator in the Department of
-Anthropology, asked me to undertake the job and inspired me to complete
-it. I am also indebted to Miss Lillian A. Ross, Associate Editor of
-Scientific Publications, and to Mr. George I. Quimby, Curator of
-Exhibits in Anthropology, for all the time they have given me in
-getting the manuscript into proper shape.
-
-            ROBERT J. BRAIDWOOD
-  _June 15, 1950_
-
-
-
-
-Preface to the Third Edition
-
-
-In preparing the enlarged third edition, many of the above mentioned
-friends have again helped me. I have picked the brains of Professor F.
-Clark Howell of the Department of Anthropology of the University of
-Chicago in reworking the earlier chapters, and he was very patient in
-the matter, which I sincerely appreciate.
-
-All of Mrs. Susan Richert Allen’s original drawings appear, but a few
-necessary corrections have been made in some of the charts and some new
-drawings have been added by Mr. John Pfiffner, Staff Artist, Chicago
-Natural History Museum.
-
-            ROBERT J. BRAIDWOOD
-  _March 1, 1959_
-
-
-
-
-Contents
-
-
-                                                       PAGE
-  How We Learn about Prehistoric Men                      7
-
-  The Changing World in Which Prehistoric Men Lived      17
-
-  Prehistoric Men Themselves                             22
-
-  Cultural Beginnings                                    38
-
-  More Evidence of Culture                               56
-
-  Early Moderns                                          70
-
-  End and Prelude                                        92
-
-  The First Revolution                                  121
-
-  The Conquest of Civilization                          144
-
-  End of Prehistory                                     162
-
-  Summary                                               176
-
-  List of Books                                         180
-
-  Index                                                 184
-
-
-
-
-HOW WE LEARN about Prehistoric Men
-
-[Illustration]
-
-
-Prehistory means the time before written history began. Actually, more
-than 99 per cent of man’s story is prehistory. Man is at least half a
-million years old, but he did not begin to write history (or to write
-anything) until about 5,000 years ago.
-
-The men who lived in prehistoric times left us no history books, but
-they did unintentionally leave a record of their presence and their way
-of life. This record is studied and interpreted by different kinds of
-scientists.
-
-
-SCIENTISTS WHO FIND OUT ABOUT PREHISTORIC MEN
-
-The scientists who study the bones and teeth and any other parts
-they find of the bodies of prehistoric men, are called _physical
-anthropologists_. Physical anthropologists are trained, much like
-doctors, to know all about the human body. They study living people,
-too; they know more about the biological facts of human “races” than
-anybody else. If the police find a badly decayed body in a trunk,
-they ask a physical anthropologist to tell them what the person
-originally looked like. The physical anthropologists who specialize in
-prehistoric men work with fossils, so they are sometimes called _human
-paleontologists_.
-
-
-ARCHEOLOGISTS
-
-There is a kind of scientist who studies the things that prehistoric
-men made and did. Such a scientist is called an _archeologist_. It is
-the archeologist’s business to look for the stone and metal tools, the
-pottery, the graves, and the caves or huts of the men who lived before
-history began.
-
-But there is more to archeology than just looking for things. In
-Professor V. Gordon Childe’s words, archeology “furnishes a sort of
-history of human activity, provided always that the actions have
-produced concrete results and left recognizable material traces.” You
-will see that there are at least three points in what Childe says:
-
-  1. The archeologists have to find the traces of things left behind by
-     ancient man, and
-
-  2. Only a few objects may be found, for most of these were probably
-     too soft or too breakable to last through the years. However,
-
-  3. The archeologist must use whatever he can find to tell a story--to
-     make a “sort of history”--from the objects and living-places and
-     graves that have escaped destruction.
-
-What I mean is this: Let us say you are walking through a dump yard,
-and you find a rusty old spark plug. If you want to think about what
-the spark plug means, you quickly remember that it is a part of an
-automobile motor. This tells you something about the man who threw
-the spark plug on the dump. He either had an automobile, or he knew
-or lived near someone who did. He can’t have lived so very long ago,
-you’ll remember, because spark plugs and automobiles are only about
-sixty years old.
-
-When you think about the old spark plug in this way you have
-just been making the beginnings of what we call an archeological
-_interpretation_; you have been making the spark plug tell a story.
-It is the same way with the man-made things we archeologists find
-and put in museums. Usually, only a few of these objects are pretty
-to look at; but each of them has some sort of story to tell. Making
-the interpretation of his finds is the most important part of the
-archeologist’s job. It is the way he gets at the “sort of history of
-human activity” which is expected of archeology.
-
-
-SOME OTHER SCIENTISTS
-
-There are many other scientists who help the archeologist and the
-physical anthropologist find out about prehistoric men. The geologists
-help us tell the age of the rocks or caves or gravel beds in which
-human bones or man-made objects are found. There are other scientists
-with names which all begin with “paleo” (the Greek word for “old”). The
-_paleontologists_ study fossil animals. There are also, for example,
-such scientists as _paleobotanists_ and _paleoclimatologists_, who
-study ancient plants and climates. These scientists help us to know
-the kinds of animals and plants that were living in prehistoric times
-and so could be used for food by ancient man; what the weather was
-like; and whether there were glaciers. Also, when I tell you that
-prehistoric men did not appear until long after the great dinosaurs had
-disappeared, I go on the say-so of the paleontologists. They know that
-fossils of men and of dinosaurs are not found in the same geological
-period. The dinosaur fossils come in early periods, the fossils of men
-much later.
-
-Since World War II even the atomic scientists have been helping the
-archeologists. By testing the amount of radioactivity left in charcoal,
-wood, or other vegetable matter obtained from archeological sites, they
-have been able to date the sites. Shell has been used also, and even
-the hair of Egyptian mummies. The dates of geological and climatic
-events have also been discovered. Some of this work has been done from
-drillings taken from the bottom of the sea.
-
-This dating by radioactivity has considerably shortened the dates which
-the archeologists used to give. If you find that some of the dates
-I give here are more recent than the dates you see in other books
-on prehistory, it is because I am using one of the new lower dating
-systems.
-
-[Illustration: RADIOCARBON CHART
-
-The rate of disappearance of radioactivity as time passes.[1]]
-
-  [1] It is important that the limitations of the radioactive carbon
-      “dating” system be held in mind. As the statistics involved in
-      the system are used, there are two chances in three that the
-      “date” of the sample falls within the range given as plus or
-      minus an added number of years. For example, the “date” for the
-      Jarmo village (see chart), given as 6750 ± 200 B.C., really
-      means that there are only two chances in three that the real
-      date of the charcoal sampled fell between 6950 and 6550 B.C.
-      We have also begun to suspect that there are ways in which the
-      samples themselves may have become “contaminated,” either on
-      the early or on the late side. We now tend to be suspicious of
-      single radioactive carbon determinations, or of determinations
-      from one site alone. But as a fabric of consistent
-      determinations for several or more sites of one archeological
-      period, we gain confidence in the “dates.”
-
-
-HOW THE SCIENTISTS FIND OUT
-
-So far, this chapter has been mainly about the people who find out
-about prehistoric men. We also need a word about _how_ they find out.
-
-All our finds came by accident until about a hundred years ago. Men
-digging wells, or digging in caves for fertilizer, often turned up
-ancient swords or pots or stone arrowheads. People also found some odd
-pieces of stone that didn’t look like natural forms, but they also
-didn’t look like any known tool. As a result, the people who found them
-gave them queer names; for example, “thunderbolts.” The people thought
-the strange stones came to earth as bolts of lightning. We know now
-that these strange stones were prehistoric stone tools.
-
-Many important finds still come to us by accident. In 1935, a British
-dentist, A. T. Marston, found the first of two fragments of a very
-important fossil human skull, in a gravel pit at Swanscombe, on the
-River Thames, England. He had to wait nine months, until the face of
-the gravel pit had been dug eight yards farther back, before the second
-fragment appeared. They fitted! Then, twenty years later, still another
-piece appeared. In 1928 workmen who were blasting out rock for the
-breakwater in the port of Haifa began to notice flint tools. Thus the
-story of cave men on Mount Carmel, in Palestine, began to be known.
-
-Planned archeological digging is only about a century old. Even before
-this, however, a few men realized the significance of objects they dug
-from the ground; one of these early archeologists was our own Thomas
-Jefferson. The first real mound-digger was a German grocer’s clerk,
-Heinrich Schliemann. Schliemann made a fortune as a merchant, first
-in Europe and then in the California gold-rush of 1849. He became an
-American citizen. Then he retired and had both money and time to test
-an old idea of his. He believed that the heroes of ancient Troy and
-Mycenae were once real Trojans and Greeks. He proved it by going to
-Turkey and Greece and digging up the remains of both cities.
-
-Schliemann had the great good fortune to find rich and spectacular
-treasures, and he also had the common sense to keep notes and make
-descriptions of what he found. He proved beyond doubt that many ancient
-city mounds can be _stratified_. This means that there may be the
-remains of many towns in a mound, one above another, like layers in a
-cake.
-
-You might like to have an idea of how mounds come to be in layers.
-The original settlers may have chosen the spot because it had a good
-spring and there were good fertile lands nearby, or perhaps because
-it was close to some road or river or harbor. These settlers probably
-built their town of stone and mud-brick. Finally, something would have
-happened to the town--a flood, or a burning, or a raid by enemies--and
-the walls of the houses would have fallen in or would have melted down
-as mud in the rain. Nothing would have remained but the mud and debris
-of a low mound of _one_ layer.
-
-The second settlers would have wanted the spot for the same reasons
-the first settlers did--good water, land, and roads. Also, the second
-settlers would have found a nice low mound to build their houses on,
-a protection from floods. But again, something would finally have
-happened to the second town, and the walls of _its_ houses would have
-come tumbling down. This makes the _second_ layer. And so on....
-
-In Syria I once had the good fortune to dig on a large mound that had
-no less than fifteen layers. Also, most of the layers were thick, and
-there were signs of rebuilding and repairs within each layer. The mound
-was more than a hundred feet high. In each layer, the building material
-used had been a soft, unbaked mud-brick, and most of the debris
-consisted of fallen or rain-melted mud from these mud-bricks.
-
-This idea of _stratification_, like the cake layers, was already a
-familiar one to the geologists by Schliemann’s time. They could show
-that their lowest layer of rock was oldest or earliest, and that the
-overlying layers became more recent as one moved upward. Schliemann’s
-digging proved the same thing at Troy. His first (lowest and earliest)
-city had at least nine layers above it; he thought that the second
-layer contained the remains of Homer’s Troy. We now know that Homeric
-Troy was layer VIIa from the bottom; also, we count eleven layers or
-sub-layers in total.
-
-Schliemann’s work marks the beginnings of modern archeology. Scholars
-soon set out to dig on ancient sites, from Egypt to Central America.
-
-
-ARCHEOLOGICAL INFORMATION
-
-As time went on, the study of archeological materials--found either
-by accident or by digging on purpose--began to show certain things.
-Archeologists began to get ideas as to the kinds of objects that
-belonged together. If you compared a mail-order catalogue of 1890 with
-one of today, you would see a lot of differences. If you really studied
-the two catalogues hard, you would also begin to see that certain
-objects “go together.” Horseshoes and metal buggy tires and pieces of
-harness would begin to fit into a picture with certain kinds of coal
-stoves and furniture and china dishes and kerosene lamps. Our friend
-the spark plug, and radios and electric refrigerators and light bulbs
-would fit into a picture with different kinds of furniture and dishes
-and tools. You won’t be old enough to remember the kind of hats that
-women wore in 1890, but you’ve probably seen pictures of them, and you
-know very well they couldn’t be worn with the fashions of today.
-
-This is one of the ways that archeologists study their materials.
-The various tools and weapons and jewelry, the pottery, the kinds
-of houses, and even the ways of burying the dead tend to fit into
-pictures. Some archeologists call all of the things that go together to
-make such a picture an _assemblage_. The assemblage of the first layer
-of Schliemann’s Troy was as different from that of the seventh layer as
-our 1900 mail-order catalogue is from the one of today.
-
-The archeologists who came after Schliemann began to notice other
-things and to compare them with occurrences in modern times. The
-idea that people will buy better mousetraps goes back into very
-ancient times. Today, if we make good automobiles or radios, we can
-sell some of them in Turkey or even in Timbuktu. This means that a
-few present-day types of American automobiles and radios form part
-of present-day “assemblages” in both Turkey and Timbuktu. The total
-present-day “assemblage” of Turkey is quite different from that of
-Timbuktu or that of America, but they have at least some automobiles
-and some radios in common.
-
-Now these automobiles and radios will eventually wear out. Let us
-suppose we could go to some remote part of Turkey or to Timbuktu in a
-dream. We don’t know what the date is, in our dream, but we see all
-sorts of strange things and ways of living in both places. Nobody
-tells us what the date is. But suddenly we see a 1936 Ford; so we
-know that in our dream it has to be at least the year 1936, and only
-as many years after that as we could reasonably expect a Ford to keep
-in running order. The Ford would probably break down in twenty years’
-time, so the Turkish or Timbuktu “assemblage” we’re seeing in our dream
-has to date at about A.D. 1936-56.
-
-Archeologists not only “date” their ancient materials in this way; they
-also see over what distances and between which peoples trading was
-done. It turns out that there was a good deal of trading in ancient
-times, probably all on a barter and exchange basis.
-
-
-EVERYTHING BEGINS TO FIT TOGETHER
-
-Now we need to pull these ideas all together and see the complicated
-structure the archeologists can build with their materials.
-
-Even the earliest archeologists soon found that there was a very long
-range of prehistoric time which would yield only very simple things.
-For this very long early part of prehistory, there was little to be
-found but the flint tools which wandering, hunting and gathering
-people made, and the bones of the wild animals they ate. Toward the
-end of prehistoric time there was a general settling down with the
-coming of agriculture, and all sorts of new things began to be made.
-Archeologists soon got a general notion of what ought to appear with
-what. Thus, it would upset a French prehistorian digging at the bottom
-of a very early cave if he found a fine bronze sword, just as much as
-it would upset him if he found a beer bottle. The people of his very
-early cave layer simply could not have made bronze swords, which came
-later, just as do beer bottles. Some accidental disturbance of the
-layers of his cave must have happened.
-
-With any luck, archeologists do their digging in a layered, stratified
-site. They find the remains of everything that would last through
-time, in several different layers. They know that the assemblage in
-the bottom layer was laid down earlier than the assemblage in the next
-layer above, and so on up to the topmost layer, which is the latest.
-They look at the results of other “digs” and find that some other
-archeologist 900 miles away has found ax-heads in his lowest layer,
-exactly like the ax-heads of their fifth layer. This means that their
-fifth layer must have been lived in at about the same time as was the
-first layer in the site 200 miles away. It also may mean that the
-people who lived in the two layers knew and traded with each other. Or
-it could mean that they didn’t necessarily know each other, but simply
-that both traded with a third group at about the same time.
-
-You can see that the more we dig and find, the more clearly the main
-facts begin to stand out. We begin to be more sure of which people
-lived at the same time, which earlier and which later. We begin to
-know who traded with whom, and which peoples seemed to live off by
-themselves. We begin to find enough skeletons in burials so that the
-physical anthropologists can tell us what the people looked like. We
-get animal bones, and a paleontologist may tell us they are all bones
-of wild animals; or he may tell us that some or most of the bones are
-those of domesticated animals, for instance, sheep or cattle, and
-therefore the people must have kept herds.
-
-More important than anything else--as our structure grows more
-complicated and our materials increase--is the fact that “a sort
-of history of human activity” does begin to appear. The habits or
-traditions that men formed in the making of their tools and in the
-ways they did things, begin to stand out for us. How characteristic
-were these habits and traditions? What areas did they spread over?
-How long did they last? We watch the different tools and the traces
-of the way things were done--how the burials were arranged, what
-the living-places were like, and so on. We wonder about the people
-themselves, for the traces of habits and traditions are useful to us
-only as clues to the men who once had them. So we ask the physical
-anthropologists about the skeletons that we found in the burials. The
-physical anthropologists tell us about the anatomy and the similarities
-and differences which the skeletons show when compared with other
-skeletons. The physical anthropologists are even working on a
-method--chemical tests of the bones--that will enable them to discover
-what the blood-type may have been. One thing is sure. We have never
-found a group of skeletons so absolutely similar among themselves--so
-cast from a single mould, so to speak--that we could claim to have a
-“pure” race. I am sure we never shall.
-
-We become particularly interested in any signs of change--when new
-materials and tool types and ways of doing things replace old ones. We
-watch for signs of social change and progress in one way or another.
-
-We must do all this without one word of written history to aid us.
-Everything we are concerned with goes back to the time _before_ men
-learned to write. That is the prehistorian’s job--to find out what
-happened before history began.
-
-
-
-
-THE CHANGING WORLD in which Prehistoric Men Lived
-
-[Illustration]
-
-
-Mankind, we’ll say, is at least a half million years old. It is very
-hard to understand how long a time half a million years really is.
-If we were to compare this whole length of time to one day, we’d get
-something like this: The present time is midnight, and Jesus was
-born just five minutes and thirty-six seconds ago. Earliest history
-began less than fifteen minutes ago. Everything before 11:45 was in
-prehistoric time.
-
-Or maybe we can grasp the length of time better in terms of
-generations. As you know, primitive peoples tend to marry and have
-children rather early in life. So suppose we say that twenty years
-will make an average generation. At this rate there would be 25,000
-generations in a half-million years. But our United States is much less
-than ten generations old, twenty-five generations take us back before
-the time of Columbus, Julius Caesar was alive just 100 generations ago,
-David was king of Israel less than 150 generations ago, 250 generations
-take us back to the beginning of written history. And there were 24,750
-generations of men before written history began!
-
-I should probably tell you that there is a new method of prehistoric
-dating which would cut the earliest dates in my reckoning almost
-in half. Dr. Cesare Emiliani, combining radioactive (C14) and
-chemical (oxygen isotope) methods in the study of deep-sea borings,
-has developed a system which would lower the total range of human
-prehistory to about 300,000 years. The system is still too new to have
-had general examination and testing. Hence, I have not used it in this
-book; it would mainly affect the dates earlier than 25,000 years ago.
-
-
-CHANGES IN ENVIRONMENT
-
-The earth probably hasn’t changed much in the last 5,000 years (250
-generations). Men have built things on its surface and dug into it and
-drawn boundaries on maps of it, but the places where rivers, lakes,
-seas, and mountains now stand have changed very little.
-
-In earlier times the earth looked very different. Geologists call the
-last great geological period the _Pleistocene_. It began somewhere
-between a half million and a million years ago, and was a time of great
-changes. Sometimes we call it the Ice Age, for in the Pleistocene
-there were at least three or four times when large areas of earth
-were covered with glaciers. The reason for my uncertainty is that
-while there seem to have been four major mountain or alpine phases of
-glaciation, there may only have been three general continental phases
-in the Old World.[2]
-
-  [2] This is a complicated affair and I do not want to bother you
-      with its details. Both the alpine and the continental ice sheets
-      seem to have had minor fluctuations during their _main_ phases,
-      and the advances of the later phases destroyed many of the
-      traces of the earlier phases. The general textbooks have tended
-      to follow the names and numbers established for the Alps early
-      in this century by two German geologists. I will not bother you
-      with the names, but there were _four_ major phases. It is the
-      second of these alpine phases which seems to fit the traces of
-      the earliest of the great continental glaciations. In this book,
-      I will use the four-part system, since it is the most familiar,
-      but will add the word _alpine_ so you may remember to make the
-      transition to the continental system if you wish to do so.
-
-Glaciers are great sheets of ice, sometimes over a thousand feet
-thick, which are now known only in Greenland and Antarctica and in
-high mountains. During several of the glacial periods in the Ice Age,
-the glaciers covered most of Canada and the northern United States and
-reached down to southern England and France in Europe. Smaller ice
-sheets sat like caps on the Rockies, the Alps, and the Himalayas. The
-continental glaciation only happened north of the equator, however, so
-remember that “Ice Age” is only half true.
-
-As you know, the amount of water on and about the earth does not vary.
-These large glaciers contained millions of tons of water frozen into
-ice. Because so much water was frozen and contained in the glaciers,
-the water level of lakes and oceans was lowered. Flooded areas were
-drained and appeared as dry land. There were times in the Ice Age when
-there was no English Channel, so that England was not an island, and a
-land bridge at the Dardanelles probably divided the Mediterranean from
-the Black Sea.
-
-A very important thing for people living during the time of a
-glaciation was the region adjacent to the glacier. They could not, of
-course, live on the ice itself. The questions would be how close could
-they live to it, and how would they have had to change their way of
-life to do so.
-
-
-GLACIERS CHANGE THE WEATHER
-
-Great sheets of ice change the weather. When the front of a glacier
-stood at Milwaukee, the weather must have been bitterly cold in
-Chicago. The climate of the whole world would have been different, and
-you can see how animals and men would have been forced to move from one
-place to another in search of food and warmth.
-
-On the other hand, it looks as if only a minor proportion of the whole
-Ice Age was really taken up by times of glaciation. In between came
-the _interglacial_ periods. During these times the climate around
-Chicago was as warm as it is now, and sometimes even warmer. It may
-interest you to know that the last great glacier melted away less than
-10,000 years ago. Professor Ernst Antevs thinks we may be living in an
-interglacial period and that the Ice Age may not be over yet. So if you
-want to make a killing in real estate for your several hundred times
-great-grandchildren, you might buy some land in the Arizona desert or
-the Sahara.
-
-We do not yet know just why the glaciers appeared and disappeared, as
-they did. It surely had something to do with an increase in rainfall
-and a fall in temperature. It probably also had to do with a general
-tendency for the land to rise at the beginning of the Pleistocene. We
-know there was some mountain-building at that time. Hence, rain-bearing
-winds nourished the rising and cooler uplands with snow. An increase
-in all three of these factors--if they came together--would only have
-needed to be slight. But exactly why this happened we do not know.
-
-The reason I tell you about the glaciers is simply to remind you of the
-changing world in which prehistoric men lived. Their surroundings--the
-animals and plants they used for food, and the weather they had to
-protect themselves from--were always changing. On the other hand, this
-change happened over so long a period of time and was so slow that
-individual people could not have noticed it. Glaciers, about which they
-probably knew nothing, moved in hundreds of miles to the north of them.
-The people must simply have wandered ever more southward in search
-of the plants and animals on which they lived. Or some men may have
-stayed where they were and learned to hunt different animals and eat
-different foods. Prehistoric men had to keep adapting themselves to new
-environments and those who were most adaptive were most successful.
-
-
-OTHER CHANGES
-
-Changes took place in the men themselves as well as in the ways they
-lived. As time went on, they made better tools and weapons. Then, too,
-we begin to find signs of how they started thinking of other things
-than food and the tools to get it with. We find that they painted on
-the walls of caves, and decorated their tools; we find that they buried
-their dead.
-
-At about the time when the last great glacier was finally melting away,
-men in the Near East made the first basic change in human economy.
-They began to plant grain, and they learned to raise and herd certain
-animals. This meant that they could store food in granaries and “on the
-hoof” against the bad times of the year. This first really basic change
-in man’s way of living has been called the “food-producing revolution.”
-By the time it happened, a modern kind of climate was beginning. Men
-had already grown to look as they do now. Know-how in ways of living
-had developed and progressed, slowly but surely, up to a point. It was
-impossible for men to go beyond that point if they only hunted and
-fished and gathered wild foods. Once the basic change was made--once
-the food-producing revolution became effective--technology leaped ahead
-and civilization and written history soon began.
-
-
-
-
-Prehistoric Men THEMSELVES
-
-[Illustration]
-
-
-DO WE KNOW WHERE MAN ORIGINATED?
-
-For a long time some scientists thought the “cradle of mankind” was in
-central Asia. Other scientists insisted it was in Africa, and still
-others said it might have been in Europe. Actually, we don’t know
-where it was. We don’t even know that there was only _one_ “cradle.”
-If we had to choose a “cradle” at this moment, we would probably say
-Africa. But the southern portions of Asia and Europe may also have been
-included in the general area. The scene of the early development of
-mankind was certainly the Old World. It is pretty certain men didn’t
-reach North or South America until almost the end of the Ice Age--had
-they done so earlier we would certainly have found some trace of them
-by now.
-
-The earliest tools we have yet found come from central and south
-Africa. By the dating system I’m using, these tools must be over
-500,000 years old. There are now reports that a few such early tools
-have been found--at the Sterkfontein cave in South Africa--along with
-the bones of small fossil men called “australopithecines.”
-
-Not all scientists would agree that the australopithecines were “men,”
-or would agree that the tools were made by the australopithecines
-themselves. For these sticklers, the earliest bones of men come from
-the island of Java. The date would be about 450,000 years ago. So far,
-we have not yet found the tools which we suppose these earliest men in
-the Far East must have made.
-
-Let me say it another way. How old are the earliest traces of men we
-now have? Over half a million years. This was a time when the first
-alpine glaciation was happening in the north. What has been found so
-far? The tools which the men of those times made, in different parts
-of Africa. It is now fairly generally agreed that the “men” who made
-the tools were the australopithecines. There is also a more “man-like”
-jawbone at Kanam in Kenya, but its find-spot has been questioned. The
-next earliest bones we have were found in Java, and they may be almost
-a hundred thousand years younger than the earliest African finds. We
-haven’t yet found the tools of these early Javanese. Our knowledge of
-tool-using in Africa spreads quickly as time goes on: soon after the
-appearance of tools in the south we shall have them from as far north
-as Algeria.
-
-Very soon after the earliest Javanese come the bones of slightly more
-developed people in Java, and the jawbone of a man who once lived in
-what is now Germany. The same general glacial beds which yielded the
-later Javanese bones and the German jawbone also include tools. These
-finds come from the time of the second alpine glaciation.
-
-So this is the situation. By the time of the end of the second alpine
-or first continental glaciation (say 400,000 years ago) we have traces
-of men from the extremes of the more southerly portions of the Old
-World--South Africa, eastern Asia, and western Europe. There are also
-some traces of men in the middle ground. In fact, Professor Franz
-Weidenreich believed that creatures who were the immediate ancestors
-of men had already spread over Europe, Africa, and Asia by the time
-the Ice Age began. We certainly have no reason to disbelieve this, but
-fortunate accidents of discovery have not yet given us the evidence to
-prove it.
-
-
-MEN AND APES
-
-Many people used to get extremely upset at the ill-formed notion
-that “man descended from the apes.” Such words were much more likely
-to start fights or “monkey trials” than the correct notion that all
-living animals, including man, ascended or evolved from a single-celled
-organism which lived in the primeval seas hundreds of millions of years
-ago. Men are mammals, of the order called Primates, and man’s living
-relatives are the great apes. Men didn’t “descend” from the apes or
-apes from men, and mankind must have had much closer relatives who have
-since become extinct.
-
-Men stand erect. They also walk and run on their two feet. Apes are
-happiest in trees, swinging with their arms from branch to branch.
-Few branches of trees will hold the mighty gorilla, although he still
-manages to sleep in trees. Apes can’t stand really erect in our sense,
-and when they have to run on the ground, they use the knuckles of their
-hands as well as their feet.
-
-A key group of fossil bones here are the south African
-australopithecines. These are called the _Australopithecinae_ or
-“man-apes” or sometimes even “ape-men.” We do not _know_ that they were
-directly ancestral to men but they can hardly have been so to apes.
-Presently I’ll describe them a bit more. The reason I mention them
-here is that while they had brains no larger than those of apes, their
-hipbones were enough like ours so that they must have stood erect.
-There is no good reason to think they couldn’t have walked as we do.
-
-
-BRAINS, HANDS, AND TOOLS
-
-Whether the australopithecines were our ancestors or not, the proper
-ancestors of men must have been able to stand erect and to walk on
-their two feet. Three further important things probably were involved,
-next, before they could become men proper. These are:
-
-  1. The increasing size and development of the brain.
-
-  2. The increasing usefulness (specialization) of the thumb and hand.
-
-  3. The use of tools.
-
-Nobody knows which of these three is most important, or which came
-first. Most probably the growth of all three things was very much
-blended together. If you think about each of the things, you will see
-what I mean. Unless your hand is more flexible than a paw, and your
-thumb will work against (or oppose) your fingers, you can’t hold a tool
-very well. But you wouldn’t get the idea of using a tool unless you had
-enough brain to help you see cause and effect. And it is rather hard to
-see how your hand and brain would develop unless they had something to
-practice on--like using tools. In Professor Krogman’s words, “the hand
-must become the obedient servant of the eye and the brain.” It is the
-_co-ordination_ of these things that counts.
-
-Many other things must have been happening to the bodies of the
-creatures who were the ancestors of men. Our ancestors had to develop
-organs of speech. More than that, they had to get the idea of letting
-_certain sounds_ made with these speech organs have _certain meanings_.
-
-All this must have gone very slowly. Probably everything was developing
-little by little, all together. Men became men very slowly.
-
-
-WHEN SHALL WE CALL MEN MEN?
-
-What do I mean when I say “men”? People who looked pretty much as we
-do, and who used different tools to do different things, are men to me.
-We’ll probably never know whether the earliest ones talked or not. They
-probably had vocal cords, so they could make sounds, but did they know
-how to make sounds work as symbols to carry meanings? But if the fossil
-bones look like our skeletons, and if we find tools which we’ll agree
-couldn’t have been made by nature or by animals, then I’d say we had
-traces of _men_.
-
-The australopithecine finds of the Transvaal and Bechuanaland, in
-south Africa, are bound to come into the discussion here. I’ve already
-told you that the australopithecines could have stood upright and
-walked on their two hind legs. They come from the very base of the
-Pleistocene or Ice Age, and a few coarse stone tools have been found
-with the australopithecine fossils. But there are three varieties
-of the australopithecines and they last on until a time equal to
-that of the second alpine glaciation. They are the best suggestion
-we have yet as to what the ancestors of men _may_ have looked like.
-They were certainly closer to men than to apes. Although their brain
-size was no larger than the brains of modern apes their body size and
-stature were quite small; hence, relative to their small size, their
-brains were large. We have not been able to prove without doubt that
-the australopithecines were _tool-making_ creatures, even though the
-recent news has it that tools have been found with australopithecine
-bones. The doubt as to whether the australopithecines used the tools
-themselves goes like this--just suppose some man-like creature (whose
-bones we have not yet found) made the tools and used them to kill
-and butcher australopithecines. Hence a few experts tend to let
-australopithecines still hang in limbo as “man-apes.”
-
-
-THE EARLIEST MEN WE KNOW
-
-I’ll postpone talking about the tools of early men until the next
-chapter. The men whose bones were the earliest of the Java lot have
-been given the name _Meganthropus_. The bones are very fragmentary. We
-would not understand them very well unless we had the somewhat later
-Javanese lot--the more commonly known _Pithecanthropus_ or “Java
-man”--against which to refer them for study. One of the less well-known
-and earliest fragments, a piece of lower jaw and some teeth, rather
-strongly resembles the lower jaws and teeth of the australopithecine
-type. Was _Meganthropus_ a sort of half-way point between the
-australopithecines and _Pithecanthropus_? It is still too early to say.
-We shall need more finds before we can be definite one way or the other.
-
-Java man, _Pithecanthropus_, comes from geological beds equal in age
-to the latter part of the second alpine glaciation; the _Meganthropus_
-finds refer to beds of the beginning of this glaciation. The first
-finds of Java man were made in 1891-92 by Dr. Eugene Dubois, a Dutch
-doctor in the colonial service. Finds have continued to be made. There
-are now bones enough to account for four skulls. There are also four
-jaws and some odd teeth and thigh bones. Java man, generally speaking,
-was about five feet six inches tall, and didn’t hold his head very
-erect. His skull was very thick and heavy and had room for little more
-than two-thirds as large a brain as we have. He had big teeth and a big
-jaw and enormous eyebrow ridges.
-
-No tools were found in the geological deposits where bones of Java man
-appeared. There are some tools in the same general area, but they come
-a bit later in time. One reason we accept the Java man as man--aside
-from his general anatomical appearance--is that these tools probably
-belonged to his near descendants.
-
-Remember that there are several varieties of men in the whole early
-Java lot, at least two of which are earlier than the _Pithecanthropus_,
-“Java man.” Some of the earlier ones seem to have gone in for
-bigness, in tooth-size at least. _Meganthropus_ is one of these
-earlier varieties. As we said, he _may_ turn out to be a link to
-the australopithecines, who _may_ or _may not_ be ancestral to men.
-_Meganthropus_ is best understandable in terms of _Pithecanthropus_,
-who appeared later in the same general area. _Pithecanthropus_ is
-pretty well understandable from the bones he left us, and also because
-of his strong resemblance to the fully tool-using cave-dwelling “Peking
-man,” _Sinanthropus_, about whom we shall talk next. But you can see
-that the physical anthropologists and prehistoric archeologists still
-have a lot of work to do on the problem of earliest men.
-
-
-PEKING MEN AND SOME EARLY WESTERNERS
-
-The earliest known Chinese are called _Sinanthropus_, or “Peking man,”
-because the finds were made near that city. In World War II, the United
-States Marine guard at our Embassy in Peking tried to help get the
-bones out of the city before the Japanese attack. Nobody knows where
-these bones are now. The Red Chinese accuse us of having stolen them.
-They were last seen on a dock-side at a Chinese port. But should you
-catch a Marine with a sack of old bones, perhaps we could achieve peace
-in Asia by returning them! Fortunately, there is a complete set of
-casts of the bones.
-
-Peking man lived in a cave in a limestone hill, made tools, cracked
-animal bones to get the marrow out, and used fire. Incidentally, the
-bones of Peking man were found because Chinese dig for what they call
-“dragon bones” and “dragon teeth.” Uneducated Chinese buy these things
-in their drug stores and grind them into powder for medicine. The
-“dragon teeth” and “bones” are really fossils of ancient animals, and
-sometimes of men. The people who supply the drug stores have learned
-where to dig for strange bones and teeth. Paleontologists who get to
-China go to the drug stores to buy fossils. In a roundabout way, this
-is how the fallen-in cave of Peking man at Choukoutien was discovered.
-
-Peking man was not quite as tall as Java man but he probably stood
-straighter. His skull looked very much like that of the Java skull
-except that it had room for a slightly larger brain. His face was less
-brutish than was Java man’s face, but this isn’t saying much.
-
-Peking man dates from early in the interglacial period following the
-second alpine glaciation. He probably lived close to 350,000 years
-ago. There are several finds to account for in Europe by about this
-time, and one from northwest Africa. The very large jawbone found
-near Heidelberg in Germany is doubtless even earlier than Peking man.
-The beds where it was found are of second alpine glacial times, and
-recently some tools have been said to have come from the same beds.
-There is not much I need tell you about the Heidelberg jaw save that it
-seems certainly to have belonged to an early man, and that it is very
-big.
-
-Another find in Germany was made at Steinheim. It consists of the
-fragmentary skull of a man. It is very important because of its
-relative completeness, but it has not yet been fully studied. The bone
-is thick, but the back of the head is neither very low nor primitive,
-and the face is also not primitive. The forehead does, however, have
-big ridges over the eyes. The more fragmentary skull from Swanscombe in
-England (p. 11) has been much more carefully studied. Only the top and
-back of that skull have been found. Since the skull rounds up nicely,
-it has been assumed that the face and forehead must have been quite
-“modern.” Careful comparison with Steinheim shows that this was not
-necessarily so. This is important because it bears on the question of
-how early truly “modern” man appeared.
-
-Recently two fragmentary jaws were found at Ternafine in Algeria,
-northwest Africa. They look like the jaws of Peking man. Tools were
-found with them. Since no jaws have yet been found at Steinheim or
-Swanscombe, but the time is the same, one wonders if these people had
-jaws like those of Ternafine.
-
-
-WHAT HAPPENED TO JAVA AND PEKING MEN
-
-Professor Weidenreich thought that there were at least a dozen ways in
-which the Peking man resembled the modern Mongoloids. This would seem
-to indicate that Peking man was really just a very early Chinese.
-
-Several later fossil men have been found in the Java-Australian area.
-The best known of these is the so-called Solo man. There are some finds
-from Australia itself which we now know to be quite late. But it looks
-as if we may assume a line of evolution from Java man down to the
-modern Australian natives. During parts of the Ice Age there was a land
-bridge all the way from Java to Australia.
-
-
-TWO ENGLISHMEN WHO WEREN’T OLD
-
-The older textbooks contain descriptions of two English finds which
-were thought to be very old. These were called Piltdown (_Eoanthropus
-dawsoni_) and Galley Hill. The skulls were very modern in appearance.
-In 1948-49, British scientists began making chemical tests which proved
-that neither of these finds is very old. It is now known that both
-“Piltdown man” and the tools which were said to have been found with
-him were part of an elaborate fake!
-
-
-TYPICAL “CAVE MEN”
-
-The next men we have to talk about are all members of a related group.
-These are the Neanderthal group. “Neanderthal man” himself was found in
-the Neander Valley, near Düsseldorf, Germany, in 1856. He was the first
-human fossil to be recognized as such.
-
-[Illustration: PRINCIPAL KNOWN TYPES OF FOSSIL MEN
-
-  CRO-MAGNON
-  NEANDERTHAL
-  MODERN SKULL
-  COMBE-CAPELLE
-  SINANTHROPUS
-  PITHECANTHROPUS]
-
-Some of us think that the neanderthaloids proper are only those people
-of western Europe who didn’t get out before the beginning of the last
-great glaciation, and who found themselves hemmed in by the glaciers
-in the Alps and northern Europe. Being hemmed in, they intermarried
-a bit too much and developed into a special type. Professor F. Clark
-Howell sees it this way. In Europe, the earliest trace of men we
-now know is the Heidelberg jaw. Evolution continued in Europe, from
-Heidelberg through the Swanscombe and Steinheim types to a group of
-pre-neanderthaloids. There are traces of these pre-neanderthaloids
-pretty much throughout Europe during the third interglacial period--say
-100,000 years ago. The pre-neanderthaloids are represented by such
-finds as the ones at Ehringsdorf in Germany and Saccopastore in Italy.
-I won’t describe them for you, since they are simply less extreme than
-the neanderthaloids proper--about half way between Steinheim and the
-classic Neanderthal people.
-
-Professor Howell believes that the pre-neanderthaloids who happened to
-get caught in the pocket of the southwest corner of Europe at the onset
-of the last great glaciation became the classic Neanderthalers. Out in
-the Near East, Howell thinks, it is possible to see traces of people
-evolving from the pre-neanderthaloid type toward that of fully modern
-man. Certainly, we don’t see such extreme cases of “neanderthaloidism”
-outside of western Europe.
-
-There are at least a dozen good examples in the main or classic
-Neanderthal group in Europe. They date to just before and in the
-earlier part of the last great glaciation (85,000 to 40,000 years ago).
-Many of the finds have been made in caves. The “cave men” the movies
-and the cartoonists show you are probably meant to be Neanderthalers.
-I’m not at all sure they dragged their women by the hair; the women
-were probably pretty tough, too!
-
-Neanderthal men had large bony heads, but plenty of room for brains.
-Some had brain cases even larger than the average for modern man. Their
-faces were heavy, and they had eyebrow ridges of bone, but the ridges
-were not as big as those of Java man. Their foreheads were very low,
-and they didn’t have much chin. They were about five feet three inches
-tall, but were heavy and barrel-chested. But the Neanderthalers didn’t
-slouch as much as they’ve been blamed for, either.
-
-One important thing about the Neanderthal group is that there is a fair
-number of them to study. Just as important is the fact that we know
-something about how they lived, and about some of the tools they made.
-
-
-OTHER MEN CONTEMPORARY WITH THE NEANDERTHALOIDS
-
-We have seen that the neanderthaloids seem to be a specialization
-in a corner of Europe. What was going on elsewhere? We think that
-the pre-neanderthaloid type was a generally widespread form of men.
-From this type evolved other more or less extreme although generally
-related men. The Solo finds in Java form one such case. Another was the
-Rhodesian man of Africa, and the more recent Hopefield finds show more
-of the general Rhodesian type. It is more confusing than it needs to be
-if these cases outside western Europe are called neanderthaloids. They
-lived during the same approximate time range but they were all somewhat
-different-looking people.
-
-
-EARLY MODERN MEN
-
-How early is modern man (_Homo sapiens_), the “wise man”? Some people
-have thought that he was very early, a few still think so. Piltdown
-and Galley Hill, which were quite modern in anatomical appearance and
-_supposedly_ very early in date, were the best “evidence” for very
-early modern men. Now that Piltdown has been liquidated and Galley Hill
-is known to be very late, what is left of the idea?
-
-The backs of the skulls of the Swanscombe and Steinheim finds look
-rather modern. Unless you pay attention to the face and forehead of the
-Steinheim find--which not many people have--and perhaps also consider
-the Ternafine jaws, you might come to the conclusion that the crown of
-the Swanscombe head was that of a modern-like man.
-
-Two more skulls, again without faces, are available from a French
-cave site, Fontéchevade. They come from the time of the last great
-interglacial, as did the pre-neanderthaloids. The crowns of the
-Fontéchevade skulls also look quite modern. There is a bit of the
-forehead preserved on one of these skulls and the brow-ridge is not
-heavy. Nevertheless, there is a suggestion that the bones belonged to
-an immature individual. In this case, his (or even more so, if _her_)
-brow-ridges would have been weak anyway. The case for the Fontéchevade
-fossils, as modern type men, is little stronger than that for
-Swanscombe, although Professor Vallois believes it a good case.
-
-It seems to add up to the fact that there were people living in
-Europe--before the classic neanderthaloids--who looked more modern,
-in some features, than the classic western neanderthaloids did. Our
-best suggestion of what men looked like--just before they became fully
-modern--comes from a cave on Mount Carmel in Palestine.
-
-
-THE FIRST MODERNS
-
-Professor T. D. McCown and the late Sir Arthur Keith, who studied the
-Mount Carmel bones, figured out that one of the two groups involved
-was as much as 70 per cent modern. There were, in fact, two groups or
-varieties of men in the Mount Carmel caves and in at least two other
-Palestinian caves of about the same time. The time would be about that
-of the onset of colder weather, when the last glaciation was beginning
-in the north--say 75,000 years ago.
-
-The 70 per cent modern group came from only one cave, Mugharet es-Skhul
-(“cave of the kids”). The other group, from several caves, had bones of
-men of the type we’ve been calling pre-neanderthaloid which we noted
-were widespread in Europe and beyond. The tools which came with each
-of these finds were generally similar, and McCown and Keith, and other
-scholars since their study, have tended to assume that both the Skhul
-group and the pre-neanderthaloid group came from exactly the same time.
-The conclusion was quite natural: here was a population of men in the
-act of evolving in two different directions. But the time may not be
-exactly the same. It is very difficult to be precise, within say 10,000
-years, for a time some 75,000 years ago. If the Skhul men are in fact
-later than the pre-neanderthaloid group of Palestine, as some of us
-think, then they show how relatively modern some men were--men who
-lived at the same time as the classic Neanderthalers of the European
-pocket.
-
-Soon after the first extremely cold phase of the last glaciation, we
-begin to get a number of bones of completely modern men in Europe.
-We also get great numbers of the tools they made, and their living
-places in caves. Completely modern skeletons begin turning up in caves
-dating back to toward 40,000 years ago. The time is about that of the
-beginning of the second phase of the last glaciation. These skeletons
-belonged to people no different from many people we see today. Like
-people today, not everybody looked alike. (The positions of the more
-important fossil men of later Europe are shown in the chart on page
-72.)
-
-
-DIFFERENCES IN THE EARLY MODERNS
-
-The main early European moderns have been divided into two groups, the
-Cro-Magnon group and the Combe Capelle-Brünn group. Cro-Magnon people
-were tall and big-boned, with large, long, and rugged heads. They
-must have been built like many present-day Scandinavians. The Combe
-Capelle-Brünn people were shorter; they had narrow heads and faces, and
-big eyebrow-ridges. Of course we don’t find the skin or hair of these
-people. But there is little doubt they were Caucasoids (“Whites”).
-
-Another important find came in the Italian Riviera, near Monte Carlo.
-Here, in a cave near Grimaldi, there was a grave containing a woman
-and a young boy, buried together. The two skeletons were first called
-“Negroid” because some features of their bones were thought to resemble
-certain features of modern African Negro bones. But more recently,
-Professor E. A. Hooton and other experts questioned the use of the word
-“Negroid” in describing the Grimaldi skeletons. It is true that nothing
-is known of the skin color, hair form, or any other fleshy feature of
-the Grimaldi people, so that the word “Negroid” in its usual meaning is
-not proper here. It is also not clear whether the features of the bones
-claimed to be “Negroid” are really so at all.
-
-From a place called Wadjak, in Java, we have “proto-Australoid” skulls
-which closely resemble those of modern Australian natives. Some of
-the skulls found in South Africa, especially the Boskop skull, look
-like those of modern Bushmen, but are much bigger. The ancestors of
-the Bushmen seem to have once been very widespread south of the Sahara
-Desert. True African Negroes were forest people who apparently expanded
-out of the west central African area only in the last several thousand
-years. Although dark in skin color, neither the Australians nor the
-Bushmen are Negroes; neither the Wadjak nor the Boskop skulls are
-“Negroid.”
-
-As we’ve already mentioned, Professor Weidenreich believed that Peking
-man was already on the way to becoming a Mongoloid. Anyway, the
-Mongoloids would seem to have been present by the time of the “Upper
-Cave” at Choukoutien, the _Sinanthropus_ find-spot.
-
-
-WHAT THE DIFFERENCES MEAN
-
-What does all this difference mean? It means that, at one moment in
-time, within each different area, men tended to look somewhat alike.
-From area to area, men tended to look somewhat different, just as
-they do today. This is all quite natural. People _tended_ to mate
-near home; in the anthropological jargon, they made up geographically
-localized breeding populations. The simple continental division of
-“stocks”--black = Africa, yellow = Asia, white = Europe--is too simple
-a picture to fit the facts. People became accustomed to life in some
-particular area within a continent (we might call it a “natural area”).
-As they went on living there, they evolved towards some particular
-physical variety. It would, of course, have been difficult to draw
-a clear boundary between two adjacent areas. There must always have
-been some mating across the boundaries in every case. One thing human
-beings don’t do, and never have done, is to mate for “purity.” It is
-self-righteous nonsense when we try to kid ourselves into thinking that
-they do.
-
-I am not going to struggle with the whole business of modern stocks and
-races. This is a book about prehistoric men, not recent historic or
-modern men. My physical anthropologist friends have been very patient
-in helping me to write and rewrite this chapter--I am not going to
-break their patience completely. Races are their business, not mine,
-and they must do the writing about races. I shall, however, give two
-modern definitions of race, and then make one comment.
-
-  Dr. William G. Boyd, professor of Immunochemistry, School of
-    Medicine, Boston University: “We may define a human race as a
-    population which differs significantly from other human populations
-    in regard to the frequency of one or more of the genes it
-    possesses.”
-
-  Professor Sherwood L. Washburn, professor of Physical Anthropology,
-    Department of Anthropology, the University of California: “A ‘race’
-    is a group of genetically similar populations, and races intergrade
-    because there are always intermediate populations.”
-
-My comment is that the ideas involved here are all biological: they
-concern groups, _not_ individuals. Boyd and Washburn may differ a bit
-on what they want to consider a “population,” but a population is a
-group nevertheless, and genetics is biology to the hilt. Now a lot of
-people still think of race in terms of how people dress or fix their
-food or of other habits or customs they have. The next step is to talk
-about racial “purity.” None of this has anything whatever to do with
-race proper, which is a matter of the biology of groups.
-
-Incidentally, I’m told that if man very carefully _controls_
-the breeding of certain animals over generations--dogs, cattle,
-chickens--he might achieve a “pure” race of animals. But he doesn’t do
-it. Some unfortunate genetic trait soon turns up, so this has just as
-carefully to be bred out again, and so on.
-
-
-SUMMARY OF PRESENT KNOWLEDGE OF FOSSIL MEN
-
-The earliest bones of men we now have--upon which all the experts
-would probably agree--are those of _Meganthropus_, from Java, of about
-450,000 years ago. The earlier australopithecines of Africa were
-possibly not tool-users and may not have been ancestral to men at all.
-But there is an alternate and evidently increasingly stronger chance
-that some of them may have been. The Kanam jaw from Kenya, another
-early possibility, is not only very incomplete but its find-spot is
-very questionable.
-
-Java man proper, _Pithecanthropus_, comes next, at about 400,000 years
-ago, and the big Heidelberg jaw in Germany must be of about the same
-date. Next comes Swanscombe in England, Steinheim in Germany, the
-Ternafine jaws in Algeria, and Peking man, _Sinanthropus_. They all
-date to the second great interglacial period, about 350,000 years ago.
-
-Piltdown and Galley Hill are out, and with them, much of the starch
-in the old idea that there were two distinct lines of development
-in human evolution: (1) a line of “paleoanthropic” development from
-Heidelberg to the Neanderthalers where it became extinct, and (2) a
-very early “modern” line, through Piltdown, Galley Hill, Swanscombe, to
-us. Swanscombe, Steinheim, and Ternafine are just as easily cases of
-very early pre-neanderthaloids.
-
-The pre-neanderthaloids were very widespread during the third
-interglacial: Ehringsdorf, Saccopastore, some of the Mount Carmel
-people, and probably Fontéchevade are cases in point. A variety of
-their descendants can be seen, from Java (Solo), Africa (Rhodesian
-man), and about the Mediterranean and in western Europe. As the acute
-cold of the last glaciation set in, the western Europeans found
-themselves surrounded by water, ice, or bitter cold tundra. To vastly
-over-simplify it, they “bred in” and became classic neanderthaloids.
-But on Mount Carmel, the Skhul cave-find with its 70 per cent modern
-features shows what could happen elsewhere at the same time.
-
-Lastly, from about 40,000 or 35,000 years ago--the time of the onset
-of the second phase of the last glaciation--we begin to find the fully
-modern skeletons of men. The modern skeletons differ from place to
-place, just as different groups of men living in different places still
-look different.
-
-What became of the Neanderthalers? Nobody can tell me for sure. I’ve a
-hunch they were simply “bred out” again when the cold weather was over.
-Many Americans, as the years go by, are no longer ashamed to claim they
-have “Indian blood in their veins.” Give us a few more generations
-and there will not be very many other Americans left to whom we can
-brag about it. It certainly isn’t inconceivable to me to imagine a
-little Cro-Magnon boy bragging to his friends about his tough, strong,
-Neanderthaler great-great-great-great-grandfather!
-
-
-
-
-Cultural BEGINNINGS
-
-[Illustration]
-
-
-Men, unlike the lower animals, are made up of much more than flesh and
-blood and bones; for men have “culture.”
-
-
-WHAT IS CULTURE?
-
-“Culture” is a word with many meanings. The doctors speak of making a
-“culture” of a certain kind of bacteria, and ants are said to have a
-“culture.” Then there is the Emily Post kind of “culture”--you say a
-person is “cultured,” or that he isn’t, depending on such things as
-whether or not he eats peas with his knife.
-
-The anthropologists use the word too, and argue heatedly over its finer
-meanings; but they all agree that every human being is part of or has
-some kind of culture. Each particular human group has a particular
-culture; that is one of the ways in which we can tell one group of
-men from another. In this sense, a CULTURE means the way the members
-of a group of people think and believe and live, the tools they make,
-and the way they do things. Professor Robert Redfield says a culture
-is an organized or formalized body of conventional understandings.
-“Conventional understandings” means the whole set of rules, beliefs,
-and standards which a group of people lives by. These understandings
-show themselves in art, and in the other things a people may make and
-do. The understandings continue to last, through tradition, from one
-generation to another. They are what really characterize different
-human groups.
-
-
-SOME CHARACTERISTICS OF CULTURE
-
-A culture lasts, although individual men in the group die off. On
-the other hand, a culture changes as the different conventions and
-understandings change. You could almost say that a culture lives in the
-minds of the men who have it. But people are not born with it; they
-get it as they grow up. Suppose a day-old Hungarian baby is adopted by
-a family in Oshkosh, Wisconsin, and the child is not told that he is
-Hungarian. He will grow up with no more idea of Hungarian culture than
-anyone else in Oshkosh.
-
-So when I speak of ancient Egyptian culture, I mean the whole body
-of understandings and beliefs and knowledge possessed by the ancient
-Egyptians. I mean their beliefs as to why grain grew, as well as their
-ability to make tools with which to reap the grain. I mean their
-beliefs about life after death. What I am thinking about as culture is
-a thing which lasted in time. If any one Egyptian, even the Pharaoh,
-died, it didn’t affect the Egyptian culture of that particular moment.
-
-
-PREHISTORIC CULTURES
-
-For that long period of man’s history that is all prehistory, we have
-no written descriptions of cultures. We find only the tools men made,
-the places where they lived, the graves in which they buried their
-dead. Fortunately for us, these tools and living places and graves all
-tell us something about the ways these men lived and the things they
-believed. But the story we learn of the very early cultures must be
-only a very small part of the whole, for we find so few things. The
-rest of the story is gone forever. We have to do what we can with what
-we find.
-
-For all of the time up to about 75,000 years ago, which was the time
-of the classic European Neanderthal group of men, we have found few
-cave-dwelling places of very early prehistoric men. First, there is the
-fallen-in cave where Peking man was found, near Peking. Then there are
-two or three other _early_, but not _very early_, possibilities. The
-finds at the base of the French cave of Fontéchevade, those in one of
-the Makapan caves in South Africa, and several open sites such as Dr.
-L. S. B. Leakey’s Olorgesailie in Kenya doubtless all lie earlier than
-the time of the main European Neanderthal group, but none are so early
-as the Peking finds.
-
-You can see that we know very little about the home life of earlier
-prehistoric men. We find different kinds of early stone tools, but we
-can’t even be really sure which tools may have been used together.
-
-
-WHY LITTLE HAS LASTED FROM EARLY TIMES
-
-Except for the rare find-spots mentioned above, all our very early
-finds come from geological deposits, or from the wind-blown surfaces
-of deserts. Here is what the business of geological deposits really
-means. Let us say that a group of people was living in England about
-300,000 years ago. They made the tools they needed, lived in some sort
-of camp, almost certainly built fires, and perhaps buried their dead.
-While the climate was still warm, many generations may have lived in
-the same place, hunting, and gathering nuts and berries; but after some
-few thousand years, the weather began very gradually to grow colder.
-These early Englishmen would not have known that a glacier was forming
-over northern Europe. They would only have noticed that the animals
-they hunted seemed to be moving south, and that the berries grew larger
-toward the south. So they would have moved south, too.
-
-The camp site they left is the place we archeologists would really have
-liked to find. All of the different tools the people used would have
-been there together--many broken, some whole. The graves, and traces
-of fire, and the tools would have been there. But the glacier got
-there first! The front of this enormous sheet of ice moved down over
-the country, crushing and breaking and plowing up everything, like a
-gigantic bulldozer. You can see what happened to our camp site.
-
-Everything the glacier couldn’t break, it pushed along in front of it
-or plowed beneath it. Rocks were ground to gravel, and soil was caught
-into the ice, which afterwards melted and ran off as muddy water. Hard
-tools of flint sometimes remained whole. Human bones weren’t so hard;
-it’s a wonder _any_ of them lasted. Gushing streams of melt water
-flushed out the debris from underneath the glacier, and water flowed
-off the surface and through great crevasses. The hard materials these
-waters carried were even more rolled and ground up. Finally, such
-materials were dropped by the rushing waters as gravels, miles from
-the front of the glacier. At last the glacier reached its greatest
-extent; then it melted backward toward the north. Debris held in the
-ice was dropped where the ice melted, or was flushed off by more melt
-water. When the glacier, leaving the land, had withdrawn to the sea,
-great hunks of ice were broken off as icebergs. These icebergs probably
-dropped the materials held in their ice wherever they floated and
-melted. There must be many tools and fragmentary bones of prehistoric
-men on the bottom of the Atlantic Ocean and the North Sea.
-
-Remember, too, that these glaciers came and went at least three or four
-times during the Ice Age. Then you will realize why the earlier things
-we find are all mixed up. Stone tools from one camp site got mixed up
-with stone tools from many other camp sites--tools which may have been
-made tens of thousands or more years apart. The glaciers mixed them
-all up, and so we cannot say which particular sets of tools belonged
-together in the first place.
-
-
-“EOLITHS”
-
-But what sort of tools do we find earliest? For almost a century,
-people have been picking up odd bits of flint and other stone in the
-oldest Ice Age gravels in England and France. It is now thought these
-odd bits of stone weren’t actually worked by prehistoric men. The
-stones were given a name, _eoliths_, or “dawn stones.” You can see them
-in many museums; but you can be pretty sure that very few of them were
-actually fashioned by men.
-
-It is impossible to pick out “eoliths” that seem to be made in any
-one _tradition_. By “tradition” I mean a set of habits for making one
-kind of tool for some particular job. No two “eoliths” look very much
-alike: tools made as part of some one tradition all look much alike.
-Now it’s easy to suppose that the very earliest prehistoric men picked
-up and used almost any sort of stone. This wouldn’t be surprising; you
-and I do it when we go camping. In other words, some of these “eoliths”
-may actually have been used by prehistoric men. They must have used
-anything that might be handy when they needed it. We could have figured
-that out without the “eoliths.”
-
-
-THE ROAD TO STANDARDIZATION
-
-Reasoning from what we know or can easily imagine, there should have
-been three major steps in the prehistory of tool-making. The first step
-would have been simple _utilization_ of what was at hand. This is the
-step into which the “eoliths” would fall. The second step would have
-been _fashioning_--the haphazard preparation of a tool when there was a
-need for it. Probably many of the earlier pebble tools, which I shall
-describe next, fall into this group. The third step would have been
-_standardization_. Here, men began to make tools according to certain
-set traditions. Counting the better-made pebble tools, there are four
-such traditions or sets of habits for the production of stone tools in
-earliest prehistoric times. Toward the end of the Pleistocene, a fifth
-tradition appears.
-
-
-PEBBLE TOOLS
-
-At the beginning of the last chapter, you’ll remember that I said there
-were tools from very early geological beds. The earliest bones of men
-have not yet been found in such early beds although the Sterkfontein
-australopithecine cave approaches this early date. The earliest tools
-come from Africa. They date back to the time of the first great
-alpine glaciation and are at least 500,000 years old. The earliest
-ones are made of split pebbles, about the size of your fist or a bit
-bigger. They go under the name of pebble tools. There are many natural
-exposures of early Pleistocene geological beds in Africa, and the
-prehistoric archeologists of south and central Africa have concentrated
-on searching for early tools. Other finds of early pebble tools have
-recently been made in Algeria and Morocco.
-
-[Illustration: SOUTH AFRICAN PEBBLE TOOL]
-
-There are probably early pebble tools to be found in areas of the
-Old World besides Africa; in fact, some prehistorians already claim
-to have identified a few. Since the forms and the distinct ways of
-making the earlier pebble tools had not yet sufficiently jelled into
-a set tradition, they are difficult for us to recognize. It is not
-so difficult, however, if there are great numbers of “possibles”
-available. A little later in time the tradition becomes more clearly
-set, and pebble tools are easier to recognize. So far, really large
-collections of pebble tools have only been found and examined in Africa.
-
-
-CORE-BIFACE TOOLS
-
-The next tradition we’ll look at is the _core_ or biface one. The tools
-are large pear-shaped pieces of stone trimmed flat on the two opposite
-sides or “faces.” Hence “biface” has been used to describe these tools.
-The front view is like that of a pear with a rather pointed top, and
-the back view looks almost exactly the same. Look at them side on, and
-you can see that the front and back faces are the same and have been
-trimmed to a thin tip. The real purpose in trimming down the two faces
-was to get a good cutting edge all around. You can see all this in the
-illustration.
-
-[Illustration: ABBEVILLIAN BIFACE]
-
-We have very little idea of the way in which these core-bifaces were
-used. They have been called “hand axes,” but this probably gives the
-wrong idea, for an ax, to us, is not a pointed tool. All of these early
-tools must have been used for a number of jobs--chopping, scraping,
-cutting, hitting, picking, and prying. Since the core-bifaces tend to
-be pointed, it seems likely that they were used for hitting, picking,
-and prying. But they have rough cutting edges, so they could have been
-used for chopping, scraping, and cutting.
-
-
-FLAKE TOOLS
-
-The third tradition is the _flake_ tradition. The idea was to get a
-tool with a good cutting edge by simply knocking a nice large flake off
-a big block of stone. You had to break off the flake in such a way that
-it was broad and thin, and also had a good sharp cutting edge. Once you
-really got on to the trick of doing it, this was probably a simpler way
-to make a good cutting tool than preparing a biface. You have to know
-how, though; I’ve tried it and have mashed my fingers more than once.
-
-The flake tools look as if they were meant mainly for chopping,
-scraping, and cutting jobs. When one made a flake tool, the idea seems
-to have been to produce a broad, sharp, cutting edge.
-
-[Illustration: CLACTONIAN FLAKE]
-
-The core-biface and the flake traditions were spread, from earliest
-times, over much of Europe, Africa, and western Asia. The map on page
-52 shows the general area. Over much of this great region there was
-flint. Both of these traditions seem well adapted to flint, although
-good core-bifaces and flakes were made from other kinds of stone,
-especially in Africa south of the Sahara.
-
-
-CHOPPERS AND ADZE-LIKE TOOLS
-
-The fourth early tradition is found in southern and eastern Asia, from
-northwestern India through Java and Burma into China. Father Maringer
-recently reported an early group of tools in Japan, which most resemble
-those of Java, called Patjitanian. The prehistoric men in this general
-area mostly used quartz and tuff and even petrified wood for their
-stone tools (see illustration, p. 46).
-
-This fourth early tradition is called the _chopper-chopping tool_
-tradition. It probably has its earliest roots in the pebble tool
-tradition of African type. There are several kinds of tools in this
-tradition, but all differ from the western core-bifaces and flakes.
-There are broad, heavy scrapers or cleavers, and tools with an
-adze-like cutting edge. These last-named tools are called “hand adzes,”
-just as the core-bifaces of the west have often been called “hand
-axes.” The section of an adze cutting edge is ∠ shaped; the section of
-an ax is < shaped.
-
-[Illustration: ANYATHIAN ADZE-LIKE TOOL]
-
-There are also pointed pebble tools. Thus the tool kit of these early
-south and east Asiatic peoples seems to have included tools for doing
-as many different jobs as did the tools of the Western traditions.
-
-Dr. H. L. Movius has emphasized that the tools which were found in the
-Peking cave with Peking man belong to the chopper-tool tradition. This
-is the only case as yet where the tools and the man have been found
-together from very earliest times--if we except Sterkfontein.
-
-
-DIFFERENCES WITHIN THE TOOL-MAKING TRADITIONS
-
-The latter three great traditions in the manufacture of stone
-tools--and the less clear-cut pebble tools before them--are all we have
-to show of the cultures of the men of those times. Changes happened in
-each of the traditions. As time went on, the tools in each tradition
-were better made. There could also be slight regional differences in
-the tools within one tradition. Thus, tools with small differences, but
-all belonging to one tradition, can be given special group (facies)
-names.
-
-This naming of special groups has been going on for some time. Here are
-some of these names, since you may see them used in museum displays
-of flint tools, or in books. Within each tradition of tool-making
-(save the chopper tools), the earliest tool type is at the bottom
-of the list, just as it appears in the lowest beds of a geological
-stratification.[3]
-
-  [3] Archeologists usually make their charts and lists with the
-      earliest materials at the bottom and the latest on top, since
-      this is the way they find them in the ground.
-
-  Chopper tool (all about equally early):
-    Anyathian (Burma)
-    Choukoutienian (China)
-    Patjitanian (Java)
-    Soan (India)
-
-  Flake:
-    “Typical Mousterian”
-    Levalloiso-Mousterian
-    Levalloisian
-    Tayacian
-    Clactonian (localized in England)
-
-  Core-biface:
-    Some blended elements in “Mousterian”
-    Micoquian (= Acheulean 6 and 7)
-    Acheulean
-    Abbevillian (once called “Chellean”)
-
-  Pebble tool:
-    Oldowan
-    Ain Hanech
-    pre-Stellenbosch
-    Kafuan
-
-The core-biface and the flake traditions appear in the chart (p. 65).
-
-The early archeologists had many of the tool groups named before they
-ever realized that there were broader tool preparation traditions. This
-was understandable, for in dealing with the mixture of things that come
-out of glacial gravels the easiest thing to do first is to isolate
-individual types of tools into groups. First you put a bushel-basketful
-of tools on a table and begin matching up types. Then you give names to
-the groups of each type. The groups and the types are really matters of
-the archeologists’ choice; in real life, they were probably less exact
-than the archeologists’ lists of them. We now know pretty well in which
-of the early traditions the various early groups belong.
-
-
-THE MEANING OF THE DIFFERENT TRADITIONS
-
-What do the traditions really mean? I see them as the standardization
-of ways to make tools for particular jobs. We may not know exactly what
-job the maker of a particular core-biface or flake tool had in mind. We
-can easily see, however, that he already enjoyed a know-how, a set of
-persistent habits of tool preparation, which would always give him the
-same type of tool when he wanted to make it. Therefore, the traditions
-show us that persistent habits already existed for the preparation of
-one type of tool or another.
-
-This tells us that one of the characteristic aspects of human culture
-was already present. There must have been, in the minds of these
-early men, a notion of the ideal type of tool for a particular job.
-Furthermore, since we find so many thousands upon thousands of tools
-of one type or another, the notion of the ideal types of tools _and_
-the know-how for the making of each type must have been held in common
-by many men. The notions of the ideal types and the know-how for their
-production must have been passed on from one generation to another.
-
-I could even guess that the notions of the ideal type of one or the
-other of these tools stood out in the minds of men of those times
-somewhat like a symbol of “perfect tool for good job.” If this were
-so--remember it’s only a wild guess of mine--then men were already
-symbol users. Now let’s go on a further step to the fact that the words
-men speak are simply sounds, each different sound being a symbol for a
-different meaning. If standardized tool-making suggests symbol-making,
-is it also possible that crude word-symbols were also being made? I
-suppose that it is not impossible.
-
-There may, of course, be a real question whether tool-utilizing
-creatures--our first step, on page 42--were actually men. Other
-animals utilize things at hand as tools. The tool-fashioning creature
-of our second step is more suggestive, although we may not yet feel
-sure that many of the earlier pebble tools were man-made products. But
-with the step to standardization and the appearance of the traditions,
-I believe we must surely be dealing with the traces of culture-bearing
-_men_. The “conventional understandings” which Professor Redfield’s
-definition of culture suggests are now evidenced for us in the
-persistent habits for the preparation of stone tools. Were we able to
-see the other things these prehistoric men must have made--in materials
-no longer preserved for the archeologist to find--I believe there would
-be clear signs of further conventional understandings. The men may have
-been physically primitive and pretty shaggy in appearance, but I think
-we must surely call them men.
-
-
-AN OLDER INTERPRETATION OF THE WESTERN TRADITIONS
-
-In the last chapter, I told you that many of the older archeologists
-and human paleontologists used to think that modern man was very old.
-The supposed ages of Piltdown and Galley Hill were given as evidence
-of the great age of anatomically modern man, and some interpretations
-of the Swanscombe and Fontéchevade fossils were taken to support
-this view. The conclusion was that there were two parallel lines or
-“phyla” of men already present well back in the Pleistocene. The
-first of these, the more primitive or “paleoanthropic” line, was
-said to include Heidelberg, the proto-neanderthaloids and classic
-Neanderthal. The more anatomically modern or “neanthropic” line was
-thought to consist of Piltdown and the others mentioned above. The
-Neanderthaler or paleoanthropic line was thought to have become extinct
-after the first phase of the last great glaciation. Of course, the
-modern or neanthropic line was believed to have persisted into the
-present, as the basis for the world’s population today. But with
-Piltdown liquidated, Galley Hill known to be very late, and Swanscombe
-and Fontéchevade otherwise interpreted, there is little left of the
-so-called parallel phyla theory.
-
-While the theory was in vogue, however, and as long as the European
-archeological evidence was looked at in one short-sighted way, the
-archeological materials _seemed_ to fit the parallel phyla theory. It
-was simply necessary to believe that the flake tools were made only
-by the paleoanthropic Neanderthaler line, and that the more handsome
-core-biface tools were the product of the neanthropic modern-man line.
-
-Remember that _almost_ all of the early prehistoric European tools
-came only from the redeposited gravel beds. This means that the tools
-were not normally found in the remains of camp sites or work shops
-where they had actually been dropped by the men who made and used
-them. The tools came, rather, from the secondary hodge-podge of the
-glacial gravels. I tried to give you a picture of the bulldozing action
-of glaciers (p. 40) and of the erosion and weathering that were
-side-effects of a glacially conditioned climate on the earth’s surface.
-As we said above, if one simply plucks tools out of the redeposited
-gravels, his natural tendency is to “type” the tools by groups, and to
-think that the groups stand for something _on their own_.
-
-In 1906, M. Victor Commont actually made a rare find of what seems
-to have been a kind of workshop site, on a terrace above the Somme
-river in France. Here, Commont realized, flake tools appeared clearly
-in direct association with core-biface tools. Few prehistorians paid
-attention to Commont or his site, however. It was easier to believe
-that flake tools represented a distinct “culture” and that this
-“culture” was that of the Neanderthaler or paleoanthropic line, and
-that the core-bifaces stood for another “culture” which was that of the
-supposed early modern or neanthropic line. Of course, I am obviously
-skipping many details here. Some later sites with Neanderthal fossils
-do seem to have only flake tools, but other such sites have both types
-of tools. The flake tools which appeared _with_ the core-bifaces
-in the Swanscombe gravels were never made much of, although it
-was embarrassing for the parallel phyla people that Fontéchevade
-ran heavily to flake tools. All in all, the parallel phyla theory
-flourished because it seemed so neat and easy to understand.
-
-
-TRADITIONS ARE TOOL-MAKING HABITS, NOT CULTURES
-
-In case you think I simply enjoy beating a dead horse, look in any
-standard book on prehistory written twenty (or even ten) years ago, or
-in most encyclopedias. You’ll find that each of the individual tool
-types, of the West, at least, was supposed to represent a “culture.”
-The “cultures” were believed to correspond to parallel lines of human
-evolution.
-
-In 1937, Mr. Harper Kelley strongly re-emphasized the importance
-of Commont’s workshop site and the presence of flake tools with
-core-bifaces. Next followed Dr. Movius’ clear delineation of the
-chopper-chopping tool tradition of the Far East. This spoiled the nice
-symmetry of the flake-tool = paleoanthropic, core-biface = neanthropic
-equations. Then came increasing understanding of the importance of
-the pebble tools in Africa, and the location of several more workshop
-sites there, especially at Olorgesailie in Kenya. Finally came the
-liquidation of Piltdown and the deflation of Galley Hill’s date. So it
-is at last possible to picture an individual prehistoric man making a
-flake tool to do one job and a core-biface tool to do another. Commont
-showed us this picture in 1906, but few believed him.
-
-[Illustration: DISTRIBUTION OF TOOL-PREPARATION TRADITIONS
-
-Time approximately 100,000 years ago]
-
-There are certainly a few cases in which flake tools did appear with
-few or no core-bifaces. The flake-tool group called Clactonian in
-England is such a case. Another good, but certainly later case is
-that of the cave on Mount Carmel in Palestine, where the blended
-pre-neanderthaloid, 70 per cent modern-type skulls were found. Here, in
-the same level with the skulls, were 9,784 flint tools. Of these, only
-three--doubtless strays--were core-bifaces; all the rest were flake
-tools or flake chips. We noted above how the Fontéchevade cave ran to
-flake tools. The only conclusion I would draw from this is that times
-and circumstances did exist in which prehistoric men needed only flake
-tools. So they only made flake tools for those particular times and
-circumstances.
-
-
-LIFE IN EARLIEST TIMES
-
-What do we actually know of life in these earliest times? In the
-glacial gravels, or in the terrace gravels of rivers once swollen by
-floods of melt water or heavy rains, or on the windswept deserts, we
-find stone tools. The earliest and coarsest of these are the pebble
-tools. We do not yet know what the men who made them looked like,
-although the Sterkfontein australopithecines probably give us a good
-hint. Then begin the more formal tool preparation traditions of the
-west--the core-bifaces and the flake tools--and the chopper-chopping
-tool series of the farther east. There is an occasional roughly worked
-piece of bone. From the gravels which yield the Clactonian flakes of
-England comes the fire-hardened point of a wooden spear. There are
-also the chance finds of the fossil human bones themselves, of which
-we spoke in the last chapter. Aside from the cave of Peking man, none
-of the earliest tools have been found in caves. Open air or “workshop”
-sites which do not seem to have been disturbed later by some geological
-agency are very rare.
-
-The chart on page 65 shows graphically what the situation in
-west-central Europe seems to have been. It is not yet certain whether
-there were pebble tools there or not. The Fontéchevade cave comes
-into the picture about 100,000 years ago or more. But for the earlier
-hundreds of thousands of years--below the red-dotted line on the
-chart--the tools we find come almost entirely from the haphazard
-mixture within the geological contexts.
-
-The stone tools of each of the earlier traditions are the simplest
-kinds of all-purpose tools. Almost any one of them could be used for
-hacking, chopping, cutting, and scraping; so the men who used them must
-have been living in a rough and ready sort of way. They found or hunted
-their food wherever they could. In the anthropological jargon, they
-were “food-gatherers,” pure and simple.
-
-Because of the mixture in the gravels and in the materials they
-carried, we can’t be sure which animals these men hunted. Bones of
-the larger animals turn up in the gravels, but they could just as
-well belong to the animals who hunted the men, rather than the other
-way about. We don’t know. This is why camp sites like Commont’s and
-Olorgesailie in Kenya are so important when we do find them. The animal
-bones at Olorgesailie belonged to various mammals of extremely large
-size. Probably they were taken in pit-traps, but there are a number of
-groups of three round stones on the site which suggest that the people
-used bolas. The South American Indians used three-ball bolas, with the
-stones in separate leather bags connected by thongs. These were whirled
-and then thrown through the air so as to entangle the feet of a fleeing
-animal.
-
-Professor F. Clark Howell recently returned from excavating another
-important open air site at Isimila in Tanganyika. The site yielded
-the bones of many fossil animals and also thousands of core-bifaces,
-flakes, and choppers. But Howell’s reconstruction of the food-getting
-habits of the Isimila people certainly suggests that the word “hunting”
-is too dignified for what they did; “scavenging” would be much nearer
-the mark.
-
-During a great part of this time the climate was warm and pleasant. The
-second interglacial period (the time between the second and third great
-alpine glaciations) lasted a long time, and during much of this time
-the climate may have been even better than ours is now. We don’t know
-that earlier prehistoric men in Europe or Africa lived in caves. They
-may not have needed to; much of the weather may have been so nice that
-they lived in the open. Perhaps they didn’t wear clothes, either.
-
-
-WHAT THE PEKING CAVE-FINDS TELL US
-
-The one early cave-dwelling we have found is that of Peking man, in
-China. Peking man had fire. He probably cooked his meat, or used
-the fire to keep dangerous animals away from his den. In the cave
-were bones of dangerous animals, members of the wolf, bear, and cat
-families. Some of the cat bones belonged to beasts larger than tigers.
-There were also bones of other wild animals: buffalo, camel, deer,
-elephants, horses, sheep, and even ostriches. Seventy per cent of the
-animals Peking man killed were fallow deer. It’s much too cold and dry
-in north China for all these animals to live there today. So this list
-helps us know that the weather was reasonably warm, and that there was
-enough rain to grow grass for the grazing animals. The list also helps
-the paleontologists to date the find.
-
-Peking man also seems to have eaten plant food, for there are hackberry
-seeds in the debris of the cave. His tools were made of sandstone and
-quartz and sometimes of a rather bad flint. As we’ve already seen, they
-belong in the chopper-tool tradition. It seems fairly clear that some
-of the edges were chipped by right-handed people. There are also many
-split pieces of heavy bone. Peking man probably split them so he could
-eat the bone marrow, but he may have used some of them as tools.
-
-Many of these split bones were the bones of Peking men. Each one of the
-skulls had already had the base broken out of it. In no case were any
-of the bones resting together in their natural relation to one another.
-There is nothing like a burial; all of the bones are scattered. Now
-it’s true that animals could have scattered bodies that were not cared
-for or buried. But splitting bones lengthwise and carefully removing
-the base of a skull call for both the tools and the people to use them.
-It’s pretty clear who the people were. Peking man was a cannibal.
-
-       *       *       *       *       *
-
-This rounds out about all we can say of the life and times of early
-prehistoric men. In those days life was rough. You evidently had to
-watch out not only for dangerous animals but also for your fellow men.
-You ate whatever you could catch or find growing. But you had sense
-enough to build fires, and you had already formed certain habits for
-making the kinds of stone tools you needed. That’s about all we know.
-But I think we’ll have to admit that cultural beginnings had been made,
-and that these early people were really _men_.
-
-
-
-
-MORE EVIDENCE of Culture
-
-[Illustration]
-
-
-While the dating is not yet sure, the material that we get from caves
-in Europe must go back to about 100,000 years ago; the time of the
-classic Neanderthal group followed soon afterwards. We don’t know why
-there is no earlier material in the caves; apparently they were not
-used before the last interglacial phase (the period just before the
-last great glaciation). We know that men of the classic Neanderthal
-group were living in caves from about 75,000 to 45,000 years ago.
-New radioactive carbon dates even suggest that some of the traces of
-culture we’ll describe in this chapter may have lasted to about 35,000
-years ago. Probably some of the pre-neanderthaloid types of men had
-also lived in caves. But we have so far found their bones in caves only
-in Palestine and at Fontéchevade.
-
-
-THE CAVE LAYERS
-
-In parts of France, some peasants still live in caves. In prehistoric
-time, many generations of people lived in them. As a result, many
-caves have deep layers of debris. The first people moved in and lived
-on the rock floor. They threw on the floor whatever they didn’t want,
-and they tracked in mud; nobody bothered to clean house in those days.
-Their debris--junk and mud and garbage and what not--became packed
-into a layer. As time went on, and generations passed, the layer grew
-thicker. Then there might have been a break in the occupation of the
-cave for a while. Perhaps the game animals got scarce and the people
-moved away; or maybe the cave became flooded. Later on, other people
-moved in and began making a new layer of their own on top of the first
-layer. Perhaps this process of layering went on in the same cave for a
-hundred thousand years; you can see what happened. The drawing on this
-page shows a section through such a cave. The earliest layer is on the
-bottom, the latest one on top. They go in order from bottom to top,
-earliest to latest. This is the _stratification_ we talked about (p.
-12).
-
-[Illustration: SECTION OF SHELTER ON LOWER TERRACE, LE MOUSTIER]
-
-While we may find a mix-up in caves, it’s not nearly as bad as the
-mixing up that was done by glaciers. The animal bones and shells, the
-fireplaces, the bones of men, and the tools the men made all belong
-together, if they come from one layer. That’s the reason why the cave
-of Peking man is so important. It is also the reason why the caves in
-Europe and the Near East are so important. We can get an idea of which
-things belong together and which lot came earliest and which latest.
-
-In most cases, prehistoric men lived only in the mouths of caves.
-They didn’t like the dark inner chambers as places to live in. They
-preferred rock-shelters, at the bases of overhanging cliffs, if there
-was enough overhang to give shelter. When the weather was good, they no
-doubt lived in the open air as well. I’ll go on using the term “cave”
-since it’s more familiar, but remember that I really mean rock-shelter,
-as a place in which people actually lived.
-
-The most important European cave sites are in Spain, France, and
-central Europe; there are also sites in England and Italy. A few caves
-are known in the Near East and Africa, and no doubt more sites will be
-found when the out-of-the-way parts of Europe, Africa, and Asia are
-studied.
-
-
-AN “INDUSTRY” DEFINED
-
-We have already seen that the earliest European cave materials are
-those from the cave of Fontéchevade. Movius feels certain that the
-lowest materials here date back well into the third interglacial stage,
-that which lay between the Riss (next to the last) and the Würm I
-(first stage of the last) alpine glaciations. This material consists
-of an _industry_ of stone tools, apparently all made in the flake
-tradition. This is the first time we have used the word “industry.”
-It is useful to call all of the different tools found together in one
-layer and made of _one kind of material_ an industry; that is, the
-tools must be found together as men left them. Tools taken from the
-glacial gravels (or from windswept desert surfaces or river gravels
-or any geological deposit) are not “together” in this sense. We might
-say the latter have only “geological,” not “archeological” context.
-Archeological context means finding things just as men left them. We
-can tell what tools go together in an “industrial” sense only if we
-have archeological context.
-
-Up to now, the only things we could have called “industries” were the
-worked stone industry and perhaps the worked (?) bone industry of the
-Peking cave. We could add some of the very clear cases of open air
-sites, like Olorgesailie. We couldn’t use the term for the stone tools
-from the glacial gravels, because we do not know which tools belonged
-together. But when the cave materials begin to appear in Europe, we can
-begin to speak of industries. Most of the European caves of this time
-contain industries of flint tools alone.
-
-
-THE EARLIEST EUROPEAN CAVE LAYERS
-
-We’ve just mentioned the industry from what is said to be the oldest
-inhabited cave in Europe; that is, the industry from the deepest layer
-of the site at Fontéchevade. Apparently it doesn’t amount to much. The
-tools are made of stone, in the flake tradition, and are very poorly
-worked. This industry is called _Tayacian_. Its type tool seems to be
-a smallish flake tool, but there are also larger flakes which seem to
-have been fashioned for hacking. In fact, the type tool seems to be
-simply a smaller edition of the Clactonian tool (pictured on p. 45).
-
-None of the Fontéchevade tools are really good. There are scrapers,
-and more or less pointed tools, and tools that may have been used
-for hacking and chopping. Many of the tools from the earlier glacial
-gravels are better made than those of this first industry we see in
-a European cave. There is so little of this material available that
-we do not know which is really typical and which is not. You would
-probably find it hard to see much difference between this industry and
-a collection of tools of the type called Clactonian, taken from the
-glacial gravels, especially if the Clactonian tools were small-sized.
-
-The stone industry of the bottommost layer of the Mount Carmel cave,
-in Palestine, where somewhat similar tools were found, has also been
-called Tayacian.
-
-I shall have to bring in many unfamiliar words for the names of the
-industries. The industries are usually named after the places where
-they were first found, and since these were in most cases in France,
-most of the names which follow will be of French origin. However,
-the names have simply become handles and are in use far beyond the
-boundaries of France. It would be better if we had a non-place-name
-terminology, but archeologists have not yet been able to agree on such
-a terminology.
-
-
-THE ACHEULEAN INDUSTRY
-
-Both in France and in Palestine, as well as in some African cave
-sites, the next layers in the deep caves have an industry in both the
-core-biface and the flake traditions. The core-biface tools usually
-make up less than half of all the tools in the industry. However,
-the name of the biface type of tool is generally given to the whole
-industry. It is called the _Acheulean_, actually a late form of it, as
-“Acheulean” is also used for earlier core-biface tools taken from the
-glacial gravels. In western Europe, the name used is _Upper Acheulean_
-or _Micoquian_. The same terms have been borrowed to name layers E and
-F in the Tabun cave, on Mount Carmel in Palestine.
-
-The Acheulean core-biface type of tool is worked on two faces so as
-to give a cutting edge all around. The outline of its front view may
-be oval, or egg-shaped, or a quite pointed pear shape. The large
-chip-scars of the Acheulean core-bifaces are shallow and flat. It is
-suspected that this resulted from the removal of the chips with a
-wooden club; the deep chip-scars of the earlier Abbevillian core-biface
-came from beating the tool against a stone anvil. These tools are
-really the best and also the final products of the core-biface
-tradition. We first noticed the tradition in the early glacial gravels
-(p. 43); now we see its end, but also its finest examples, in the
-deeper cave levels.
-
-The flake tools, which really make up the greater bulk of this
-industry, are simple scrapers and chips with sharp cutting edges. The
-habits used to prepare them must have been pretty much the same as
-those used for at least one of the flake industries we shall mention
-presently.
-
-There is very little else in these early cave layers. We do not have
-a proper “industry” of bone tools. There are traces of fire, and of
-animal bones, and a few shells. In Palestine, there are many more
-bones of deer than of gazelle in these layers; the deer lives in a
-wetter climate than does the gazelle. In the European cave layers, the
-animal bones are those of beasts that live in a warm climate. They
-belonged in the last interglacial period. We have not yet found the
-bones of fossil men definitely in place with this industry.
-
-[Illustration: ACHEULEAN BIFACE]
-
-
-FLAKE INDUSTRIES FROM THE CAVES
-
-Two more stone industries--the _Levalloisian_ and the
-“_Mousterian_”--turn up at approximately the same time in the European
-cave layers. Their tools seem to be mainly in the flake tradition,
-but according to some of the authorities their preparation also shows
-some combination with the habits by which the core-biface tools were
-prepared.
-
-Now notice that I don’t tell you the Levalloisian and the “Mousterian”
-layers are both above the late Acheulean layers. Look at the cave
-section (p. 57) and you’ll find that some “Mousterian of Acheulean
-tradition” appears above some “typical Mousterian.” This means that
-there may be some kinds of Acheulean industries that are later than
-some kinds of “Mousterian.” The same is true of the Levalloisian.
-
-There were now several different kinds of habits that men used in
-making stone tools. These habits were based on either one or the other
-of the two traditions--core-biface or flake--or on combinations of
-the habits used in the preparation techniques of both traditions. All
-were popular at about the same time. So we find that people who made
-one kind of stone tool industry lived in a cave for a while. Then they
-gave up the cave for some reason, and people with another industry
-moved in. Then the first people came back--or at least somebody with
-the same tool-making habits as the first people. Or maybe a third group
-of tool-makers moved in. The people who had these different habits for
-making their stone tools seem to have moved around a good deal. They no
-doubt borrowed and exchanged tricks of the trade with each other. There
-were no patent laws in those days.
-
-The extremely complicated interrelationships of the different habits
-used by the tool-makers of this range of time are at last being
-systematically studied. M. François Bordes has developed a statistical
-method of great importance for understanding these tool preparation
-habits.
-
-
-THE LEVALLOISIAN AND MOUSTERIAN
-
-The easiest Levalloisian tool to spot is a big flake tool. The trick
-in making it was to fashion carefully a big chunk of stone (called
-the Levalloisian “tortoise core,” because it resembles the shape of
-a turtle-shell) and then to whack this in such a way that a large
-flake flew off. This large thin flake, with sharp cutting edges, is
-the finished Levalloisian tool. There were various other tools in a
-Levalloisian industry, but this is the characteristic _Levalloisian_
-tool.
-
-There are several “typical Mousterian” stone tools. Different from
-the tools of the Levalloisian type, these were made from “disc-like
-cores.” There are medium-sized flake “side scrapers.” There are also
-some small pointed tools and some small “hand axes.” The last of these
-tool types is often a flake worked on both of the flat sides (that
-is, bifacially). There are also pieces of flint worked into the form
-of crude balls. The pointed tools may have been fixed on shafts to
-make short jabbing spears; the round flint balls may have been used as
-bolas. Actually, we don’t _know_ what either tool was used for. The
-points and side scrapers are illustrated (pp. 64 and 66).
-
-[Illustration: LEVALLOIS FLAKE]
-
-
-THE MIXING OF TRADITIONS
-
-Nowadays the archeologists are less and less sure of the importance
-of any one specific tool type and name. Twenty years ago, they used
-to speak simply of Acheulean or Levalloisian or Mousterian tools.
-Now, more and more, _all_ of the tools from some one layer in a
-cave are called an “industry,” which is given a mixed name. Thus we
-have “Levalloiso-Mousterian,” and “Acheuleo-Levalloisian,” and even
-“Acheuleo-Mousterian” (or “Mousterian of Acheulean tradition”). Bordes’
-systematic work is beginning to clear up some of our confusion.
-
-The time of these late Acheuleo-Levalloiso-Mousterioid industries
-is from perhaps as early as 100,000 years ago. It may have lasted
-until well past 50,000 years ago. This was the time of the first
-phase of the last great glaciation. It was also the time that the
-classic group of Neanderthal men was living in Europe. A number of
-the Neanderthal fossil finds come from these cave layers. Before the
-different habits of tool preparation were understood it used to be
-popular to say Neanderthal man was “Mousterian man.” I think this is
-wrong. What used to be called “Mousterian” is now known to be a variety
-of industries with tools of both core-biface and flake habits, and
-so mixed that the word “Mousterian” used alone really doesn’t mean
-anything. The Neanderthalers doubtless understood the tool preparation
-habits by means of which Acheulean, Levalloisian and Mousterian type
-tools were produced. We also have the more modern-like Mount Carmel
-people, found in a cave layer of Palestine with tools almost entirely
-in the flake tradition, called “Levalloiso-Mousterian,” and the
-Fontéchevade-Tayacian (p. 59).
-
-[Illustration: MOUSTERIAN POINT]
-
-
-OTHER SUGGESTIONS OF LIFE IN THE EARLY CAVE LAYERS
-
-Except for the stone tools, what do we know of the way men lived in the
-time range after 100,000 to perhaps 40,000 years ago or even later?
-We know that in the area from Europe to Palestine, at least some of
-the people (some of the time) lived in the fronts of caves and warmed
-themselves over fires. In Europe, in the cave layers of these times,
-we find the bones of different animals; the bones in the lowest layers
-belong to animals that lived in a warm climate; above them are the
-bones of those who could stand the cold, like the reindeer and mammoth.
-Thus, the meat diet must have been changing, as the glacier crept
-farther south. Shells and possibly fish bones have lasted in these
-cave layers, but there is not a trace of the vegetable foods and the
-nuts and berries and other wild fruits that must have been eaten when
-they could be found.
-
-[Illustration: CHART SHOWING PRESENT UNDERSTANDING OF RELATIONSHIPS AND
-SUCCESSION OF TOOL-PREPARATION TRADITIONS, INDUSTRIES, AND ASSEMBLAGES
-OF WEST-CENTRAL EUROPE
-
-Wavy lines indicate transitions in industrial habits. These transitions
-are not yet understood in detail. The glacial and climatic scheme shown
-is the alpine one.]
-
-Bone tools have also been found from this period. Some are called
-scrapers, and there are also long chisel-like leg-bone fragments
-believed to have been used for skinning animals. Larger hunks of bone,
-which seem to have served as anvils or chopping blocks, are fairly
-common.
-
-Bits of mineral, used as coloring matter, have also been found. We
-don’t know what the color was used for.
-
-[Illustration: MOUSTERIAN SIDE SCRAPER]
-
-There is a small but certain number of cases of intentional burials.
-These burials have been found on the floors of the caves; in other
-words, the people dug graves in the places where they lived. The holes
-made for the graves were small. For this reason (or perhaps for some
-other?) the bodies were in a curled-up or contracted position. Flint or
-bone tools or pieces of meat seem to have been put in with some of the
-bodies. In several cases, flat stones had been laid over the graves.
-
-
-TOOLS FROM AFRICA AND ASIA ABOUT 100,000 YEARS AGO
-
-Professor Movius characterizes early prehistoric Africa as a continent
-showing a variety of stone industries. Some of these industries were
-purely local developments and some were practically identical with
-industries found in Europe at the same time. From northwest Africa
-to Capetown--excepting the tropical rain forest region of the west
-center--tools of developed Acheulean, Levalloisian, and Mousterian
-types have been recognized. Often they are named after African place
-names.
-
-In east and south Africa lived people whose industries show a
-development of the Levalloisian technique. Such industries are
-called Stillbay. Another industry, developed on the basis of the
-Acheulean technique, is called Fauresmith. From the northwest comes
-an industry with tanged points and flake-blades; this is called the
-Aterian. The tropical rain forest region contained people whose stone
-tools apparently show adjustment to this peculiar environment; the
-so-called Sangoan industry includes stone picks, adzes, core-bifaces
-of specialized Acheulean type, and bifacial points which were probably
-spearheads.
-
-In western Asia, even as far as the east coast of India, the tools of
-the Eurafrican core-biface and flake tool traditions continued to be
-used. But in the Far East, as we noted in the last chapter, men had
-developed characteristic stone chopper and chopping tools. This tool
-preparation tradition--basically a pebble tool tradition--lasted to the
-very end of the Ice Age.
-
-When more intact open air sites such as that of an earlier time at
-Olorgesailie, and more stratified cave sites are found and excavated
-in Asia and Africa, we shall be able to get a more complete picture.
-So far, our picture of the general cultural level of the Old World at
-about 100,000 years ago--and soon afterwards--is best from Europe, but
-it is still far from complete there, too.
-
-
-CULTURE AT THE BEGINNING OF THE LAST GREAT GLACIAL PERIOD
-
-The few things we have found must indicate only a very small part
-of the total activities of the people who lived at the time. All of
-the things they made of wood and bark, of skins, of anything soft,
-are gone. The fact that burials were made, at least in Europe and
-Palestine, is pretty clear proof that the people had some notion of a
-life after death. But what this notion really was, or what gods (if
-any) men believed in, we cannot know. Dr. Movius has also reminded me
-of the so-called bear cults--cases in which caves have been found which
-contain the skulls of bears in apparently purposeful arrangement. This
-might suggest some notion of hoarding up the spirits or the strength of
-bears killed in the hunt. Probably the people lived in small groups,
-as hunting and food-gathering seldom provide enough food for large
-groups of people. These groups probably had some kind of leader or
-“chief.” Very likely the rude beginnings of rules for community life
-and politics, and even law, were being made. But what these were, we
-do not know. We can only guess about such things, as we can only guess
-about many others; for example, how the idea of a family must have been
-growing, and how there may have been witch doctors who made beginnings
-in medicine or in art, in the materials they gathered for their trade.
-
-The stone tools help us most. They have lasted, and we can find
-them. As they come to us, from this cave or that, and from this
-layer or that, the tool industries show a variety of combinations
-of the different basic habits or traditions of tool preparation.
-This seems only natural, as the groups of people must have been very
-small. The mixtures and blendings of the habits used in making stone
-tools must mean that there were also mixtures and blends in many of
-the other ideas and beliefs of these small groups. And what this
-probably means is that there was no one _culture_ of the time. It is
-certainly unlikely that there were simply three cultures, “Acheulean,”
-“Levalloisian,” and “Mousterian,” as has been thought in the past.
-Rather there must have been a great variety of loosely related cultures
-at about the same stage of advancement. We could say, too, that here
-we really begin to see, for the first time, that remarkable ability
-of men to adapt themselves to a variety of conditions. We shall see
-this adaptive ability even more clearly as time goes on and the record
-becomes more complete.
-
-Over how great an area did these loosely related cultures reach in
-the time 75,000 to 45,000 or even as late as 35,000 years ago? We
-have described stone tools made in one or another of the flake and
-core-biface habits, for an enormous area. It covers all of Europe, all
-of Africa, the Near East, and parts of India. It is perfectly possible
-that the flake and core-biface habits lasted on after 35,000 years ago,
-in some places outside of Europe. In northern Africa, for example, we
-are certain that they did (see chart, p. 72).
-
-On the other hand, in the Far East (China, Burma, Java) and in northern
-India, the tools of the old chopper-tool tradition were still being
-made. Out there, we must assume, there was a different set of loosely
-related cultures. At least, there was a different set of loosely
-related habits for the making of tools. But the men who made them must
-have looked much like the men of the West. Their tools were different,
-but just as useful.
-
-As to what the men of the West looked like, I’ve already hinted at all
-we know so far (pp. 29 ff.). The Neanderthalers were present at
-the time. Some more modern-like men must have been about, too, since
-fossils of them have turned up at Mount Carmel in Palestine, and at
-Teshik Tash, in Trans-caspian Russia. It is still too soon to know
-whether certain combinations of tools within industries were made
-only by certain physical types of men. But since tools of both the
-core-biface and the flake traditions, and their blends, turn up from
-South Africa to England to India, it is most unlikely that only one
-type of man used only one particular habit in the preparation of tools.
-What seems perfectly clear is that men in Africa and men in India were
-making just as good tools as the men who lived in western Europe.
-
-
-
-
-EARLY MODERNS
-
-[Illustration]
-
-
-From some time during the first inter-stadial of the last great
-glaciation (say some time after about 40,000 years ago), we have
-more accurate dates for the European-Mediterranean area and less
-accurate ones for the rest of the Old World. This is probably
-because the effects of the last glaciation have been studied in the
-European-Mediterranean area more than they have been elsewhere.
-
-
-A NEW TRADITION APPEARS
-
-Something new was probably beginning to happen in the
-European-Mediterranean area about 40,000 years ago, though all the
-rest of the Old World seems to have been going on as it had been. I
-can’t be sure of this because the information we are using as a basis
-for dates is very inaccurate for the areas outside of Europe and the
-Mediterranean.
-
-We can at least make a guess. In Egypt and north Africa, men were still
-using the old methods of making stone tools. This was especially true
-of flake tools of the Levalloisian type, save that they were growing
-smaller and smaller as time went on. But at the same time, a new
-tradition was becoming popular in westernmost Asia and in Europe. This
-was the blade-tool tradition.
-
-
-BLADE TOOLS
-
-A stone blade is really just a long parallel-sided flake, as the
-drawing shows. It has sharp cutting edges, and makes a very useful
-knife. The real trick is to be able to make one. It is almost
-impossible to make a blade out of any stone but flint or a natural
-volcanic glass called obsidian. And even if you have flint or obsidian,
-you first have to work up a special cone-shaped “blade-core,” from
-which to whack off blades.
-
-[Illustration: PLAIN BLADE]
-
-You whack with a hammer stone against a bone or antler punch which is
-directed at the proper place on the blade-core. The blade-core has to
-be well supported or gripped while this is going on. To get a good
-flint blade tool takes a great deal of know-how.
-
-Remember that a tradition in stone tools means no more than that some
-particular way of making the tools got started and lasted a long time.
-Men who made some tools in one tradition or set of habits would also
-make other tools for different purposes by means of another tradition
-or set of habits. It was even possible for the two sets of habits to
-become combined.
-
-
-THE EARLIEST BLADE TOOLS
-
-The oldest blade tools we have found were deep down in the layers of
-the Mount Carmel caves, in Tabun Eb and Ea. Similar tools have been
-found in equally early cave levels in Syria; their popularity there
-seems to fluctuate a bit. Some more or less parallel-sided flakes are
-known in the Levalloisian industry in France, but they are probably
-no earlier than Tabun E. The Tabun blades are part of a local late
-“Acheulean” industry, which is characterized by core-biface “hand
-axes,” but which has many flake tools as well. Professor F. E.
-Zeuner believes that this industry may be more than 120,000 years old;
-actually its date has not yet been fixed, but it is very old--older
-than the fossil finds of modern-like men in the same caves.
-
-[Illustration: SUCCESSION OF ICE AGE FLINT TYPES, INDUSTRIES, AND
-ASSEMBLAGES, AND OF FOSSIL MEN, IN NORTHWESTERN EURAFRASIA]
-
-For some reason, the habit of making blades in Palestine and Syria was
-interrupted. Blades only reappeared there at about the same time they
-were first made in Europe, some time after 45,000 years ago; that is,
-after the first phase of the last glaciation was ended.
-
-[Illustration: BACKED BLADE]
-
-We are not sure just where the earliest _persisting_ habits for the
-production of blade tools developed. Impressed by the very early
-momentary appearance of blades at Tabun on Mount Carmel, Professor
-Dorothy A. Garrod first favored the Near East as a center of origin.
-She spoke of “some as yet unidentified Asiatic centre,” which she
-thought might be in the highlands of Iran or just beyond. But more
-recent work has been done in this area, especially by Professor Coon,
-and the blade tools do not seem to have an early appearance there. When
-the blade tools reappear in the Syro-Palestinian area, they do so in
-industries which also include Levalloiso-Mousterian flake tools. From
-the point of view of form and workmanship, the blade tools themselves
-are not so fine as those which seem to be making their appearance
-in western Europe about the same time. There is a characteristic
-Syro-Palestinian flake point, possibly a projectile tip, called the
-Emiran, which is not known from Europe. The appearance of blade tools,
-together with Levalloiso-Mousterian flakes, continues even after the
-Emiran point has gone out of use.
-
-It seems clear that the production of blade tools did not immediately
-swamp the set of older habits in Europe, too; the use of flake
-tools also continued there. This was not so apparent to the older
-archeologists, whose attention was focused on individual tool types. It
-is not, in fact, impossible--although it is certainly not proved--that
-the technique developed in the preparation of the Levalloisian tortoise
-core (and the striking of the Levalloisian flake from it) might have
-followed through to the conical core and punch technique for the
-production of blades. Professor Garrod is much impressed with the speed
-of change during the later phases of the last glaciation, and its
-probable consequences. She speaks of “the greater number of industries
-having enough individual character to be classified as distinct ...
-since evolution now starts to outstrip diffusion.” Her “evolution” here
-is of course an industrial evolution rather than a biological one.
-Certainly the people of Europe had begun to make blade tools during
-the warm spell after the first phase of the last glaciation. By about
-40,000 years ago blades were well established. The bones of the blade
-tool makers we’ve found so far indicate that anatomically modern men
-had now certainly appeared. Unfortunately, only a few fossil men have
-so far been found from the very beginning of the blade tool range in
-Europe (or elsewhere). What I certainly shall _not_ tell you is that
-conquering bands of fine, strong, anatomically modern men, armed with
-superior blade tools, came sweeping out of the East to exterminate the
-lowly Neanderthalers. Even if we don’t know exactly what happened, I’d
-lay a good bet it wasn’t that simple.
-
-We do know a good deal about different blade industries in Europe.
-Almost all of them come from cave layers. There is a great deal of
-complication in what we find. The chart (p. 72) tries to simplify
-this complication; in fact, it doubtless simplifies it too much. But
-it may suggest all the complication of industries which is going
-on at this time. You will note that the upper portion of my much
-simpler chart (p. 65) covers the same material (in the section
-marked “Various Blade-Tool Industries”). That chart is certainly too
-simplified.
-
-You will realize that all this complication comes not only from
-the fact that we are finding more material. It is due also to the
-increasing ability of men to adapt themselves to a great variety of
-situations. Their tools indicate this adaptiveness. We know there was
-a good deal of climatic change at this time. The plants and animals
-that men used for food were changing, too. The great variety of tools
-and industries we now find reflect these changes and the ability of men
-to keep up with the times. Now, for example, is the first time we are
-sure that there are tools to _make_ other tools. They also show men’s
-increasing ability to adapt themselves.
-
-
-SPECIAL TYPES OF BLADE TOOLS
-
-The most useful tools that appear at this time were made from blades.
-
-  1. The “backed” blade. This is a knife made of a flint blade, with
-     one edge purposely blunted, probably to save the user’s fingers
-     from being cut. There are several shapes of backed blades (p.
-     73).
-
-  [Illustration: TWO BURINS]
-
-  2. The _burin_ or “graver.” The burin was the original chisel. Its
-     cutting edge is _transverse_, like a chisel’s. Some burins are
-     made like a screw-driver, save that burins are sharp. Others have
-     edges more like the blade of a chisel or a push plane, with
-     only one bevel. Burins were probably used to make slots in wood
-     and bone; that is, to make handles or shafts for other tools.
-     They must also be the tools with which much of the engraving on
-     bone (see p. 83) was done. There is a bewildering variety of
-     different kinds of burins.
-
-[Illustration: TANGED POINT]
-
-  3. The “tanged” point. These stone points were used to tip arrows or
-     light spears. They were made from blades, and they had a long tang
-     at the bottom where they were fixed to the shaft. At the place
-     where the tang met the main body of the stone point, there was
-     a marked “shoulder,” the beginnings of a barb. Such points had
-     either one or two shoulders.
-
-[Illustration: NOTCHED BLADE]
-
-  4. The “notched” or “strangulated” blade. Along with the points for
-     arrows or light spears must go a tool to prepare the arrow or
-     spear shaft. Today, such a tool would be called a “draw-knife” or
-     a “spoke-shave,” and this is what the notched blades probably are.
-     Our spoke-shaves have sharp straight cutting blades and really
-     “shave.” Notched blades of flint probably scraped rather than cut.
-
-  5. The “awl,” “drill,” or “borer.” These blade tools are worked out
-     to a spike-like point. They must have been used for making holes
-     in wood, bone, shell, skin, or other things.
-
-[Illustration: DRILL OR AWL]
-
-  6. The “end-scraper on a blade” is a tool with one or both ends
-     worked so as to give a good scraping edge. It could have been used
-     to hollow out wood or bone, scrape hides, remove bark from trees,
-     and a number of other things (p. 78).
-
-There is one very special type of flint tool, which is best known from
-western Europe in an industry called the Solutrean. These tools were
-usually made of blades, but the best examples are so carefully worked
-on both sides (bifacially) that it is impossible to see the original
-blade. This tool is
-
-  7. The “laurel leaf” point. Some of these tools were long and
-     dagger-like, and must have been used as knives or daggers. Others
-     were small, called “willow leaf,” and must have been mounted on
-     spear or arrow shafts. Another typical Solutrean tool is the
-     “shouldered” point. Both the “laurel leaf” and “shouldered” point
-     types are illustrated (see above and p. 79).
-
-[Illustration: END-SCRAPER ON A BLADE]
-
-[Illustration: LAUREL LEAF POINT]
-
-The industries characterized by tools in the blade tradition also
-yield some flake and core tools. We will end this list with two types
-of tools that appear at this time. The first is made of a flake; the
-second is a core tool.
-
-[Illustration: SHOULDERED POINT]
-
-  8. The “keel-shaped round scraper” is usually small and quite round,
-     and has had chips removed up to a peak in the center. It is called
-     “keel-shaped” because it is supposed to look (when upside down)
-     like a section through a boat. Actually, it looks more like a tent
-     or an umbrella. Its outer edges are sharp all the way around, and
-     it was probably a general purpose scraping tool (see illustration,
-     p. 81).
-
-  9. The “keel-shaped nosed scraper” is a much larger and heavier tool
-     than the round scraper. It was made on a core with a flat bottom,
-     and has one nicely worked end or “nose.” Such tools are usually
-     large enough to be easily grasped, and probably were used like
-     push planes (see illustration, p. 81).
-
-[Illustration: KEEL-SHAPED ROUND SCRAPER]
-
-[Illustration: KEEL-SHAPED NOSED SCRAPER]
-
-The stone tools (usually made of flint) we have just listed are among
-the most easily recognized blade tools, although they show differences
-in detail at different times. There are also many other kinds. Not
-all of these tools appear in any one industry at one time. Thus the
-different industries shown in the chart (p. 72) each have only some
-of the blade tools we’ve just listed, and also a few flake tools. Some
-industries even have a few core tools. The particular types of blade
-tools appearing in one cave layer or another, and the frequency of
-appearance of the different types, tell which industry we have in each
-layer.
-
-
-OTHER KINDS OF TOOLS
-
-By this time in Europe--say from about 40,000 to about 10,000 years
-ago--we begin to find other kinds of material too. Bone tools begin
-to appear. There are knives, pins, needles with eyes, and little
-double-pointed straight bars of bone that were probably fish-hooks. The
-fish-line would have been fastened in the center of the bar; when the
-fish swallowed the bait, the bar would have caught cross-wise in the
-fish’s mouth.
-
-One quite special kind of bone tool is a long flat point for a light
-spear. It has a deep notch cut up into the breadth of its base, and is
-called a “split-based bone point” (p. 82). We know examples of bone
-beads from these times, and of bone handles for flint tools. Pierced
-teeth of some animals were worn as beads or pendants, but I am not sure
-that elks’ teeth were worn this early. There are even spool-shaped
-“buttons” or toggles.
-
-[Illustration: SPLIT-BASED BONE POINT]
-
-[Illustration: SPEAR-THROWER]
-
-[Illustration: BONE HARPOON]
-
-Antler came into use for tools, especially in central and western
-Europe. We do not know the use of one particular antler tool that
-has a large hole bored in one end. One suggestion is that it was
-a thong-stropper used to strop or work up hide thongs (see
-illustration, below); another suggestion is that it was an arrow-shaft
-straightener.
-
-Another interesting tool, usually of antler, is the spear-thrower,
-which is little more than a stick with a notch or hook on one end.
-The hook fits into the butt end of the spear, and the length of the
-spear-thrower allows you to put much more power into the throw (p.
-82). It works on pretty much the same principle as the sling.
-
-Very fancy harpoons of antler were also made in the latter half of
-the period in western Europe. These harpoons had barbs on one or both
-sides and a base which would slip out of the shaft (p. 82). Some have
-engraved decoration.
-
-
-THE BEGINNING OF ART
-
-[Illustration: THONG-STROPPER]
-
-In western Europe, at least, the period saw the beginning of several
-kinds of art work. It is handy to break the art down into two great
-groups: the movable art, and the cave paintings and sculpture. The
-movable art group includes the scratchings, engravings, and modeling
-which decorate tools and weapons. Knives, stroppers, spear-throwers,
-harpoons, and sometimes just plain fragments of bone or antler are
-often carved. There is also a group of large flat pebbles which seem
-almost to have served as sketch blocks. The surfaces of these various
-objects may show animals, or rather abstract floral designs, or
-geometric designs.
-
-[Illustration: “VENUS” FIGURINE FROM WILLENDORF]
-
-Some of the movable art is not done on tools. The most remarkable
-examples of this class are little figures of women. These women seem to
-be pregnant, and their most female characteristics are much emphasized.
-It is thought that these “Venus” or “Mother-goddess” figurines may be
-meant to show the great forces of nature--fertility and the birth of
-life.
-
-
-CAVE PAINTINGS
-
-In the paintings on walls and ceilings of caves we have some examples
-that compare with the best art of any time. The subjects were usually
-animals, the great cold-weather beasts of the end of the Ice Age: the
-mammoth, the wooly rhinoceros, the bison, the reindeer, the wild horse,
-the bear, the wild boar, and wild cattle. As in the movable art, there
-are different styles in the cave art. The really great cave art is
-pretty well restricted to southern France and Cantabrian (northwestern)
-Spain.
-
-There are several interesting things about the “Franco-Cantabrian” cave
-art. It was done deep down in the darkest and most dangerous parts of
-the caves, although the men lived only in the openings of caves. If you
-think what they must have had for lights--crude lamps of hollowed stone
-have been found, which must have burned some kind of oil or grease,
-with a matted hair or fiber wick--and of the animals that may have
-lurked in the caves, you’ll understand the part about danger. Then,
-too, we’re sure the pictures these people painted were not simply to be
-looked at and admired, for they painted one picture right over other
-pictures which had been done earlier. Clearly, it was the _act_ of
-_painting_ that counted. The painter had to go way down into the most
-mysterious depths of the earth and create an animal in paint. Possibly
-he believed that by doing this he gained some sort of magic power over
-the same kind of animal when he hunted it in the open air. It certainly
-doesn’t look as if he cared very much about the picture he painted--as
-a finished product to be admired--for he or somebody else soon went
-down and painted another animal right over the one he had done.
-
-The cave art of the Franco-Cantabrian style is one of the great
-artistic achievements of all time. The subjects drawn are almost always
-the larger animals of the time: the bison, wild cattle and horses, the
-wooly rhinoceros, the mammoth, the wild boar, and the bear. In some of
-the best examples, the beasts are drawn in full color and the paintings
-are remarkably alive and charged with energy. They come from the hands
-of men who knew the great animals well--knew the feel of their fur, the
-tremendous drive of their muscles, and the danger one faced when he
-hunted them.
-
-Another artistic style has been found in eastern Spain. It includes
-lively drawings, often of people hunting with bow and arrow. The East
-Spanish art is found on open rock faces and in rock-shelters. It is
-less spectacular and apparently more recent than the Franco-Cantabrian
-cave art.
-
-
-LIFE AT THE END OF THE ICE AGE IN EUROPE
-
-Life in these times was probably as good as a hunter could expect it
-to be. Game and fish seem to have been plentiful; berries and wild
-fruits probably were, too. From France to Russia, great pits or
-piles of animal bones have been found. Some of this killing was done
-as our Plains Indians killed the buffalo--by stampeding them over
-steep river banks or cliffs. There were also good tools for hunting,
-however. In western Europe, people lived in the openings of caves and
-under overhanging rocks. On the great plains of eastern Europe, very
-crude huts were being built, half underground. The first part of this
-time must have been cold, for it was the middle and end phases of the
-last great glaciation. Northern Europe from Scotland to Scandinavia,
-northern Germany and Russia, and also the higher mountains to the
-south, were certainly covered with ice. But people had fire, and the
-needles and tools that were used for scraping hides must mean that they
-wore clothing.
-
-It is clear that men were thinking of a great variety of things beside
-the tools that helped them get food and shelter. Such burials as we
-find have more grave-gifts than before. Beads and ornaments and often
-flint, bone, or antler tools are included in the grave, and sometimes
-the body is sprinkled with red ochre. Red is the color of blood, which
-means life, and of fire, which means heat. Professor Childe wonders if
-the red ochre was a pathetic attempt at magic--to give back to the body
-the heat that had gone from it. But pathetic or not, it is sure proof
-that these people were already moved by death as men still are moved by
-it.
-
-Their art is another example of the direction the human mind was
-taking. And when I say human, I mean it in the fullest sense, for this
-is the time in which fully modern man has appeared. On page 34, we
-spoke of the Cro-Magnon group and of the Combe Capelle-Brünn group of
-Caucasoids and of the Grimaldi “Negroids,” who are no longer believed
-to be Negroid. I doubt that any one of these groups produced most of
-the achievements of the times. It’s not yet absolutely sure which
-particular group produced the great cave art. The artists were almost
-certainly a blend of several (no doubt already mixed) groups. The pair
-of Grimaldians were buried in a grave with a sprinkling of red ochre,
-and were provided with shell beads and ornaments and with some blade
-tools of flint. Regardless of the different names once given them by
-the human paleontologists, each of these groups seems to have shared
-equally in the cultural achievements of the times, for all that the
-archeologists can say.
-
-
-MICROLITHS
-
-One peculiar set of tools seems to serve as a marker for the very last
-phase of the Ice Age in southwestern Europe. This tool-making habit is
-also found about the shore of the Mediterranean basin, and it moved
-into northern Europe as the last glaciation pulled northward. People
-began making blade tools of very small size. They learned how to chip
-very slender and tiny blades from a prepared core. Then they made these
-little blades into tiny triangles, half-moons (“lunates”), trapezoids,
-and several other geometric forms. These little tools are called
-“microliths.” They are so small that most of them must have been fixed
-in handles or shafts.
-
-[Illustration: MICROLITHS
-
-  BLADE FRAGMENT
-  BURIN
-  LUNATE
-  TRAPEZOID
-  SCALENE TRIANGLE
-  ARROWHEAD]
-
-We have found several examples of microliths mounted in shafts. In
-northern Europe, where their use soon spread, the microlithic triangles
-or lunates were set in rows down each side of a bone or wood point.
-One corner of each little triangle stuck out, and the whole thing
-made a fine barbed harpoon. In historic times in Egypt, geometric
-trapezoidal microliths were still in use as arrowheads. They were
-fastened--broad end out--on the end of an arrow shaft. It seems queer
-to give an arrow a point shaped like a “T.” Actually, the little points
-were very sharp, and must have pierced the hides of animals very
-easily. We also think that the broader cutting edge of the point may
-have caused more bleeding than a pointed arrowhead would. In hunting
-fleet-footed animals like the gazelle, which might run for miles after
-being shot with an arrow, it was an advantage to cause as much bleeding
-as possible, for the animal would drop sooner.
-
-We are not really sure where the microliths were first invented. There
-is some evidence that they appear early in the Near East. Their use
-was very common in northwest Africa but this came later. The microlith
-makers who reached south Russia and central Europe possibly moved up
-out of the Near East. Or it may have been the other way around; we
-simply don’t yet know.
-
-Remember that the microliths we are talking about here were made from
-carefully prepared little blades, and are often geometric in outline.
-Each microlithic industry proper was made up, in good part, of such
-tiny blade tools. But there were also some normal-sized blade tools and
-even some flake scrapers, in most microlithic industries. I emphasize
-this bladelet and the geometric character of the microlithic industries
-of the western Old World, since there has sometimes been confusion in
-the matter. Sometimes small flake chips, utilized as minute pointed
-tools, have been called “microliths.” They may be _microlithic_ in size
-in terms of the general meaning of the word, but they do not seem to
-belong to the sub-tradition of the blade tool preparation habits which
-we have been discussing here.
-
-
-LATER BLADE-TOOL INDUSTRIES OF THE NEAR EAST AND AFRICA
-
-The blade-tool industries of normal size we talked about earlier spread
-from Europe to central Siberia. We noted that blade tools were made
-in western Asia too, and early, although Professor Garrod is no longer
-sure that the whole tradition originated in the Near East. If you look
-again at my chart (p. 72) you will note that in western Asia I list
-some of the names of the western European industries, but with the
-qualification “-like” (for example, “Gravettian-like”). The western
-Asiatic blade-tool industries do vaguely recall some aspects of those
-of western Europe, but we would probably be better off if we used
-completely local names for them. The “Emiran” of my chart is such an
-example; its industry includes a long spike-like blade point which has
-no western European counterpart.
-
-When we last spoke of Africa (p. 66), I told you that stone tools
-there were continuing in the Levalloisian flake tradition, and were
-becoming smaller. At some time during this process, two new tool
-types appeared in northern Africa: one was the Aterian point with
-a tang (p. 67), and the other was a sort of “laurel leaf” point,
-called the “Sbaikian.” These two tool types were both produced from
-flakes. The Sbaikian points, especially, are roughly similar to some
-of the Solutrean points of Europe. It has been suggested that both the
-Sbaikian and Aterian points may be seen on their way to France through
-their appearance in the Spanish cave deposits of Parpallo, but there is
-also a rival “pre-Solutrean” in central Europe. We still do not know
-whether there was any contact between the makers of these north African
-tools and the Solutrean tool-makers. What does seem clear is that the
-blade-tool tradition itself arrived late in northern Africa.
-
-
-NETHER AFRICA
-
-Blade tools and “laurel leaf” points and some other probably late
-stone tool types also appear in central and southern Africa. There
-are geometric microliths on bladelets and even some coarse pottery in
-east Africa. There is as yet no good way of telling just where these
-items belong in time; in broad geological terms they are “late.”
-Some people have guessed that they are as early as similar European
-and Near Eastern examples, but I doubt it. The makers of small-sized
-Levalloisian flake tools occupied much of Africa until very late in
-time.
-
-
-THE FAR EAST
-
-India and the Far East still seem to be going their own way. In India,
-some blade tools have been found. These are not well dated, save that
-we believe they must be post-Pleistocene. In the Far East it looks as
-if the old chopper-tool tradition was still continuing. For Burma,
-Dr. Movius feels this is fairly certain; for China he feels even more
-certain. Actually, we know very little about the Far East at about the
-time of the last glaciation. This is a shame, too, as you will soon
-agree.
-
-
-THE NEW WORLD BECOMES INHABITED
-
-At some time toward the end of the last great glaciation--almost
-certainly after 20,000 years ago--people began to move over Bering
-Strait, from Asia into America. As you know, the American Indians have
-been assumed to be basically Mongoloids. New studies of blood group
-types make this somewhat uncertain, but there is no doubt that the
-ancestors of the American Indians came from Asia.
-
-The stone-tool traditions of Europe, Africa, the Near and Middle East,
-and central Siberia, did _not_ move into the New World. With only a
-very few special or late exceptions, there are _no_ core-bifaces,
-flakes, or blade tools of the Old World. Such things just haven’t been
-found here.
-
-This is why I say it’s a shame we don’t know more of the end of the
-chopper-tool tradition in the Far East. According to Weidenreich,
-the Mongoloids were in the Far East long before the end of the last
-glaciation. If the genetics of the blood group types do demand a
-non-Mongoloid ancestry for the American Indians, who else may have been
-in the Far East 25,000 years ago? We know a little about the habits
-for making stone tools which these first people brought with them,
-and these habits don’t conform with those of the western Old World.
-We’d better keep our eyes open for whatever happened to the end of
-the chopper-tool tradition in northern China; already there are hints
-that it lasted late there. Also we should watch future excavations
-in eastern Siberia. Perhaps we shall find the chopper-tool tradition
-spreading up that far.
-
-
-THE NEW ERA
-
-Perhaps it comes in part from the way I read the evidence and perhaps
-in part it is only intuition, but I feel that the materials of this
-chapter suggest a new era in the ways of life. Before about 40,000
-years ago, people simply “gathered” their food, wandering over large
-areas to scavenge or to hunt in a simple sort of way. But here we
-have seen them “settling-in” more, perhaps restricting themselves in
-their wanderings and adapting themselves to a given locality in more
-intensive ways. This intensification might be suggested by the word
-“collecting.” The ways of life we described in the earlier chapters
-were “food-gathering” ways, but now an era of “food-collecting” has
-begun. We shall see further intensifications of it in the next chapter.
-
-
-
-
-End and PRELUDE
-
-[Illustration]
-
-
-Up to the end of the last glaciation, we prehistorians have a
-relatively comfortable time schedule. The farther back we go the less
-exact we can be about time and details. Elbow-room of five, ten,
-even fifty or more thousands of years becomes available for us to
-maneuver in as we work backward in time. But now our story has come
-forward to the point where more exact methods of dating are at hand.
-The radioactive carbon method reaches back into the span of the last
-glaciation. There are other methods, developed by the geologists and
-paleobotanists, which supplement and extend the usefulness of the
-radioactive carbon dates. And, happily, as our means of being more
-exact increases, our story grows more exciting. There are also more
-details of culture for us to deal with, which add to the interest.
-
-
-CHANGES AT THE END OF THE ICE AGE
-
-The last great glaciation of the Ice Age was a two-part affair, with a
-sub-phase at the end of the second part. In Europe the last sub-phase
-of this glaciation commenced somewhere around 15,000 years ago. Then
-the glaciers began to melt back, for the last time. Remember that
-Professor Antevs (p. 19) isn’t sure the Ice Age is over yet! This
-melting sometimes went by fits and starts, and the weather wasn’t
-always changing for the better; but there was at least one time when
-European weather was even better than it is now.
-
-The melting back of the glaciers and the weather fluctuations caused
-other changes, too. We know a fair amount about these changes in
-Europe. In an earlier chapter, we said that the whole Ice Age was a
-matter of continual change over long periods of time. As the last
-glaciers began to melt back some interesting things happened to mankind.
-
-In Europe, along with the melting of the last glaciers, geography
-itself was changing. Britain and Ireland had certainly become islands
-by 5000 B.C. The Baltic was sometimes a salt sea, sometimes a large
-fresh-water lake. Forests began to grow where the glaciers had been,
-and in what had once been the cold tundra areas in front of the
-glaciers. The great cold-weather animals--the mammoth and the wooly
-rhinoceros--retreated northward and finally died out. It is probable
-that the efficient hunting of the earlier people of 20,000 or 25,000
-to about 12,000 years ago had helped this process along (see p. 86).
-Europeans, especially those of the post-glacial period, had to keep
-changing to keep up with the times.
-
-The archeological materials for the time from 10,000 to 6000 B.C. seem
-simpler than those of the previous five thousand years. The great cave
-art of France and Spain had gone; so had the fine carving in bone and
-antler. Smaller, speedier animals were moving into the new forests. New
-ways of hunting them, or ways of getting other food, had to be found.
-Hence, new tools and weapons were necessary. Some of the people who
-moved into northern Germany were successful reindeer hunters. Then the
-reindeer moved off to the north, and again new sources of food had to
-be found.
-
-
-THE READJUSTMENTS COMPLETED IN EUROPE
-
-After a few thousand years, things began to look better. Or at least
-we can say this: By about 6000 B.C. we again get hotter archeological
-materials. The best of these come from the north European area:
-Britain, Belgium, Holland, Denmark, north Germany, southern Norway and
-Sweden. Much of this north European material comes from bogs and swamps
-where it had become water-logged and has kept very well. Thus we have
-much more complete _assemblages_[4] than for any time earlier.
-
-  [4] “Assemblage” is a useful word when there are different kinds of
-      archeological materials belonging together, from one area and of
-      one time. An assemblage is made up of a number of “industries”
-      (that is, all the tools in chipped stone, all the tools in
-      bone, all the tools in wood, the traces of houses, etc.) and
-      everything else that manages to survive, such as the art, the
-      burials, the bones of the animals used as food, and the traces
-      of plant foods; in fact, everything that has been left to us
-      and can be used to help reconstruct the lives of the people to
-      whom it once belonged. Our own present-day “assemblage” would be
-      the sum total of all the objects in our mail-order catalogues,
-      department stores and supply houses of every sort, our churches,
-      our art galleries and other buildings, together with our roads,
-      canals, dams, irrigation ditches, and any other traces we might
-      leave of ourselves, from graves to garbage dumps. Not everything
-      would last, so that an archeologist digging us up--say 2,000
-      years from now--would find only the most durable items in our
-      assemblage.
-
-The best known of these assemblages is the _Maglemosian_, named after a
-great Danish peat-swamp where much has been found.
-
-[Illustration: SKETCH OF MAGLEMOSIAN ASSEMBLAGE
-
-  CHIPPED STONE
-  HEMP
-  GROUND STONE
-  BONE AND ANTLER
-  WOOD]
-
-In the Maglemosian assemblage the flint industry was still very
-important. Blade tools, tanged arrow points, and burins were still
-made, but there were also axes for cutting the trees in the new
-forests. Moreover, the tiny microlithic blades, in a variety of
-geometric forms, are also found. Thus, a specialized tradition that
-possibly began east of the Mediterranean had reached northern Europe.
-There was also a ground stone industry; some axes and club-heads were
-made by grinding and polishing rather than by chipping. The industries
-in bone and antler show a great variety of tools: axes, fish-hooks,
-fish spears, handles and hafts for other tools, harpoons, and clubs.
-A remarkable industry in wood has been preserved. Paddles, sled
-runners, handles for tools, and bark floats for fish-nets have been
-found. There are even fish-nets made of plant fibers. Canoes of some
-kind were no doubt made. Bone and antler tools were decorated with
-simple patterns, and amber was collected. Wooden bows and arrows are
-found.
-
-It seems likely that the Maglemosian bog finds are remains of summer
-camps, and that in winter the people moved to higher and drier regions.
-Childe calls them the “Forest folk”; they probably lived much the
-same sort of life as did our pre-agricultural Indians of the north
-central states. They hunted small game or deer; they did a great deal
-of fishing; they collected what plant food they could find. In fact,
-their assemblage shows us again that remarkable ability of men to adapt
-themselves to change. They had succeeded in domesticating the dog; he
-was still a very wolf-like dog, but his long association with mankind
-had now begun. Professor Coon believes that these people were direct
-descendants of the men of the glacial age and that they had much the
-same appearance. He believes that most of the Ice Age survivors still
-extant are living today in the northwestern European area.
-
-
-SOUTH AND CENTRAL EUROPE PERHAPS AS READJUSTED AS THE NORTH
-
-There is always one trouble with things that come from areas where
-preservation is exceptionally good: The very quantity of materials in
-such an assemblage tends to make things from other areas look poor
-and simple, although they may not have been so originally at all. The
-assemblages of the people who lived to the south of the Maglemosian
-area may also have been quite large and varied; but, unfortunately,
-relatively little of the southern assemblages has lasted. The
-water-logged sites of the Maglemosian area preserved a great deal
-more. Hence the Maglemosian itself _looks_ quite advanced to us, when
-we compare it with the few things that have happened to last in other
-areas. If we could go back and wander over the Europe of eight thousand
-years ago, we would probably find that the peoples of France, central
-Europe, and south central Russia were just as advanced as those of the
-north European-Baltic belt.
-
-South of the north European belt the hunting-food-collecting peoples
-were living on as best they could during this time. One interesting
-group, which seems to have kept to the regions of sandy soil and scrub
-forest, made great quantities of geometric microliths. These are the
-materials called _Tardenoisian_. The materials of the “Forest folk” of
-France and central Europe generally are called _Azilian_; Dr. Movius
-believes the term might best be restricted to the area south of the
-Loire River.
-
-
-HOW MUCH REAL CHANGE WAS THERE?
-
-You can see that no really _basic_ change in the way of life has yet
-been described. Childe sees the problem that faced the Europeans of
-10,000 to 3000 B.C. as a problem in readaptation to the post-glacial
-forest environment. By 6000 B.C. some quite successful solutions of
-the problem--like the Maglemosian--had been made. The upsets that came
-with the melting of the last ice gradually brought about all sorts of
-changes in the tools and food-getting habits, but the people themselves
-were still just as much simple hunters, fishers, and food-collectors as
-they had been in 25,000 B.C. It could be said that they changed just
-enough so that they would not have to change. But there is a bit more
-to it than this.
-
-Professor Mathiassen of Copenhagen, who knows the archeological remains
-of this time very well, poses a question. He speaks of the material
-as being neither rich nor progressive, in fact “rather stagnant,” but
-he goes on to add that the people had a certain “receptiveness” and
-were able to adapt themselves quickly when the next change did come.
-My own understanding of the situation is that the “Forest folk” made
-nothing as spectacular as had the producers of the earlier Magdalenian
-assemblage and the Franco-Cantabrian art. On the other hand, they
-_seem_ to have been making many more different kinds of tools for many
-more different kinds of tasks than had their Ice Age forerunners. I
-emphasize “seem” because the preservation in the Maglemosian bogs
-is very complete; certainly we cannot list anywhere near as many
-different things for earlier times as we did for the Maglemosians
-(p. 94). I believe this experimentation with all kinds of new tools
-and gadgets, this intensification of adaptiveness (p. 91), this
-“receptiveness,” even if it is still only pointed toward hunting,
-fishing, and food-collecting, is an important thing.
-
-Remember that the only marker we have handy for the _beginning_ of
-this tendency toward “receptiveness” and experimentation is the
-little microlithic blade tools of various geometric forms. These, we
-saw, began before the last ice had melted away, and they lasted on
-in use for a very long time. I wish there were a better marker than
-the microliths but I do not know of one. Remember, too, that as yet
-we can only use the microliths as a marker in Europe and about the
-Mediterranean.
-
-
-CHANGES IN OTHER AREAS?
-
-All this last section was about Europe. How about the rest of the world
-when the last glaciers were melting away?
-
-We simply don’t know much about this particular time in other parts
-of the world except in Europe, the Mediterranean basin and the Middle
-East. People were certainly continuing to move into the New World by
-way of Siberia and the Bering Strait about this time. But for the
-greater part of Africa and Asia, we do not know exactly what was
-happening. Some day, we shall no doubt find out; today we are without
-clear information.
-
-
-REAL CHANGE AND PRELUDE IN THE NEAR EAST
-
-The appearance of the microliths and the developments made by the
-“Forest folk” of northwestern Europe also mark an end. They show us
-the terminal phase of the old food-collecting way of life. It grows
-increasingly clear that at about the same time that the Maglemosian and
-other “Forest folk” were adapting themselves to hunting, fishing, and
-collecting in new ways to fit the post-glacial environment, something
-completely new was being made ready in western Asia.
-
-Unfortunately, we do not have as much understanding of the climate and
-environment of the late Ice Age in western Asia as we have for most
-of Europe. Probably the weather was never so violent or life quite
-so rugged as it was in northern Europe. We know that the microliths
-made their appearance in western Asia at least by 10,000 B.C. and
-possibly earlier, marking the beginning of the terminal phase of
-food-collecting. Then, gradually, we begin to see the build-up towards
-the first _basic change_ in human life.
-
-This change amounted to a revolution just as important as the
-Industrial Revolution. In it, men first learned to domesticate
-plants and animals. They began _producing_ their food instead of
-simply gathering or collecting it. When their food-production
-became reasonably effective, people could and did settle down in
-village-farming communities. With the appearance of the little farming
-villages, a new way of life was actually under way. Professor Childe
-has good reason to speak of the “food-producing revolution,” for it was
-indeed a revolution.
-
-
-QUESTIONS ABOUT CAUSE
-
-We do not yet know _how_ and _why_ this great revolution took place. We
-are only just beginning to put the questions properly. I suspect the
-answers will concern some delicate and subtle interplay between man and
-nature. Clearly, both the level of culture and the natural condition of
-the environment must have been ready for the great change, before the
-change itself could come about.
-
-It is going to take years of co-operative field work by both
-archeologists and the natural scientists who are most helpful to them
-before the _how_ and _why_ answers begin to appear. Anthropologically
-trained archeologists are fascinated with the cultures of men in times
-of great change. About ten or twelve thousand years ago, the general
-level of culture in many parts of the world seems to have been ready
-for change. In northwestern Europe, we saw that cultures “changed
-just enough so that they would not have to change.” We linked this to
-environmental changes with the coming of post-glacial times.
-
-In western Asia, we archeologists can prove that the food-producing
-revolution actually took place. We can see _the_ important consequence
-of effective domestication of plants and animals in the appearance of
-the settled village-farming community. And within the village-farming
-community was the seed of civilization. The way in which effective
-domestication of plants and animals came about, however, must also be
-linked closely with the natural environment. Thus the archeologists
-will not solve the _how_ and _why_ questions alone--they will need the
-help of interested natural scientists in the field itself.
-
-
-PRECONDITIONS FOR THE REVOLUTION
-
-Especially at this point in our story, we must remember how culture and
-environment go hand in hand. Neither plants nor animals domesticate
-themselves; men domesticate them. Furthermore, men usually domesticate
-only those plants and animals which are useful. There is a good
-question here: What is cultural usefulness? But I shall side-step it to
-save time. Men cannot domesticate plants and animals that do not exist
-in the environment where the men live. Also, there are certainly some
-animals and probably some plants that resist domestication, although
-they might be useful.
-
-This brings me back again to the point that _both_ the level of culture
-and the natural condition of the environment--with the proper plants
-and animals in it--must have been ready before domestication could
-have happened. But this is precondition, not cause. Why did effective
-food-production happen first in the Near East? Why did it happen
-independently in the New World slightly later? Why also in the Far
-East? Why did it happen at all? Why are all human beings not still
-living as the Maglemosians did? These are the questions we still have
-to face.
-
-
-CULTURAL “RECEPTIVENESS” AND PROMISING ENVIRONMENTS
-
-Until the archeologists and the natural scientists--botanists,
-geologists, zoologists, and general ecologists--have spent many more
-years on the problem, we shall not have full _how_ and _why_ answers. I
-do think, however, that we are beginning to understand what to look for.
-
-We shall have to learn much more of what makes the cultures of men
-“receptive” and experimental. Did change in the environment alone
-force it? Was it simply a case of Professor Toynbee’s “challenge and
-response?” I cannot believe the answer is quite that simple. Were it
-so simple, we should want to know why the change hadn’t come earlier,
-along with earlier environmental changes. We shall not know the answer,
-however, until we have excavated the traces of many more cultures of
-the time in question. We shall doubtless also have to learn more about,
-and think imaginatively about, the simpler cultures still left today.
-The “mechanics” of culture in general will be bound to interest us.
-
-It will also be necessary to learn much more of the environments of
-10,000 to 12,000 years ago. In which regions of the world were the
-natural conditions most promising? Did this promise include plants and
-animals which could be domesticated, or did it only offer new ways of
-food-collecting? There is much work to do on this problem, but we are
-beginning to get some general hints.
-
-Before I begin to detail the hints we now have from western Asia, I
-want to do two things. First, I shall tell you of an old theory as to
-how food-production might have appeared. Second, I will bother you with
-some definitions which should help us in our thinking as the story goes
-on.
-
-
-AN OLD THEORY AS TO THE CAUSE OF THE REVOLUTION
-
-The idea that change would result, if the balance between nature
-and culture became upset, is of course not a new one. For at least
-twenty-five years, there has been a general theory as to _how_ the
-food-producing revolution happened. This theory depends directly on the
-idea of natural change in the environment.
-
-The five thousand years following about 10,000 B.C. must have been
-very difficult ones, the theory begins. These were the years when
-the most marked melting of the last glaciers was going on. While the
-glaciers were in place, the climate to the south of them must have been
-different from the climate in those areas today. You have no doubt read
-that people once lived in regions now covered by the Sahara Desert.
-This is true; just when is not entirely clear. The theory is that
-during the time of the glaciers, there was a broad belt of rain winds
-south of the glaciers. These rain winds would have kept north Africa,
-the Nile Valley, and the Middle East green and fertile. But when the
-glaciers melted back to the north, the belt of rain winds is supposed
-to have moved north too. Then the people living south and east of the
-Mediterranean would have found that their water supply was drying up,
-that the animals they hunted were dying or moving away, and that the
-plant foods they collected were dried up and scarce.
-
-According to the theory, all this would have been true except in the
-valleys of rivers and in oases in the growing deserts. Here, in the
-only places where water was left, the men and animals and plants would
-have clustered. They would have been forced to live close to one
-another, in order to live at all. Presently the men would have seen
-that some animals were more useful or made better food than others,
-and so they would have begun to protect these animals from their
-natural enemies. The men would also have been forced to try new plant
-foods--foods which possibly had to be prepared before they could be
-eaten. Thus, with trials and errors, but by being forced to live close
-to plants and animals, men would have learned to domesticate them.
-
-
-THE OLD THEORY TOO SIMPLE FOR THE FACTS
-
-This theory was set up before we really knew anything in detail about
-the later prehistory of the Near and Middle East. We now know that
-the facts which have been found don’t fit the old theory at all well.
-Also, I have yet to find an American meteorologist who feels that we
-know enough about the changes in the weather pattern to say that it can
-have been so simple and direct. And, of course, the glacial ice which
-began melting after 12,000 years ago was merely the last sub-phase of
-the last great glaciation. There had also been three earlier periods
-of great alpine glaciers, and long periods of warm weather in between.
-If the rain belt moved north as the glaciers melted for the last time,
-it must have moved in the same direction in earlier times. Thus, the
-forced neighborliness of men, plants, and animals in river valleys and
-oases must also have happened earlier. Why didn’t domestication happen
-earlier, then?
-
-Furthermore, it does not seem to be in the oases and river valleys
-that we have our first or only traces of either food-production
-or the earliest farming villages. These traces are also in the
-hill-flanks of the mountains of western Asia. Our earliest sites of the
-village-farmers do not seem to indicate a greatly different climate
-from that which the same region now shows. In fact, everything we now
-know suggests that the old theory was just too simple an explanation to
-have been the true one. The only reason I mention it--beyond correcting
-the ideas you may get in the general texts--is that it illustrates the
-kind of thinking we shall have to do, even if it is doubtless wrong in
-detail.
-
-We archeologists shall have to depend much more than we ever have on
-the natural scientists who can really help us. I can tell you this from
-experience. I had the great good fortune to have on my expedition staff
-in Iraq in 1954-55, a geologist, a botanist, and a zoologist. Their
-studies added whole new bands of color to my spectrum of thinking about
-_how_ and _why_ the revolution took place and how the village-farming
-community began. But it was only a beginning; as I said earlier, we are
-just now learning to ask the proper questions.
-
-
-ABOUT STAGES AND ERAS
-
-Now come some definitions, so I may describe my material more easily.
-Archeologists have always loved to make divisions and subdivisions
-within the long range of materials which they have found. They often
-disagree violently about which particular assemblage of material
-goes into which subdivision, about what the subdivisions should be
-named, about what the subdivisions really mean culturally. Some
-archeologists, probably through habit, favor an old scheme of Grecized
-names for the subdivisions: paleolithic, mesolithic, neolithic. I
-refuse to use these words myself. They have meant too many different
-things to too many different people and have tended to hide some pretty
-fuzzy thinking. Probably you haven’t even noticed my own scheme of
-subdivision up to now, but I’d better tell you in general what it is.
-
-I think of the earliest great group of archeological materials, from
-which we can deduce only a food-gathering way of culture, as the
-_food-gathering stage_. I say “stage” rather than “age,” because it
-is not quite over yet; there are still a few primitive people in
-out-of-the-way parts of the world who remain in the _food-gathering
-stage_. In fact, Professor Julian Steward would probably prefer to call
-it a food-gathering _level_ of existence, rather than a stage. This
-would be perfectly acceptable to me. I also tend to find myself using
-_collecting_, rather than _gathering_, for the more recent aspects or
-era of the stage, as the word “collecting” appears to have more sense
-of purposefulness and specialization than does “gathering” (see p.
-91).
-
-Now, while I think we could make several possible subdivisions of the
-food-gathering stage--I call my subdivisions of stages _eras_[5]--I
-believe the only one which means much to us here is the last or
-_terminal sub-era of food-collecting_ of the whole food-gathering
-stage. The microliths seem to mark its approach in the northwestern
-part of the Old World. It is really shown best in the Old World by
-the materials of the “Forest folk,” the cultural adaptation to the
-post-glacial environment in northwestern Europe. We talked about
-the “Forest folk” at the beginning of this chapter, and I used the
-Maglemosian assemblage of Denmark as an example.
-
-  [5] It is difficult to find words which have a sequence or gradation
-      of meaning with respect to both development and a range of time
-      in the past, or with a range of time from somewhere in the past
-      which is perhaps not yet ended. One standard Webster definition
-      of _stage_ is: “One of the steps into which the material
-      development of man ... is divided.” I cannot find any dictionary
-      definition that suggests which of the words, _stage_ or _era_,
-      has the meaning of a longer span of time. Therefore, I have
-      chosen to let my eras be shorter, and to subdivide my stages
-      into eras. Webster gives _era_ as: “A signal stage of history,
-      an epoch.” When I want to subdivide my eras, I find myself using
-      _sub-eras_. Thus I speak of the _eras_ within a _stage_ and of
-      the _sub-eras_ within an _era_; that is, I do so when I feel
-      that I really have to, and when the evidence is clear enough to
-      allow it.
-
-The food-producing revolution ushers in the _food-producing stage_.
-This stage began to be replaced by the _industrial stage_ only about
-two hundred years ago. Now notice that my stage divisions are in terms
-of technology and economics. We must think sharply to be sure that the
-subdivisions of the stages, the eras, are in the same terms. This does
-not mean that I think technology and economics are the only important
-realms of culture. It is rather that for most of prehistoric time the
-materials left to the archeologists tend to limit our deductions to
-technology and economics.
-
-I’m so soon out of my competence, as conventional ancient history
-begins, that I shall only suggest the earlier eras of the
-food-producing stage to you. This book is about prehistory, and I’m not
-a universal historian.
-
-
-THE TWO EARLIEST ERAS OF THE FOOD-PRODUCING STAGE
-
-The food-producing stage seems to appear in western Asia with really
-revolutionary suddenness. It is seen by the relative speed with which
-the traces of new crafts appear in the earliest village-farming
-community sites we’ve dug. It is seen by the spread and multiplication
-of these sites themselves, and the remarkable growth in human
-population we deduce from this increase in sites. We’ll look at some
-of these sites and the archeological traces they yield in the next
-chapter. When such village sites begin to appear, I believe we are in
-the _era of the primary village-farming community_. I also believe this
-is the second era of the food-producing stage.
-
-The first era of the food-producing stage, I believe, was an _era of
-incipient cultivation and animal domestication_. I keep saying “I
-believe” because the actual evidence for this earlier era is so slight
-that one has to set it up mainly by playing a hunch for it. The reason
-for playing the hunch goes about as follows.
-
-One thing we seem to be able to see, in the food-collecting era in
-general, is a tendency for people to begin to settle down. This
-settling down seemed to become further intensified in the terminal
-era. How this is connected with Professor Mathiassen’s “receptiveness”
-and the tendency to be experimental, we do not exactly know. The
-evidence from the New World comes into play here as well as that from
-the Old World. With this settling down in one place, the people of the
-terminal era--especially the “Forest folk” whom we know best--began
-making a great variety of new things. I remarked about this earlier in
-the chapter. Dr. Robert M. Adams is of the opinion that this atmosphere
-of experimentation with new tools--with new ways of collecting food--is
-the kind of atmosphere in which one might expect trials at planting
-and at animal domestication to have been made. We first begin to find
-traces of more permanent life in outdoor camp sites, although caves
-were still inhabited at the beginning of the terminal era. It is not
-surprising at all that the “Forest folk” had already domesticated the
-dog. In this sense, the whole era of food-collecting was becoming ready
-and almost “incipient” for cultivation and animal domestication.
-
-Northwestern Europe was not the place for really effective beginnings
-in agriculture and animal domestication. These would have had to take
-place in one of those natural environments of promise, where a variety
-of plants and animals, each possible of domestication, was available in
-the wild state. Let me spell this out. Really effective food-production
-must include a variety of items to make up a reasonably well-rounded
-diet. The food-supply so produced must be trustworthy, even though
-the food-producing peoples themselves might be happy to supplement
-it with fish and wild strawberries, just as we do when such things
-are available. So, as we said earlier, part of our problem is that
-of finding a region with a natural environment which includes--and
-did include, some ten thousand years ago--a variety of possibly
-domesticable wild plants and animals.
-
-
-NUCLEAR AREAS
-
-Now comes the last of my definitions. A region with a natural
-environment which included a variety of wild plants and animals,
-both possible and ready for domestication, would be a central
-or core or _nuclear area_, that is, it would be when and _if_
-food-production took place within it. It is pretty hard for me to
-imagine food-production having ever made an independent start outside
-such a nuclear area, although there may be some possible nuclear areas
-in which food-production never took place (possibly in parts of Africa,
-for example).
-
-We know of several such nuclear areas. In the New World, Middle America
-and the Andean highlands make up one or two; it is my understanding
-that the evidence is not yet clear as to which. There seems to have
-been a nuclear area somewhere in southeastern Asia, in the Malay
-peninsula or Burma perhaps, connected with the early cultivation of
-taro, breadfruit, the banana and the mango. Possibly the cultivation
-of rice and the domestication of the chicken and of zebu cattle and
-the water buffalo belong to this southeast Asiatic nuclear area. We
-know relatively little about it archeologically, as yet. The nuclear
-area which was the scene of the earliest experiment in effective
-food-production was in western Asia. Since I know it best, I shall use
-it as my example.
-
-
-THE NUCLEAR NEAR EAST
-
-The nuclear area of western Asia is naturally the one of greatest
-interest to people of the western cultural tradition. Our cultural
-heritage began within it. The area itself is the region of the hilly
-flanks of rain-watered grass-land which build up to the high mountain
-ridges of Iran, Iraq, Turkey, Syria, and Palestine. The map on page
-125 indicates the region. If you have a good atlas, try to locate the
-zone which surrounds the drainage basin of the Tigris and Euphrates
-Rivers at elevations of from approximately 2,000 to 5,000 feet. The
-lower alluvial land of the Tigris-Euphrates basin itself has very
-little rainfall. Some years ago Professor James Henry Breasted called
-the alluvial lands of the Tigris-Euphrates a part of the “fertile
-crescent.” These alluvial lands are very fertile if irrigated. Breasted
-was most interested in the oriental civilizations of conventional
-ancient history, and irrigation had been discovered before they
-appeared.
-
-The country of hilly flanks above Breasted’s crescent receives from
-10 to 20 or more inches of winter rainfall each year, which is about
-what Kansas has. Above the hilly-flanks zone tower the peaks and ridges
-of the Lebanon-Amanus chain bordering the coast-line from Palestine
-to Turkey, the Taurus Mountains of southern Turkey, and the Zagros
-range of the Iraq-Iran borderland. This rugged mountain frame for our
-hilly-flanks zone rises to some magnificent alpine scenery, with peaks
-of from ten to fifteen thousand feet in elevation. There are several
-gaps in the Mediterranean coastal portion of the frame, through which
-the winter’s rain-bearing winds from the sea may break so as to carry
-rain to the foothills of the Taurus and the Zagros.
-
-The picture I hope you will have from this description is that of an
-intermediate hilly-flanks zone lying between two regions of extremes.
-The lower Tigris-Euphrates basin land is low and far too dry and hot
-for agriculture based on rainfall alone; to the south and southwest, it
-merges directly into the great desert of Arabia. The mountains which
-lie above the hilly-flanks zone are much too high and rugged to have
-encouraged farmers.
-
-
-THE NATURAL ENVIRONMENT OF THE NUCLEAR NEAR EAST
-
-The more we learn of this hilly-flanks zone that I describe, the
-more it seems surely to have been a nuclear area. This is where we
-archeologists need, and are beginning to get, the help of natural
-scientists. They are coming to the conclusion that the natural
-environment of the hilly-flanks zone today is much as it was some eight
-to ten thousand years ago. There are still two kinds of wild wheat and
-a wild barley, and the wild sheep, goat, and pig. We have discovered
-traces of each of these at about nine thousand years ago, also traces
-of wild ox, horse, and dog, each of which appears to be the probable
-ancestor of the domesticated form. In fact, at about nine thousand
-years ago, the two wheats, the barley, and at least the goat, were
-already well on the road to domestication.
-
-The wild wheats give us an interesting clue. They are only available
-together with the wild barley within the hilly-flanks zone. While the
-wild barley grows in a variety of elevations and beyond the zone,
-at least one of the wild wheats does not seem to grow below the hill
-country. As things look at the moment, the domestication of both the
-wheats together could _only_ have taken place within the hilly-flanks
-zone. Barley seems to have first come into cultivation due to its
-presence as a weed in already cultivated wheat fields. There is also
-a suggestion--there is still much more to learn in the matter--that
-the animals which were first domesticated were most at home up in the
-hilly-flanks zone in their wild state.
-
-With a single exception--that of the dog--the earliest positive
-evidence of domestication includes the two forms of wheat, the barley,
-and the goat. The evidence comes from within the hilly-flanks zone.
-However, it comes from a settled village proper, Jarmo (which I’ll
-describe in the next chapter), and is thus from the era of the primary
-village-farming community. We are still without positive evidence of
-domesticated grain and animals in the first era of the food-producing
-stage, that of incipient cultivation and animal domestication.
-
-
-THE ERA OF INCIPIENT CULTIVATION AND ANIMAL DOMESTICATION
-
-I said above (p. 105) that my era of incipient cultivation and animal
-domestication is mainly set up by playing a hunch. Although we cannot
-really demonstrate it--and certainly not in the Near East--it would
-be very strange for food-collectors not to have known a great deal
-about the plants and animals most useful to them. They do seem to have
-domesticated the dog. We can easily imagine them remembering to go
-back, season after season, to a particular patch of ground where seeds
-or acorns or berries grew particularly well. Most human beings, unless
-they are extremely hungry, are attracted to baby animals, and many wild
-pups or fawns or piglets must have been brought back alive by hunting
-parties.
-
-In this last sense, man has probably always been an incipient
-cultivator and domesticator. But I believe that Adams is right in
-suggesting that this would be doubly true with the experimenters of
-the terminal era of food-collecting. We noticed that they also seem
-to have had a tendency to settle down. Now my hunch goes that _when_
-this experimentation and settling down took place within a potential
-nuclear area--where a whole constellation of plants and animals
-possible of domestication was available--the change was easily made.
-Professor Charles A. Reed, our field colleague in zoology, agrees that
-year-round settlement with plant domestication probably came before
-there were important animal domestications.
-
-
-INCIPIENT ERAS AND NUCLEAR AREAS
-
-I have put this scheme into a simple chart (p. 111) with the names
-of a few of the sites we are going to talk about. You will see that my
-hunch means that there are eras of incipient cultivation _only_ within
-nuclear areas. In a nuclear area, the terminal era of food-collecting
-would probably have been quite short. I do not know for how long a time
-the era of incipient cultivation and domestication would have lasted,
-but perhaps for several thousand years. Then it passed on into the era
-of the primary village-farming community.
-
-Outside a nuclear area, the terminal era of food-collecting would last
-for a long time; in a few out-of-the-way parts of the world, it still
-hangs on. It would end in any particular place through contact with
-and the spread of ideas of people who had passed on into one of the
-more developed eras. In many cases, the terminal era of food-collecting
-was ended by the incoming of the food-producing peoples themselves.
-For example, the practices of food-production were carried into Europe
-by the actual movement of some numbers of peoples (we don’t know how
-many) who had reached at least the level of the primary village-farming
-community. The “Forest folk” learned food-production from them. There
-was never an era of incipient cultivation and domestication proper in
-Europe, if my hunch is right.
-
-
-ARCHEOLOGICAL DIFFICULTIES IN SEEING THE INCIPIENT ERA
-
-The way I see it, two things were required in order that an era of
-incipient cultivation and domestication could begin. First, there had
-to be the natural environment of a nuclear area, with its whole group
-of plants and animals capable of domestication. This is the aspect of
-the matter which we’ve said is directly given by nature. But it is
-quite possible that such an environment with such a group of plants
-and animals in it may have existed well before ten thousand years ago
-in the Near East. It is also quite possible that the same promising
-condition may have existed in regions which never developed into
-nuclear areas proper. Here, again, we come back to the cultural factor.
-I think it was that “atmosphere of experimentation” we’ve talked about
-once or twice before. I can’t define it for you, other than to say that
-by the end of the Ice Age, the general level of many cultures was ready
-for change. Ask me how and why this was so, and I’ll tell you we don’t
-know yet, and that if we did understand this kind of question, there
-would be no need for me to go on being a prehistorian!
-
-[Illustration: POSSIBLE RELATIONSHIPS OF STAGES AND ERAS IN WESTERN
-ASIA AND NORTHEASTERN AFRICA]
-
-Now since this was an era of incipience, of the birth of new ideas,
-and of experimentation, it is very difficult to see its traces
-archeologically. New tools having to do with the new ways of getting
-and, in fact, producing food would have taken some time to develop.
-It need not surprise us too much if we cannot find hoes for planting
-and sickles for reaping grain at the very beginning. We might expect
-a time of making-do with some of the older tools, or with make-shift
-tools, for some of the new jobs. The present-day wild cousin of the
-domesticated sheep still lives in the mountains of western Asia. It has
-no wool, only a fine down under hair like that of a deer, so it need
-not surprise us to find neither the whorls used for spinning nor traces
-of woolen cloth. It must have taken some time for a wool-bearing sheep
-to develop and also time for the invention of the new tools which go
-with weaving. It would have been the same with other kinds of tools for
-the new way of life.
-
-It is difficult even for an experienced comparative zoologist to tell
-which are the bones of domesticated animals and which are those of
-their wild cousins. This is especially so because the animal bones the
-archeologists find are usually fragmentary. Furthermore, we do not have
-a sort of library collection of the skeletons of the animals or an
-herbarium of the plants of those times, against which the traces which
-the archeologists find may be checked. We are only beginning to get
-such collections for the modern wild forms of animals and plants from
-some of our nuclear areas. In the nuclear area in the Near East, some
-of the wild animals, at least, have already become extinct. There are
-no longer wild cattle or wild horses in western Asia. We know they were
-there from the finds we’ve made in caves of late Ice Age times, and
-from some slightly later sites.
-
-
-SITES WITH ANTIQUITIES OF THE INCIPIENT ERA
-
-So far, we know only a very few sites which would suit my notion of the
-incipient era of cultivation and animal domestication. I am closing
-this chapter with descriptions of two of the best Near Eastern examples
-I know of. You may not be satisfied that what I am able to describe
-makes a full-bodied era of development at all. Remember, however, that
-I’ve told you I’m largely playing a kind of a hunch, and also that the
-archeological materials of this era will always be extremely difficult
-to interpret. At the beginning of any new way of life, there will be a
-great tendency for people to make-do, at first, with tools and habits
-they are already used to. I would suspect that a great deal of this
-making-do went on almost to the end of this era.
-
-
-THE NATUFIAN, AN ASSEMBLAGE OF THE INCIPIENT ERA
-
-The assemblage called the Natufian comes from the upper layers of a
-number of caves in Palestine. Traces of its flint industry have also
-turned up in Syria and Lebanon. We don’t know just how old it is. I
-guess that it probably falls within five hundred years either way of
-about 5000 B.C.
-
-Until recently, the people who produced the Natufian assemblage were
-thought to have been only cave dwellers, but now at least three open
-air Natufian sites have been briefly described. In their best-known
-dwelling place, on Mount Carmel, the Natufian folk lived in the open
-mouth of a large rock-shelter and on the terrace in front of it. On the
-terrace, they had set at least two short curving lines of stones; but
-these were hardly architecture; they seem more like benches or perhaps
-the low walls of open pens. There were also one or two small clusters
-of stones laid like paving, and a ring of stones around a hearth or
-fireplace. One very round and regular basin-shaped depression had been
-cut into the rocky floor of the terrace, and there were other less
-regular basin-like depressions. In the newly reported open air sites,
-there seem to have been huts with rounded corners.
-
-Most of the finds in the Natufian layer of the Mount Carmel cave were
-flints. About 80 per cent of these flint tools were microliths made
-by the regular working of tiny blades into various tools, some having
-geometric forms. The larger flint tools included backed blades, burins,
-scrapers, a few arrow points, some larger hacking or picking tools, and
-one special type. This last was the sickle blade.
-
-We know a sickle blade of flint when we see one, because of a strange
-polish or sheen which seems to develop on the cutting edge when the
-blade has been used to cut grasses or grain, or--perhaps--reeds. In
-the Natufian, we have even found the straight bone handles in which a
-number of flint sickle blades were set in a line.
-
-There was a small industry in ground or pecked stone (that is, abraded
-not chipped) in the Natufian. This included some pestle and mortar
-fragments. The mortars are said to have a deep and narrow hole,
-and some of the pestles show traces of red ochre. We are not sure
-that these mortars and pestles were also used for grinding food. In
-addition, there were one or two bits of carving in stone.
-
-
-NATUFIAN ANTIQUITIES IN OTHER MATERIALS; BURIALS AND PEOPLE
-
-The Natufian industry in bone was quite rich. It included, beside the
-sickle hafts mentioned above, points and harpoons, straight and curved
-types of fish-hooks, awls, pins and needles, and a variety of beads and
-pendants. There were also beads and pendants of pierced teeth and shell.
-
-A number of Natufian burials have been found in the caves; some burials
-were grouped together in one grave. The people who were buried within
-the Mount Carmel cave were laid on their backs in an extended position,
-while those on the terrace seem to have been “flexed” (placed in their
-graves in a curled-up position). This may mean no more than that it was
-easier to dig a long hole in cave dirt than in the hard-packed dirt of
-the terrace. The people often had some kind of object buried with them,
-and several of the best collections of beads come from the burials. On
-two of the skulls there were traces of elaborate head-dresses of shell
-beads.
-
-[Illustration: SKETCH OF NATUFIAN ASSEMBLAGE
-
-  MICROLITHS
-  ARCHITECTURE?
-  BURIAL
-  CHIPPED STONE
-  GROUND STONE
-  BONE]
-
-The animal bones of the Natufian layers show beasts of a “modern” type,
-but with some differences from those of present-day Palestine. The
-bones of the gazelle far outnumber those of the deer; since gazelles
-like a much drier climate than deer, Palestine must then have had much
-the same climate that it has today. Some of the animal bones were those
-of large or dangerous beasts: the hyena, the bear, the wild boar,
-and the leopard. But the Natufian people may have had the help of a
-large domesticated dog. If our guess at a date for the Natufian is
-right (about 7750 B.C.), this is an earlier dog than was that in the
-Maglemosian of northern Europe. More recently, it has been reported
-that a domesticated goat is also part of the Natufian finds.
-
-The study of the human bones from the Natufian burials is not yet
-complete. Until Professor McCown’s study becomes available, we may note
-Professor Coon’s assessment that these people were of a “basically
-Mediterranean type.”
-
-
-THE KARIM SHAHIR ASSEMBLAGE
-
-Karim Shahir differs from the Natufian sites in that it shows traces
-of a temporary open site or encampment. It lies on the top of a bluff
-in the Kurdish hill-country of northeastern Iraq. It was dug by Dr.
-Bruce Howe of the expedition I directed in 1950-51 for the Oriental
-Institute and the American Schools of Oriental Research. In 1954-55,
-our expedition located another site, M’lefaat, with general resemblance
-to Karim Shahir, but about a hundred miles north of it. In 1956, Dr.
-Ralph Solecki located still another Karim Shahir type of site called
-Zawi Chemi Shanidar. The Zawi Chemi site has a radiocarbon date of 8900
-± 300 B.C.
-
-Karim Shahir has evidence of only one very shallow level of occupation.
-It was probably not lived on very long, although the people who lived
-on it spread out over about three acres of area. In spots, the single
-layer yielded great numbers of fist-sized cracked pieces of limestone,
-which had been carried up from the bed of a stream at the bottom of the
-bluff. We think these cracked stones had something to do with a kind of
-architecture, but we were unable to find positive traces of hut plans.
-At M’lefaat and Zawi Chemi, there were traces of rounded hut plans.
-
-As in the Natufian, the great bulk of small objects of the Karim Shahir
-assemblage was in chipped flint. A large proportion of the flint tools
-were microlithic bladelets and geometric forms. The flint sickle blade
-was almost non-existent, being far scarcer than in the Natufian. The
-people of Karim Shahir did a modest amount of work in the grinding of
-stone; there were milling stone fragments of both the mortar and the
-quern type, and stone hoes or axes with polished bits. Beads, pendants,
-rings, and bracelets were made of finer quality stone. We found a few
-simple points and needles of bone, and even two rather formless unbaked
-clay figurines which seemed to be of animal form.
-
-[Illustration: SKETCH OF KARIM SHAHIR ASSEMBLAGE
-
-  CHIPPED STONE
-  GROUND STONE
-  UNBAKED CLAY
-  SHELL
-  BONE
-  “ARCHITECTURE”]
-
-Karim Shahir did not yield direct evidence of the kind of vegetable
-food its people ate. The animal bones showed a considerable
-increase in the proportion of the bones of the species capable of
-domestication--sheep, goat, cattle, horse, dog--as compared with animal
-bones from the earlier cave sites of the area, which have a high
-proportion of bones of wild forms like deer and gazelle. But we do not
-know that any of the Karim Shahir animals were actually domesticated.
-Some of them may have been, in an “incipient” way, but we have no means
-at the moment that will tell us from the bones alone.
-
-
-WERE THE NATUFIAN AND KARIM SHAHIR PEOPLES FOOD-PRODUCERS?
-
-It is clear that a great part of the food of the Natufian people
-must have been hunted or collected. Shells of land, fresh-water, and
-sea animals occur in their cave layers. The same is true as regards
-Karim Shahir, save for sea shells. But on the other hand, we have
-the sickles, the milling stones, the possible Natufian dog, and the
-goat, and the general animal situation at Karim Shahir to hint at an
-incipient approach to food-production. At Karim Shahir, there was the
-tendency to settle down out in the open; this is echoed by the new
-reports of open air Natufian sites. The large number of cracked stones
-certainly indicates that it was worth the peoples’ while to have some
-kind of structure, even if the site as a whole was short-lived.
-
-It is a part of my hunch that these things all point toward
-food-production--that the hints we seek are there. But in the sense
-that the peoples of the era of the primary village-farming community,
-which we shall look at next, are fully food-producing, the Natufian
-and Karim Shahir folk had not yet arrived. I think they were part of
-a general build-up to full scale food-production. They were possibly
-controlling a few animals of several kinds and perhaps one or two
-plants, without realizing the full possibilities of this “control” as a
-new way of life.
-
-This is why I think of the Karim Shahir and Natufian folk as being at
-a level, or in an era, of incipient cultivation and domestication. But
-we shall have to do a great deal more excavation in this range of time
-before we’ll get the kind of positive information we need.
-
-
-SUMMARY
-
-I am sorry that this chapter has had to be so much more about ideas
-than about the archeological traces of prehistoric men themselves.
-But the antiquities of the incipient era of cultivation and animal
-domestication will not be spectacular, even when we do have them
-excavated in quantity. Few museums will be interested in these
-antiquities for exhibition purposes. The charred bits or impressions
-of plants, the fragments of animal bone and shell, and the varied
-clues to climate and environment will be as important as the artifacts
-themselves. It will be the ideas to which these traces lead us that
-will be important. I am sure that this unspectacular material--when we
-have much more of it, and learn how to understand what it says--will
-lead us to how and why answers about the first great change in human
-history.
-
-We know the earliest village-farming communities appeared in western
-Asia, in a nuclear area. We do not yet know why the Near Eastern
-experiment came first, or why it didn’t happen earlier in some other
-nuclear area. Apparently, the level of culture and the promise of the
-natural environment were ready first in western Asia. The next sites
-we look at will show a simple but effective food-production already
-in existence. Without effective food-production and the settled
-village-farming communities, civilization never could have followed.
-How effective food-production came into being by the end of the
-incipient era, is, I believe, one of the most fascinating questions any
-archeologist could face.
-
-It now seems probable--from possibly two of the Palestinian sites with
-varieties of the Natufian (Jericho and Nahal Oren)--that there were
-one or more local Palestinian developments out of the Natufian into
-later times. In the same way, what followed after the Karim Shahir type
-of assemblage in northeastern Iraq was in some ways a reflection of
-beginnings made at Karim Shahir and Zawi Chemi.
-
-
-
-
-THE First Revolution
-
-[Illustration]
-
-
-As the incipient era of cultivation and animal domestication passed
-onward into the era of the primary village-farming community, the first
-basic change in human economy was fully achieved. In southwestern Asia,
-this seems to have taken place about nine thousand years ago. I am
-going to restrict my description to this earliest Near Eastern case--I
-do not know enough about the later comparable experiments in the Far
-East and in the New World. Let us first, once again, think of the
-contrast between food-collecting and food-producing as ways of life.
-
-
-THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN FOOD-COLLECTORS AND FOOD-PRODUCERS
-
-Childe used the word “revolution” because of the radical change that
-took place in the habits and customs of man. Food-collectors--that is,
-hunters, fishers, berry- and nut-gatherers--had to live in small groups
-or bands, for they had to be ready to move wherever their food supply
-moved. Not many people can be fed in this way in one area, and small
-children and old folks are a burden. There is not enough food to store,
-and it is not the kind that can be stored for long.
-
-Do you see how this all fits into a picture? Small groups of people
-living now in this cave, now in that--or out in the open--as they moved
-after the animals they hunted; no permanent villages, a few half-buried
-huts at best; no breakable utensils; no pottery; no signs of anything
-for clothing beyond the tools that were probably used to dress the
-skins of animals; no time to think of much of anything but food and
-protection and disposal of the dead when death did come: an existence
-which takes nature as it finds it, which does little or nothing to
-modify nature--all in all, a savage’s existence, and a very tough one.
-A man who spends his whole life following animals just to kill them to
-eat, or moving from one berry patch to another, is really living just
-like an animal himself.
-
-
-THE FOOD-PRODUCING ECONOMY
-
-Against this picture let me try to draw another--that of man’s life
-after food-production had begun. His meat was stored “on the hoof,”
-his grain in silos or great pottery jars. He lived in a house: it was
-worth his while to build one, because he couldn’t move far from his
-fields and flocks. In his neighborhood enough food could be grown
-and enough animals bred so that many people were kept busy. They all
-lived close to their flocks and fields, in a village. The village was
-already of a fair size, and it was growing, too. Everybody had more to
-eat; they were presumably all stronger, and there were more children.
-Children and old men could shepherd the animals by day or help with
-the lighter work in the fields. After the crops had been harvested the
-younger men might go hunting and some of them would fish, but the food
-they brought in was only an addition to the food in the village; the
-villagers wouldn’t starve, even if the hunters and fishermen came home
-empty-handed.
-
-There was more time to do different things, too. They began to modify
-nature. They made pottery out of raw clay, and textiles out of hair
-or fiber. People who became good at pottery-making traded their pots
-for food and spent all of their time on pottery alone. Other people
-were learning to weave cloth or to make new tools. There were already
-people in the village who were becoming full-time craftsmen.
-
-Other things were changing, too. The villagers must have had
-to agree on new rules for living together. The head man of the
-village had problems different from those of the chief of the small
-food-collectors’ band. If somebody’s flock of sheep spoiled a wheat
-field, the owner wanted payment for the grain he lost. The chief of
-the hunters was never bothered with such questions. Even the gods
-had changed. The spirits and the magic that had been used by hunters
-weren’t of any use to the villagers. They needed gods who would watch
-over the fields and the flocks, and they eventually began to erect
-buildings where their gods might dwell, and where the men who knew most
-about the gods might live.
-
-
-WAS FOOD-PRODUCTION A “REVOLUTION”?
-
-If you can see the difference between these two pictures--between
-life in the food-collecting stage and life after food-production
-had begun--you’ll see why Professor Childe speaks of a revolution.
-By revolution, he doesn’t mean that it happened over night or that
-it happened only once. We don’t know exactly how long it took. Some
-people think that all these changes may have occurred in less than
-500 years, but I doubt that. The incipient era was probably an affair
-of some duration. Once the level of the village-farming community had
-been established, however, things did begin to move very fast. By
-six thousand years ago, the descendants of the first villagers had
-developed irrigation and plow agriculture in the relatively rainless
-Mesopotamian alluvium and were living in towns with temples. Relative
-to the half million years of food-gathering which lay behind, this had
-been achieved with truly revolutionary suddenness.
-
-
-GAPS IN OUR KNOWLEDGE OF THE NEAR EAST
-
-If you’ll look again at the chart (p. 111) you’ll see that I have
-very few sites and assemblages to name in the incipient era of
-cultivation and domestication, and not many in the earlier part of
-the primary village-farming level either. Thanks in no small part
-to the intelligent co-operation given foreign excavators by the
-Iraq Directorate General of Antiquities, our understanding of the
-sequence in Iraq is growing more complete. I shall use Iraq as my main
-yard-stick here. But I am far from being able to show you a series of
-Sears Roebuck catalogues, even century by century, for any part of
-the nuclear area. There is still a great deal of earth to move, and a
-great mass of material to recover and interpret before we even begin to
-understand “how” and “why.”
-
-Perhaps here, because this kind of archeology is really my specialty,
-you’ll excuse it if I become personal for a moment. I very much look
-forward to having further part in closing some of the gaps in knowledge
-of the Near East. This is not, as I’ve told you, the spectacular
-range of Near Eastern archeology. There are no royal tombs, no gold,
-no great buildings or sculpture, no writing, in fact nothing to
-excite the normal museum at all. Nevertheless it is a range which,
-idea-wise, gives the archeologist tremendous satisfaction. The country
-of the hilly flanks is an exciting combination of green grasslands
-and mountainous ridges. The Kurds, who inhabit the part of the area
-in which I’ve worked most recently, are an extremely interesting and
-hospitable people. Archeologists don’t become rich, but I’ll forego
-the Cadillac for any bright spring morning in the Kurdish hills, on a
-good site with a happy crew of workmen and an interested and efficient
-staff. It is probably impossible to convey the full feeling which life
-on such a dig holds--halcyon days for the body and acute pleasurable
-stimulation for the mind. Old things coming newly out of the good dirt,
-and the pieces of the human puzzle fitting into place! I think I am
-an honest man; I cannot tell you that I am sorry the job is not yet
-finished and that there are still gaps in this part of the Near Eastern
-archeological sequence.
-
-
-EARLIEST SITES OF THE VILLAGE FARMERS
-
-So far, the Karim Shahir type of assemblage, which we looked at in the
-last chapter, is the earliest material available in what I take to
-be the nuclear area. We do not believe that Karim Shahir was a village
-site proper: it looks more like the traces of a temporary encampment.
-Two caves, called Belt and Hotu, which are outside the nuclear area
-and down on the foreshore of the Caspian Sea, have been excavated
-by Professor Coon. These probably belong in the later extension of
-the terminal era of food-gathering; in their upper layers are traits
-like the use of pottery borrowed from the more developed era of the
-same time in the nuclear area. The same general explanation doubtless
-holds true for certain materials in Egypt, along the upper Nile and in
-the Kharga oasis: these materials, called Sebilian III, the Khartoum
-“neolithic,” and the Khargan microlithic, are from surface sites,
-not from caves. The chart (p. 111) shows where I would place these
-materials in era and time.
-
-[Illustration: THE HILLY FLANKS OF THE CRESCENT AND EARLY SITES OF THE
-NEAR EAST]
-
-Both M’lefaat and Dr. Solecki’s Zawi Chemi Shanidar site appear to have
-been slightly more “settled in” than was Karim Shahir itself. But I do
-not think they belong to the era of farming-villages proper. The first
-site of this era, in the hills of Iraqi Kurdistan, is Jarmo, on which
-we have spent three seasons of work. Following Jarmo comes a variety of
-sites and assemblages which lie along the hilly flanks of the crescent
-and just below it. I am going to describe and illustrate some of these
-for you.
-
-Since not very much archeological excavation has yet been done on sites
-of this range of time, I shall have to mention the names of certain
-single sites which now alone stand for an assemblage. This does not
-mean that I think the individual sites I mention were unique. In the
-times when their various cultures flourished, there must have been
-many little villages which shared the same general assemblage. We are
-only now beginning to locate them again. Thus, if I speak of Jarmo,
-or Jericho, or Sialk as single examples of their particular kinds of
-assemblages, I don’t mean that they were unique at all. I think I could
-take you to the sites of at least three more Jarmos, within twenty
-miles of the original one. They are there, but they simply haven’t yet
-been excavated. In 1956, a Danish expedition discovered material of
-Jarmo type at Shimshara, only two dozen miles northeast of Jarmo, and
-below an assemblage of Hassunan type (which I shall describe presently).
-
-
-THE GAP BETWEEN KARIM SHAHIR AND JARMO
-
-As we see the matter now, there is probably still a gap in the
-available archeological record between the Karim Shahir-M’lefaat-Zawi
-Chemi group (of the incipient era) and that of Jarmo (of the
-village-farming era). Although some items of the Jarmo type materials
-do reflect the beginnings of traditions set in the Karim Shahir group
-(see p. 120), there is not a clear continuity. Moreover--to the
-degree that we may trust a few radiocarbon dates--there would appear
-to be around two thousand years of difference in time. The single
-available Zawi Chemi “date” is 8900 ± 300 B.C.; the most reasonable
-group of “dates” from Jarmo average to about 6750 ± 200 B.C. I am
-uncertain about this two thousand years--I do not think it can have
-been so long.
-
-This suggests that we still have much work to do in Iraq. You can
-imagine how earnestly we await the return of political stability in the
-Republic of Iraq.
-
-
-JARMO, IN THE KURDISH HILLS, IRAQ
-
-The site of Jarmo has a depth of deposit of about twenty-seven feet,
-and approximately a dozen layers of architectural renovation and
-change. Nevertheless it is a “one period” site: its assemblage remains
-essentially the same throughout, although one or two new items are
-added in later levels. It covers about four acres of the top of a
-bluff, below which runs a small stream. Jarmo lies in the hill country
-east of the modern oil town of Kirkuk. The Iraq Directorate General of
-Antiquities suggested that we look at it in 1948, and we have had three
-seasons of digging on it since.
-
-The people of Jarmo grew the barley plant and two different kinds of
-wheat. They made flint sickles with which to reap their grain, mortars
-or querns on which to crack it, ovens in which it might be parched, and
-stone bowls out of which they might eat their porridge. We are sure
-that they had the domesticated goat, but Professor Reed (the staff
-zoologist) is not convinced that the bones of the other potentially
-domesticable animals of Jarmo--sheep, cattle, pig, horse, dog--show
-sure signs of domestication. We had first thought that all of these
-animals were domesticated ones, but Reed feels he must find out much
-more before he can be sure. As well as their grain and the meat from
-their animals, the people of Jarmo consumed great quantities of land
-snails. Botanically, the Jarmo wheat stands about half way between
-fully bred wheat and the wild forms.
-
-
-ARCHITECTURE: HALL-MARK OF THE VILLAGE
-
-The sure sign of the village proper is in its traces of architectural
-permanence. The houses of Jarmo were only the size of a small cottage
-by our standards, but each was provided with several rectangular rooms.
-The walls of the houses were made of puddled mud, often set on crude
-foundations of stone. (The puddled mud wall, which the Arabs call
-_touf_, is built by laying a three to six inch course of soft mud,
-letting this sun-dry for a day or two, then adding the next course,
-etc.) The village probably looked much like the simple Kurdish farming
-village of today, with its mud-walled houses and low mud-on-brush
-roofs. I doubt that the Jarmo village had more than twenty houses at
-any one moment of its existence. Today, an average of about seven
-people live in a comparable Kurdish house; probably the population of
-Jarmo was about 150 people.
-
-[Illustration: SKETCH OF JARMO ASSEMBLAGE
-
-  CHIPPED STONE
-  UNBAKED CLAY
-  GROUND STONE
-  POTTERY _UPPER THIRD OF SITE ONLY._
-  REED MATTING
-  BONE
-  ARCHITECTURE]
-
-It is interesting that portable pottery does not appear until the
-last third of the life of the Jarmo village. Throughout the duration
-of the village, however, its people had experimented with the plastic
-qualities of clay. They modeled little figurines of animals and of
-human beings in clay; one type of human figurine they favored was that
-of a markedly pregnant woman, probably the expression of some sort of
-fertility spirit. They provided their house floors with baked-in-place
-depressions, either as basins or hearths, and later with domed ovens of
-clay. As we’ve noted, the houses themselves were of clay or mud; one
-could almost say they were built up like a house-sized pot. Then,
-finally, the idea of making portable pottery itself appeared, although
-I very much doubt that the people of the Jarmo village discovered the
-art.
-
-On the other hand, the old tradition of making flint blades and
-microlithic tools was still very strong at Jarmo. The sickle-blade was
-made in quantities, but so also were many of the much older tool types.
-Strangely enough, it is within this age-old category of chipped stone
-tools that we see one of the clearest pointers to a newer age. Many of
-the Jarmo chipped stone tools--microliths--were made of obsidian, a
-black volcanic natural glass. The obsidian beds nearest to Jarmo are
-over three hundred miles to the north. Already a bulk carrying trade
-had been established--the forerunner of commerce--and the routes were
-set by which, in later times, the metal trade was to move.
-
-There are now twelve radioactive carbon “dates” from Jarmo. The most
-reasonable cluster of determinations averages to about 6750 ± 200
-B.C., although there is a completely unreasonable range of “dates”
-running from 3250 to 9250 B.C.! _If_ I am right in what I take to be
-“reasonable,” the first flush of the food-producing revolution had been
-achieved almost nine thousand years ago.
-
-
-HASSUNA, IN UPPER MESOPOTAMIAN IRAQ
-
-We are not sure just how soon after Jarmo the next assemblage of Iraqi
-material is to be placed. I do not think the time was long, and there
-are a few hints that detailed habits in the making of pottery and
-ground stone tools were actually continued from Jarmo times into the
-time of the next full assemblage. This is called after a site named
-Hassuna, a few miles to the south and west of modern Mosul. We also
-have Hassunan type materials from several other sites in the same
-general region. It is probably too soon to make generalizations about
-it, but the Hassunan sites seem to cluster at slightly lower elevations
-than those we have been talking about so far.
-
-The catalogue of the Hassuna assemblage is of course more full and
-elaborate than that of Jarmo. The Iraqi government’s archeologists
-who dug Hassuna itself, exposed evidence of increasing architectural
-know-how. The walls of houses were still formed of puddled mud;
-sun-dried bricks appear only in later periods. There were now several
-different ways of making and decorating pottery vessels. One style of
-pottery painting, called the Samarran style, is an extremely handsome
-one and must have required a great deal of concentration and excellence
-of draftsmanship. On the other hand, the old habits for the preparation
-of good chipped stone tools--still apparent at Jarmo--seem to have
-largely disappeared by Hassunan times. The flint work of the Hassunan
-catalogue is, by and large, a wretched affair. We might guess that the
-kinaesthetic concentration of the Hassuna craftsmen now went into other
-categories; that is, they suddenly discovered they might have more fun
-working with the newer materials. It’s a shame, for example, that none
-of their weaving is preserved for us.
-
-The two available radiocarbon determinations from Hassunan contexts
-stand at about 5100 and 5600 B.C. ± 250 years.
-
-
-OTHER EARLY VILLAGE SITES IN THE NUCLEAR AREA
-
-I’ll now name and very briefly describe a few of the other early
-village assemblages either in or adjacent to the hilly flanks of the
-crescent. Unfortunately, we do not have radioactive carbon dates for
-many of these materials. We may guess that some particular assemblage,
-roughly comparable to that of Hassuna, for example, must reflect a
-culture which lived at just about the same time as that of Hassuna. We
-do this guessing on the basis of the general similarity and degree of
-complexity of the Sears Roebuck catalogues of the particular assemblage
-and that of Hassuna. We suppose that for sites near at hand and of a
-comparable cultural level, as indicated by their generally similar
-assemblages, the dating must be about the same. We may also know that
-in a general stratigraphic sense, the sites in question may both appear
-at the bottom of the ascending village sequence in their respective
-areas. Without a number of consistent radioactive carbon dates, we
-cannot be precise about priorities.
-
-[Illustration: SKETCH OF HASSUNA ASSEMBLAGE
-
-  POTTERY
-  POTTERY OBJECTS
-  CHIPPED STONE
-  BONE
-  GROUND STONE
-  ARCHITECTURE
-  REED MATTING
-  BURIAL]
-
-The ancient mound at Jericho, in the Dead Sea valley in Palestine,
-yields some very interesting material. Its catalogue somewhat resembles
-that of Jarmo, especially in the sense that there is a fair depth
-of deposit without portable pottery vessels. On the other hand, the
-architecture of Jericho is surprisingly complex, with traces of massive
-stone fortification walls and the general use of formed sun-dried
-mud brick. Jericho lies in a somewhat strange and tropically lush
-ecological niche, some seven hundred feet below sea level; it is
-geographically within the hilly-flanks zone but environmentally not
-part of it.
-
-Several radiocarbon “dates” for Jericho fall within the range of those
-I find reasonable for Jarmo, and their internal statistical consistency
-is far better than that for the Jarmo determinations. It is not yet
-clear exactly what this means.
-
-The mound at Jericho (Tell es-Sultan) contains a remarkably
-fine sequence, which perhaps does not have the gap we noted in
-Iraqi-Kurdistan between the Karim Shahir group and Jarmo. While I am
-not sure that the Jericho sequence will prove valid for those parts
-of Palestine outside the special Dead Sea environmental niche, the
-sequence does appear to proceed from the local variety of Natufian into
-that of a very well settled community. So far, we have little direct
-evidence for the food-production basis upon which the Jericho people
-subsisted.
-
-There is an early village assemblage with strong characteristics of its
-own in the land bordering the northeast corner of the Mediterranean
-Sea, where Syria and the Cilician province of Turkey join. This early
-Syro-Cilician assemblage must represent a general cultural pattern
-which was at least in part contemporary with that of the Hassuna
-assemblage. These materials from the bases of the mounds at Mersin, and
-from Judaidah in the Amouq plain, as well as from a few other sites,
-represent the remains of true villages. The walls of their houses were
-built of puddled mud, but some of the house foundations were of stone.
-Several different kinds of pottery were made by the people of these
-villages. None of it resembles the pottery from Hassuna or from the
-upper levels of Jarmo or Jericho. The Syro-Cilician people had not
-lost their touch at working flint. An important southern variation of
-the Syro-Cilician assemblage has been cleared recently at Byblos, a
-port town famous in later Phoenician times. There are three radiocarbon
-determinations which suggest that the time range for these developments
-was in the sixth or early fifth millennium B.C.
-
-It would be fascinating to search for traces of even earlier
-village-farming communities and for the remains of the incipient
-cultivation era, in the Syro-Cilician region.
-
-
-THE IRANIAN PLATEAU AND THE NILE VALLEY
-
-The map on page 125 shows some sites which lie either outside or in
-an extension of the hilly-flanks zone proper. From the base of the
-great mound at Sialk on the Iranian plateau came an assemblage of
-early village material, generally similar, in the kinds of things it
-contained, to the catalogues of Hassuna and Judaidah. The details of
-how things were made are different; the Sialk assemblage represents
-still another cultural pattern. I suspect it appeared a bit later
-in time than did that of Hassuna. There is an important new item in
-the Sialk catalogue. The Sialk people made small drills or pins of
-hammered copper. Thus the metallurgist’s specialized craft had made its
-appearance.
-
-There is at least one very early Iranian site on the inward slopes
-of the hilly-flanks zone. It is the earlier of two mounds at a place
-called Bakun, in southwestern Iran; the results of the excavations
-there are not yet published and we only know of its coarse and
-primitive pottery. I only mention Bakun because it helps us to plot the
-extent of the hilly-flanks zone villages on the map.
-
-The Nile Valley lies beyond the peculiar environmental zone of the
-hilly flanks of the crescent, and it is probable that the earliest
-village-farming communities in Egypt were established by a few people
-who wandered into the Nile delta area from the nuclear area. The
-assemblage which is most closely comparable to the catalogue of Hassuna
-or Judaidah, for example, is that from little settlements along the
-shore of the Fayum lake. The Fayum materials come mainly from grain
-bins or silos. Another site, Merimde, in the western part of the Nile
-delta, shows the remains of a true village, but it may be slightly
-later than the settlement of the Fayum. There are radioactive carbon
-“dates” for the Fayum materials at about 4275 B.C. ± 320 years, which
-is almost fifteen hundred years later than the determinations suggested
-for the Hassunan or Syro-Cilician assemblages. I suspect that this
-is a somewhat over-extended indication of the time it took for the
-generalized cultural pattern of village-farming community life to
-spread from the nuclear area down into Egypt, but as yet we have no way
-of testing these matters.
-
-In this same vein, we have two radioactive carbon dates for an
-assemblage from sites near Khartoum in the Sudan, best represented by
-the mound called Shaheinab. The Shaheinab catalogue roughly corresponds
-to that of the Fayum; the distance between the two places, as the Nile
-flows, is roughly 1,500 miles. Thus it took almost a thousand years for
-the new way of life to be carried as far south into Africa as Khartoum;
-the two Shaheinab “dates” average about 3300 B.C. ± 400 years.
-
-If the movement was up the Nile (southward), as these dates suggest,
-then I suspect that the earliest available village material of middle
-Egypt, the so-called Tasian, is also later than that of the Fayum. The
-Tasian materials come from a few graves near a village called Deir
-Tasa, and I have an uncomfortable feeling that the Tasian “assemblage”
-may be mainly an artificial selection of poor examples of objects which
-belong in the following range of time.
-
-
-SPREAD IN TIME AND SPACE
-
-There are now two things we can do; in fact, we have already begun to
-do them. We can watch the spread of the new way of life upward through
-time in the nuclear area. We can also see how the new way of life
-spread outward in space from the nuclear area, as time went on. There
-is good archeological evidence that both these processes took place.
-For the hill country of northeastern Iraq, in the nuclear area, we
-have already noticed how the succession (still with gaps) from Karim
-Shahir, through M’lefaat and Jarmo, to Hassuna can be charted (see
-chart, p. 111). In the next chapter, we shall continue this charting
-and description of what happened in Iraq upward through time. We also
-watched traces of the new way of life move through space up the Nile
-into Africa, to reach Khartoum in the Sudan some thirty-five hundred
-years later than we had seen it at Jarmo or Jericho. We caught glimpses
-of it in the Fayum and perhaps at Tasa along the way.
-
-For the remainder of this chapter, I shall try to suggest briefly for
-you the directions taken by the spread of the new way of life from the
-nuclear area in the Near East. First, let me make clear again that
-I _do not_ believe that the village-farming community way of life
-was invented only once and in the Near East. It seems to me that the
-evidence is very clear that a separate experiment arose in the New
-World. For China, the question of independence or borrowing--in the
-appearance of the village-farming community there--is still an open
-one. In the last chapter, we noted the probability of an independent
-nuclear area in southeastern Asia. Professor Carl Sauer strongly
-champions the great importance of this area as _the_ original center
-of agricultural pursuits, as a kind of “cradle” of all incipient eras
-of the Old World at least. While there is certainly not the slightest
-archeological evidence to allow us to go that far, we may easily expect
-that an early southeast Asian development would have been felt in
-China. However, the appearance of the village-farming community in the
-northwest of India, at least, seems to have depended on the earlier
-development in the Near East. It is also probable that ideas of the new
-way of life moved well beyond Khartoum in Africa.
-
-
-THE SPREAD OF THE VILLAGE-FARMING COMMUNITY WAY OF LIFE INTO EUROPE
-
-How about Europe? I won’t give you many details. You can easily imagine
-that the late prehistoric prelude to European history is a complicated
-affair. We all know very well how complicated an area Europe is now,
-with its welter of different languages and cultures. Remember, however,
-that a great deal of archeology has been done on the late prehistory of
-Europe, and very little on that of further Asia and Africa. If we knew
-as much about these areas as we do of Europe, I expect we’d find them
-just as complicated.
-
-This much is clear for Europe, as far as the spread of the
-village-community way of life is concerned. The general idea and much
-of the know-how and the basic tools of food-production moved from the
-Near East to Europe. So did the plants and animals which had been
-domesticated; they were not naturally at home in Europe, as they were
-in western Asia. I do not, of course, mean that there were traveling
-salesmen who carried these ideas and things to Europe with a commercial
-gleam in their eyes. The process took time, and the ideas and things
-must have been passed on from one group of people to the next. There
-was also some actual movement of peoples, but we don’t know the size of
-the groups that moved.
-
-The story of the “colonization” of Europe by the first farmers is
-thus one of (1) the movement from the eastern Mediterranean lands
-of some people who were farmers; (2) the spread of ideas and things
-beyond the Near East itself and beyond the paths along which the
-“colonists” moved; and (3) the adaptations of the ideas and things
-by the indigenous “Forest folk”, about whose “receptiveness” Professor
-Mathiassen speaks (p. 97). It is important to note that the resulting
-cultures in the new European environment were European, not Near
-Eastern. The late Professor Childe remarked that “the peoples of the
-West were not slavish imitators; they adapted the gifts from the East
-... into a new and organic whole capable of developing on its own
-original lines.”
-
-
-THE WAYS TO EUROPE
-
-Suppose we want to follow the traces of those earliest village-farmers
-who did travel from western Asia into Europe. Let us start from
-Syro-Cilicia, that part of the hilly-flanks zone proper which lies in
-the very northeastern corner of the Mediterranean. Three ways would be
-open to us (of course we could not be worried about permission from the
-Soviet authorities!). We would go north, or north and slightly east,
-across Anatolian Turkey, and skirt along either shore of the Black Sea
-or even to the east of the Caucasus Mountains along the Caspian Sea,
-to reach the plains of Ukrainian Russia. From here, we could march
-across eastern Europe to the Baltic and Scandinavia, or even hook back
-southwestward to Atlantic Europe.
-
-Our second way from Syro-Cilicia would also lie over Anatolia, to the
-northwest, where we would have to swim or raft ourselves over the
-Dardanelles or the Bosphorus to the European shore. Then we would bear
-left toward Greece, but some of us might turn right again in Macedonia,
-going up the valley of the Vardar River to its divide and on down
-the valley of the Morava beyond, to reach the Danube near Belgrade
-in Jugoslavia. Here we would turn left, following the great river
-valley of the Danube up into central Europe. We would have a number of
-tributary valleys to explore, or we could cross the divide and go down
-the valley of the Rhine to the North Sea.
-
-Our third way from Syro-Cilicia would be by sea. We would coast along
-southern Anatolia and visit Cyprus, Crete, and the Aegean islands on
-our way to Greece, where, in the north, we might meet some of those who
-had taken the second route. From Greece, we would sail on to Italy and
-the western isles, to reach southern France and the coasts of Spain.
-Eventually a few of us would sail up the Atlantic coast of Europe, to
-reach western Britain and even Ireland.
-
-[Illustration: PROBABLE ROUTES AND TIMING IN THE SPREAD OF THE
-VILLAGE-FARMING COMMUNITY WAY OF LIFE FROM THE NEAR EAST TO EUROPE]
-
-Of course none of us could ever take these journeys as the first
-farmers took them, since the whole course of each journey must have
-lasted many lifetimes. The date given to the assemblage called Windmill
-Hill, the earliest known trace of village-farming communities in
-England, is about 2500 B.C. I would expect about 5500 B.C. to be a
-safe date to give for the well-developed early village communities of
-Syro-Cilicia. We suspect that the spread throughout Europe did not
-proceed at an even rate. Professor Piggott writes that “at a date
-probably about 2600 B.C., simple agricultural communities were being
-established in Spain and southern France, and from the latter region a
-spread northwards can be traced ... from points on the French seaboard
-of the [English] Channel ... there were emigrations of a certain number
-of these tribes by boat, across to the chalk lands of Wessex and Sussex
-[in England], probably not more than three or four generations later
-than the formation of the south French colonies.”
-
-New radiocarbon determinations are becoming available all the
-time--already several suggest that the food-producing way of life
-had reached the lower Rhine and Holland by 4000 B.C. But not all
-prehistorians accept these “dates,” so I do not show them on my map
-(p. 139).
-
-
-THE EARLIEST FARMERS OF ENGLAND
-
-To describe the later prehistory of all Europe for you would take
-another book and a much larger one than this is. Therefore, I have
-decided to give you only a few impressions of the later prehistory of
-Britain. Of course the British Isles lie at the other end of Europe
-from our base-line in western Asia. Also, they received influences
-along at least two of the three ways in which the new way of life
-moved into Europe. We will look at more of their late prehistory in a
-following chapter: here, I shall speak only of the first farmers.
-
-The assemblage called Windmill Hill, which appears in the south of
-England, exhibits three different kinds of structures, evidence of
-grain-growing and of stock-breeding, and some distinctive types of
-pottery and stone implements. The most remarkable type of structure
-is the earthwork enclosures which seem to have served as seasonal
-cattle corrals. These enclosures were roughly circular, reached over
-a thousand feet in diameter, and sometimes included two or three
-concentric sets of banks and ditches. Traces of oblong timber houses
-have been found, but not within the enclosures. The second type of
-structure is mine-shafts, dug down into the chalk beds where good
-flint for the making of axes or hoes could be found. The third type
-of structure is long simple mounds or “unchambered barrows,” in one
-end of which burials were made. It has been commonly believed that the
-Windmill Hill assemblage belonged entirely to the cultural tradition
-which moved up through France to the Channel. Professor Piggott is now
-convinced, however, that important elements of Windmill Hill stem from
-northern Germany and Denmark--products of the first way into Europe
-from the east.
-
-The archeological traces of a second early culture are to be found
-in the west of England, western and northern Scotland, and most of
-Ireland. The bearers of this culture had come up the Atlantic coast
-by sea from southern France and Spain. The evidence they have left us
-consists mainly of tombs and the contents of tombs, with only very
-rare settlement sites. The tombs were of some size and received the
-bodies of many people. The tombs themselves were built of stone, heaped
-over with earth; the stones enclosed a passage to a central chamber
-(“passage graves”), or to a simple long gallery, along the sides of
-which the bodies were laid (“gallery graves”). The general type of
-construction is called “megalithic” (= great stone), and the whole
-earth-mounded structure is often called a _barrow_. Since many have
-proper chambers, in one sense or another, we used the term “unchambered
-barrow” above to distinguish those of the Windmill Hill type from these
-megalithic structures. There is some evidence for sacrifice, libations,
-and ceremonial fires, and it is clear that some form of community
-ritual was focused on the megalithic tombs.
-
-The cultures of the people who produced the Windmill Hill assemblage
-and of those who made the megalithic tombs flourished, at least in
-part, at the same time. Although the distributions of the two different
-types of archeological traces are in quite different parts of the
-country, there is Windmill Hill pottery in some of the megalithic
-tombs. But the tombs also contain pottery which seems to have arrived
-with the tomb builders themselves.
-
-The third early British group of antiquities of this general time
-(following 2500 B.C.) comes from sites in southern and eastern England.
-It is not so certain that the people who made this assemblage, called
-Peterborough, were actually farmers. While they may on occasion have
-practiced a simple agriculture, many items of their assemblage link
-them closely with that of the “Forest folk” of earlier times in
-England and in the Baltic countries. Their pottery is decorated with
-impressions of cords and is quite different from that of Windmill Hill
-and the megalithic builders. In addition, the distribution of their
-finds extends into eastern Britain, where the other cultures have left
-no trace. The Peterborough people had villages with semi-subterranean
-huts, and the bones of oxen, pigs, and sheep have been found in a few
-of these. On the whole, however, hunting and fishing seem to have been
-their vital occupations. They also established trade routes especially
-to acquire the raw material for stone axes.
-
-A probably slightly later culture, whose traces are best known from
-Skara Brae on Orkney, also had its roots in those cultures of the
-Baltic area which fused out of the meeting of the “Forest folk” and
-the peoples who took the eastern way into Europe. Skara Brae is very
-well preserved, having been built of thin stone slabs about which
-dune-sand drifted after the village died. The individual houses, the
-bedsteads, the shelves, the chests for clothes and oddments--all built
-of thin stone-slabs--may still be seen in place. But the Skara Brae
-people lived entirely by sheep- and cattle-breeding, and by catching
-shellfish. Neither grain nor the instruments of agriculture appeared at
-Skara Brae.
-
-
-THE EUROPEAN ACHIEVEMENT
-
-The above is only a very brief description of what went on in Britain
-with the arrival of the first farmers. There are many interesting
-details which I have omitted in order to shorten the story.
-
-I believe some of the difficulty we have in understanding the
-establishment of the first farming communities in Europe is with
-the word “colonization.” We have a natural tendency to think of
-“colonization” as it has happened within the last few centuries. In the
-case of the colonization of the Americas, for example, the colonists
-came relatively quickly, and in increasingly vast numbers. They had
-vastly superior technical, political, and war-making skills, compared
-with those of the Indians. There was not much mixing with the Indians.
-The case in Europe five or six thousand years ago must have been very
-different. I wonder if it is even proper to call people “colonists”
-who move some miles to a new region, settle down and farm it for some
-years, then move on again, generation after generation? The ideas and
-the things which these new people carried were only _potentially_
-superior. The ideas and things and the people had to prove themselves
-in their adaptation to each new environment. Once this was done another
-link to the chain would be added, and then the forest-dwellers and
-other indigenous folk of Europe along the way might accept the new
-ideas and things. It is quite reasonable to expect that there must have
-been much mixture of the migrants and the indigenes along the way; the
-Peterborough and Skara Brae assemblages we mentioned above would seem
-to be clear traces of such fused cultures. Sometimes, especially if the
-migrants were moving by boat, long distances may have been covered in
-a short time. Remember, however, we seem to have about three thousand
-years between the early Syro-Cilician villages and Windmill Hill.
-
-Let me repeat Professor Childe again. “The peoples of the West were
-not slavish imitators: they adapted the gifts from the East ... into
-a new and organic whole capable of developing on its own original
-lines.” Childe is of course completely conscious of the fact that his
-“peoples of the West” were in part the descendants of migrants who came
-originally from the “East,” bringing their “gifts” with them. This
-was the late prehistoric achievement of Europe--to take new ideas and
-things and some migrant peoples and, by mixing them with the old in its
-own environments, to forge a new and unique series of cultures.
-
-What we know of the ways of men suggests to us that when the details
-of the later prehistory of further Asia and Africa are learned, their
-stories will be just as exciting.
-
-
-
-
-THE Conquest of Civilization
-
-[Illustration]
-
-
-Now we must return to the Near East again. We are coming to the point
-where history is about to begin. I am going to stick pretty close
-to Iraq and Egypt in this chapter. These countries will perhaps be
-the most interesting to most of us, for the foundations of western
-civilization were laid in the river lands of the Tigris and Euphrates
-and of the Nile. I shall probably stick closest of all to Iraq, because
-things first happened there and also because I know it best.
-
-There is another interesting thing, too. We have seen that the first
-experiment in village-farming took place in the Near East. So did
-the first experiment in civilization. Both experiments “took.” The
-traditions we live by today are based, ultimately, on those ancient
-beginnings in food-production and civilization in the Near East.
-
-
-WHAT “CIVILIZATION” MEANS
-
-I shall not try to define “civilization” for you; rather, I shall
-tell you what the word brings to my mind. To me civilization means
-urbanization: the fact that there are cities. It means a formal
-political set-up--that there are kings or governing bodies that the
-people have set up. It means formal laws--rules of conduct--which the
-government (if not the people) believes are necessary. It probably
-means that there are formalized projects--roads, harbors, irrigation
-canals, and the like--and also some sort of army or police force
-to protect them. It means quite new and different art forms. It
-also usually means there is writing. (The people of the Andes--the
-Incas--had everything which goes to make up a civilization but formal
-writing. I can see no reason to say they were not civilized.) Finally,
-as the late Professor Redfield reminded us, civilization seems to bring
-with it the dawn of a new kind of moral order.
-
-In different civilizations, there may be important differences in the
-way such things as the above are managed. In early civilizations, it is
-usual to find religion very closely tied in with government, law, and
-so forth. The king may also be a high priest, or he may even be thought
-of as a god. The laws are usually thought to have been given to the
-people by the gods. The temples are protected just as carefully as the
-other projects.
-
-
-CIVILIZATION IMPOSSIBLE WITHOUT FOOD-PRODUCTION
-
-Civilizations have to be made up of many people. Some of the people
-live in the country; some live in very large towns or cities. Classes
-of society have begun. There are officials and government people; there
-are priests or religious officials; there are merchants and traders;
-there are craftsmen, metal-workers, potters, builders, and so on; there
-are also farmers, and these are the people who produce the food for the
-whole population. It must be obvious that civilization cannot exist
-without food-production and that food-production must also be at a
-pretty efficient level of village-farming before civilization can even
-begin.
-
-But people can be food-producing without being civilized. In many
-parts of the world this is still the case. When the white men first
-came to America, the Indians in most parts of this hemisphere were
-food-producers. They grew corn, potatoes, tomatoes, squash, and many
-other things the white men had never eaten before. But only the Aztecs
-of Mexico, the Mayas of Yucatan and Guatemala, and the Incas of the
-Andes were civilized.
-
-
-WHY DIDN’T CIVILIZATION COME TO ALL FOOD-PRODUCERS?
-
-Once you have food-production, even at the well-advanced level of
-the village-farming community, what else has to happen before you
-get civilization? Many men have asked this question and have failed
-to give a full and satisfactory answer. There is probably no _one_
-answer. I shall give you my own idea about how civilization _may_ have
-come about in the Near East alone. Remember, it is only a guess--a
-putting together of hunches from incomplete evidence. It is _not_ meant
-to explain how civilization began in any of the other areas--China,
-southeast Asia, the Americas--where other early experiments in
-civilization went on. The details in those areas are quite different.
-Whether certain general principles hold, for the appearance of any
-early civilization, is still an open and very interesting question.
-
-
-WHERE CIVILIZATION FIRST APPEARED IN THE NEAR EAST
-
-You remember that our earliest village-farming communities lay along
-the hilly flanks of a great “crescent.” (See map on p. 125.)
-Professor Breasted’s “fertile crescent” emphasized the rich river
-valleys of the Nile and the Tigris-Euphrates Rivers. Our hilly-flanks
-area of the crescent zone arches up from Egypt through Palestine and
-Syria, along southern Turkey into northern Iraq, and down along the
-southwestern fringe of Iran. The earliest food-producing villages we
-know already existed in this area by about 6750 B.C. (± 200 years).
-
-Now notice that this hilly-flanks zone does not include southern
-Mesopotamia, the alluvial land of the lower Tigris and Euphrates in
-Iraq, or the Nile Valley proper. The earliest known villages of classic
-Mesopotamia and Egypt seem to appear fifteen hundred or more years
-after those of the hilly-flanks zone. For example, the early Fayum
-village which lies near a lake west of the Nile Valley proper (see p.
-135) has a radiocarbon date of 4275 B.C. ± 320 years. It was in the
-river lands, however, that the immediate beginnings of civilization
-were made.
-
-We know that by about 3200 B.C. the Early Dynastic period had begun
-in southern Mesopotamia. The beginnings of writing go back several
-hundred years earlier, but we can safely say that civilization had
-begun in Mesopotamia by 3200 B.C. In Egypt, the beginning of the First
-Dynasty is slightly later, at about 3100 B.C., and writing probably
-did not appear much earlier. There is no question but that history and
-civilization were well under way in both Mesopotamia and Egypt by 3000
-B.C.--about five thousand years ago.
-
-
-THE HILLY-FLANKS ZONE VERSUS THE RIVER LANDS
-
-Why did these two civilizations spring up in these two river
-lands which apparently were not even part of the area where the
-village-farming community began? Why didn’t we have the first
-civilizations in Palestine, Syria, north Iraq, or Iran, where we’re
-sure food-production had had a long time to develop? I think the
-probable answer gives a clue to the ways in which civilization began in
-Egypt and Mesopotamia.
-
-The land in the hilly flanks is of a sort which people can farm without
-too much trouble. There is a fairly fertile coastal strip in Palestine
-and Syria. There are pleasant mountain slopes, streams running out to
-the sea, and rain, at least in the winter months. The rain belt and the
-foothills of the Turkish mountains also extend to northern Iraq and on
-to the Iranian plateau. The Iranian plateau has its mountain valleys,
-streams, and some rain. These hilly flanks of the “crescent,” through
-most of its arc, are almost made-to-order for beginning farmers. The
-grassy slopes of the higher hills would be pasture for their herds
-and flocks. As soon as the earliest experiments with agriculture and
-domestic animals had been successful, a pleasant living could be
-made--and without too much trouble.
-
-I should add here again, that our evidence points increasingly to a
-climate for those times which is very little different from that for
-the area today. Now look at Egypt and southern Mesopotamia. Both are
-lands without rain, for all intents and purposes. Both are lands with
-rivers that have laid down very fertile soil--soil perhaps superior to
-that in the hilly flanks. But in both lands, the rivers are of no great
-aid without some control.
-
-The Nile floods its banks once a year, in late September or early
-October. It not only soaks the narrow fertile strip of land on either
-side; it lays down a fresh layer of new soil each year. Beyond the
-fertile strip on either side rise great cliffs, and behind them is the
-desert. In its natural, uncontrolled state, the yearly flood of the
-Nile must have caused short-lived swamps that were full of crocodiles.
-After a short time, the flood level would have dropped, the water and
-the crocodiles would have run back into the river, and the swamp plants
-would have become parched and dry.
-
-The Tigris and the Euphrates of Mesopotamia are less likely to flood
-regularly than the Nile. The Tigris has a shorter and straighter course
-than the Euphrates; it is also the more violent river. Its banks are
-high, and when the snows melt and flow into all of its tributary rivers
-it is swift and dangerous. The Euphrates has a much longer and more
-curving course and few important tributaries. Its banks are lower and
-it is less likely to flood dangerously. The land on either side and
-between the two rivers is very fertile, south of the modern city of
-Baghdad. Unlike the Nile Valley, neither the Tigris nor the Euphrates
-is flanked by cliffs. The land on either side of the rivers stretches
-out for miles and is not much rougher than a poor tennis court.
-
-
-THE RIVERS MUST BE CONTROLLED
-
-The real trick in both Egypt and Mesopotamia is to make the rivers work
-for you. In Egypt, this is a matter of building dikes and reservoirs
-that will catch and hold the Nile flood. In this way, the water is held
-and allowed to run off over the fields as it is needed. In Mesopotamia,
-it is a matter of taking advantage of natural river channels and branch
-channels, and of leading ditches from these onto the fields.
-
-Obviously, we can no longer find the first dikes or reservoirs of
-the Nile Valley, or the first canals or ditches of Mesopotamia. The
-same land has been lived on far too long for any traces of the first
-attempts to be left; or, especially in Egypt, it has been covered by
-the yearly deposits of silt, dropped by the river floods. But we’re
-pretty sure the first food-producers of Egypt and southern Mesopotamia
-must have made such dikes, canals, and ditches. In the first place,
-there can’t have been enough rain for them to grow things otherwise.
-In the second place, the patterns for such projects seem to have been
-pretty well set by historic times.
-
-
-CONTROL OF THE RIVERS THE BUSINESS OF EVERYONE
-
-Here, then, is a _part_ of the reason why civilization grew in Egypt
-and Mesopotamia first--not in Palestine, Syria, or Iran. In the latter
-areas, people could manage to produce their food as individuals. It
-wasn’t too hard; there were rain and some streams, and good pasturage
-for the animals even if a crop or two went wrong. In Egypt and
-Mesopotamia, people had to put in a much greater amount of work, and
-this work couldn’t be individual work. Whole villages or groups of
-people had to turn out to fix dikes or dig ditches. The dikes had to be
-repaired and the ditches carefully cleared of silt each year, or they
-would become useless.
-
-There also had to be hard and fast rules. The person who lived nearest
-the ditch or the reservoir must not be allowed to take all the water
-and leave none for his neighbors. It was not only a business of
-learning to control the rivers and of making their waters do the
-farmer’s work. It also meant controlling men. But once these men had
-managed both kinds of controls, what a wonderful yield they had! The
-soil was already fertile, and the silt which came in the floods and
-ditches kept adding fertile soil.
-
-
-THE GERM OF CIVILIZATION IN EGYPT AND MESOPOTAMIA
-
-This learning to work together for the common good was the real germ of
-the Egyptian and the Mesopotamian civilizations. The bare elements of
-civilization were already there: the need for a governing hand and for
-laws to see that the communities’ work was done and that the water was
-justly shared. You may object that there is a sort of chicken and egg
-paradox in this idea. How could the people set up the rules until they
-had managed to get a way to live, and how could they manage to get a
-way to live until they had set up the rules? I think that small groups
-must have moved down along the mud-flats of the river banks quite
-early, making use of naturally favorable spots, and that the rules grew
-out of such cases. It would have been like the hand-in-hand growth of
-automobiles and paved highways in the United States.
-
-Once the rules and the know-how did get going, there must have been a
-constant interplay of the two. Thus, the more the crops yielded, the
-richer and better-fed the people would have been, and the more the
-population would have grown. As the population grew, more land would
-have needed to be flooded or irrigated, and more complex systems of
-dikes, reservoirs, canals, and ditches would have been built. The more
-complex the system, the more necessity for work on new projects and for
-the control of their use.... And so on....
-
-What I have just put down for you is a guess at the manner of growth of
-some of the formalized systems that go to make up a civilized society.
-My explanation has been pointed particularly at Egypt and Mesopotamia.
-I have already told you that the irrigation and water-control part of
-it does not apply to the development of the Aztecs or the Mayas, or
-perhaps anybody else. But I think that a fair part of the story of
-Egypt and Mesopotamia must be as I’ve just told you.
-
-I am particularly anxious that you do _not_ understand me to mean that
-irrigation _caused_ civilization. I am sure it was not that simple at
-all. For, in fact, a complex and highly engineered irrigation system
-proper did not come until later times. Let’s say rather that the simple
-beginnings of irrigation allowed and in fact encouraged a great number
-of things in the technological, political, social, and moral realms of
-culture. We do not yet understand what all these things were or how
-they worked. But without these other aspects of culture, I do not
-think that urbanization and civilization itself could have come into
-being.
-
-
-THE ARCHEOLOGICAL SEQUENCE TO CIVILIZATION IN IRAQ
-
-We last spoke of the archeological materials of Iraq on page 130,
-where I described the village-farming community of Hassunan type. The
-Hassunan type villages appear in the hilly-flanks zone and in the
-rolling land adjacent to the Tigris in northern Iraq. It is probable
-that even before the Hassuna pattern of culture lived its course, a
-new assemblage had been established in northern Iraq and Syria. This
-assemblage is called Halaf, after a site high on a tributary of the
-Euphrates, on the Syro-Turkish border.
-
-[Illustration: SKETCH OF SELECTED ITEMS OF HALAFIAN ASSEMBLAGE
-
-  BEADS AND PENDANTS
-  POTTERY MOTIFS
-  POTTERY]
-
-The Halafian assemblage is incompletely known. The culture it
-represents included a remarkably handsome painted pottery.
-Archeologists have tended to be so fascinated with this pottery that
-they have bothered little with the rest of the Halafian assemblage. We
-do know that strange stone-founded houses, with plans like those of the
-popular notion of an Eskimo igloo, were built. Like the pottery of the
-Samarran style, which appears as part of the Hassunan assemblage (see
-p. 131), the Halafian painted pottery implies great concentration and
-excellence of draftsmanship on the part of the people who painted it.
-
-We must mention two very interesting sites adjacent to the mud-flats of
-the rivers, half way down from northern Iraq to the classic alluvial
-Mesopotamian area. One is Baghouz on the Euphrates; the other is
-Samarra on the Tigris (see map, p. 125). Both these sites yield the
-handsome painted pottery of the style called Samarran: in fact it
-is Samarra which gives its name to the pottery. Neither Baghouz nor
-Samarra have completely Hassunan types of assemblages, and at Samarra
-there are a few pots of proper Halafian style. I suppose that Samarra
-and Baghouz give us glimpses of those early farmers who had begun to
-finger their way down the mud-flats of the river banks toward the
-fertile but yet untilled southland.
-
-
-CLASSIC SOUTHERN MESOPOTAMIA FIRST OCCUPIED
-
-Our next step is into the southland proper. Here, deep in the core of
-the mound which later became the holy Sumerian city of Eridu, Iraqi
-archeologists uncovered a handsome painted pottery. Pottery of the same
-type had been noticed earlier by German archeologists on the surface
-of a small mound, awash in the spring floods, near the remains of the
-Biblical city of Erich (Sumerian = Uruk; Arabic = Warka). This “Eridu”
-pottery, which is about all we have of the assemblage of the people who
-once produced it, may be seen as a blend of the Samarran and Halafian
-painted pottery styles. This may over-simplify the case, but as yet we
-do not have much evidence to go on. The idea does at least fit with my
-interpretation of the meaning of Baghouz and Samarra as way-points on
-the mud-flats of the rivers half way down from the north.
-
-My colleague, Robert Adams, believes that there were certainly
-riverine-adapted food-collectors living in lower Mesopotamia. The
-presence of such would explain why the Eridu assemblage is not simply
-the sum of the Halafian and Samarran assemblages. But the domesticated
-plants and animals and the basic ways of food-production must have
-come from the hilly-flanks country in the north.
-
-Above the basal Eridu levels, and at a number of other sites in the
-south, comes a full-fledged assemblage called Ubaid. Incidentally,
-there is an aspect of the Ubaidian assemblage in the north as well. It
-seems to move into place before the Halaf manifestation is finished,
-and to blend with it. The Ubaidian assemblage in the south is by far
-the more spectacular. The development of the temple has been traced
-at Eridu from a simple little structure to a monumental building some
-62 feet long, with a pilaster-decorated façade and an altar in its
-central chamber. There is painted Ubaidian pottery, but the style is
-hurried and somewhat careless and gives the _impression_ of having been
-a cheap mass-production means of decoration when compared with the
-carefully drafted styles of Samarra and Halaf. The Ubaidian people made
-other items of baked clay: sickles and axes of very hard-baked clay
-are found. The northern Ubaidian sites have yielded tools of copper,
-but metal tools of unquestionable Ubaidian find-spots are not yet
-available from the south. Clay figurines of human beings with monstrous
-turtle-like faces are another item in the southern Ubaidian assemblage.
-
-[Illustration: SKETCH OF SELECTED ITEMS OF UBAIDIAN ASSEMBLAGE]
-
-There is a large Ubaid cemetery at Eridu, much of it still awaiting
-excavation. The few skeletons so far tentatively studied reveal a
-completely modern type of “Mediterraneanoid”; the individuals whom the
-skeletons represent would undoubtedly blend perfectly into the modern
-population of southern Iraq. What the Ubaidian assemblage says to us is
-that these people had already adapted themselves and their culture to
-the peculiar riverine environment of classic southern Mesopotamia. For
-example, hard-baked clay axes will chop bundles of reeds very well, or
-help a mason dress his unbaked mud bricks, and there were only a few
-soft and pithy species of trees available. The Ubaidian levels of Eridu
-yield quantities of date pits; that excellent and characteristically
-Iraqi fruit was already in use. The excavators also found the clay
-model of a ship, with the stepping-point for a mast, so that Sinbad the
-Sailor must have had his antecedents as early as the time of Ubaid.
-The bones of fish, which must have flourished in the larger canals as
-well as in the rivers, are common in the Ubaidian levels and thereafter.
-
-
-THE UBAIDIAN ACHIEVEMENT
-
-On present evidence, my tendency is to see the Ubaidian assemblage
-in southern Iraq as the trace of a new era. I wish there were more
-evidence, but what we have suggests this to me. The culture of southern
-Ubaid soon became a culture of towns--of centrally located towns with
-some rural villages about them. The town had a temple and there must
-have been priests. These priests probably had political and economic
-functions as well as religious ones, if the somewhat later history of
-Mesopotamia may suggest a pattern for us. Presently the temple and its
-priesthood were possibly the focus of the market; the temple received
-its due, and may already have had its own lands and herds and flocks.
-The people of the town, undoubtedly at least in consultation with the
-temple administration, planned and maintained the simple irrigation
-ditches. As the system flourished, the community of rural farmers would
-have produced more than sufficient food. The tendency for specialized
-crafts to develop--tentative at best at the cultural level of the
-earlier village-farming community era--would now have been achieved,
-and probably many other specialists in temple administration, water
-control, architecture, and trade would also have appeared, as the
-surplus food-supply was assured.
-
-Southern Mesopotamia is not a land rich in natural resources other
-than its fertile soil. Stone, good wood for construction, metal, and
-innumerable other things would have had to be imported. Grain and
-dates--although both are bulky and difficult to transport--and wool and
-woven stuffs must have been the mediums of exchange. Over what area did
-the trading net-work of Ubaid extend? We start with the idea that the
-Ubaidian assemblage is most richly developed in the south. We assume, I
-think, correctly, that it represents a cultural flowering of the south.
-On the basis of the pottery of the still elusive “Eridu” immigrants
-who had first followed the rivers into alluvial Mesopotamia, we get
-the notion that the characteristic painted pottery style of Ubaid
-was developed in the southland. If this reconstruction is correct
-then we may watch with interest where the Ubaid pottery-painting
-tradition spread. We have already mentioned that there is a substantial
-assemblage of (and from the southern point of view, _fairly_ pure)
-Ubaidian material in northern Iraq. The pottery appears all along the
-Iranian flanks, even well east of the head of the Persian Gulf, and
-ends in a later and spectacular flourish in an extremely handsome
-painted style called the “Susa” style. Ubaidian pottery has been noted
-up the valleys of both of the great rivers, well north of the Iraqi
-and Syrian borders on the southern flanks of the Anatolian plateau.
-It reaches the Mediterranean Sea and the valley of the Orontes in
-Syria, and it may be faintly reflected in the painted style of a
-site called Ghassul, on the east bank of the Jordan in the Dead Sea
-Valley. Over this vast area--certainly in all of the great basin of
-the Tigris-Euphrates drainage system and its natural extensions--I
-believe we may lay our fingers on the traces of a peculiar way of
-decorating pottery, which we call Ubaidian. This cursive and even
-slap-dash decoration, it appears to me, was part of a new cultural
-tradition which arose from the adjustments which immigrant northern
-farmers first made to the new and challenging environment of southern
-Mesopotamia. But exciting as the idea of the spread of influences of
-the Ubaid tradition in space may be, I believe you will agree that the
-consequences of the growth of that tradition in southern Mesopotamia
-itself, as time passed, are even more important.
-
-
-THE WARKA PHASE IN THE SOUTH
-
-So far, there are only two radiocarbon determinations for the Ubaidian
-assemblage, one from Tepe Gawra in the north and one from Warka in the
-south. My hunch would be to use the dates 4500 to 3750 B.C., with a
-plus or more probably a minus factor of about two hundred years for
-each, as the time duration of the Ubaidian assemblage in southern
-Mesopotamia.
-
-Next, much to our annoyance, we have what is almost a temporary
-black-out. According to the system of terminology I favor, our next
-“assemblage” after that of Ubaid is called the _Warka_ phase, from
-the Arabic name for the site of Uruk or Erich. We know it only from
-six or seven levels in a narrow test-pit at Warka, and from an even
-smaller hole at another site. This “assemblage,” so far, is known only
-by its pottery, some of which still bears Ubaidian style painting. The
-characteristic Warkan pottery is unpainted, with smoothed red or gray
-surfaces and peculiar shapes. Unquestionably, there must be a great
-deal more to say about the Warkan assemblage, but someone will first
-have to excavate it!
-
-
-THE DAWN OF CIVILIZATION
-
-After our exasperation with the almost unknown Warka interlude,
-following the brilliant “false dawn” of Ubaid, we move next to an
-assemblage which yields traces of a preponderance of those elements
-which we noted (p. 144) as meaning civilization. This assemblage
-is that called _Proto-Literate_; it already contains writing. On
-the somewhat shaky principle that writing, however early, means
-history--and no longer prehistory--the assemblage is named for the
-historical implications of its content, and no longer after the name of
-the site where it was first found. Since some of the older books used
-site-names for this assemblage, I will tell you that the Proto-Literate
-includes the latter half of what used to be called the “Uruk period”
-_plus_ all of what used to be called the “Jemdet Nasr period.” It shows
-a consistent development from beginning to end.
-
-I shall, in fact, leave much of the description and the historic
-implications of the Proto-Literate assemblage to the conventional
-historians. Professor T. J. Jacobsen, reaching backward from the
-legends he finds in the cuneiform writings of slightly later times, can
-in fact tell you a more complete story of Proto-Literate culture than
-I can. It should be enough here if I sum up briefly what the excavated
-archeological evidence shows.
-
-We have yet to dig a Proto-Literate site in its entirety, but the
-indications are that the sites cover areas the size of small cities.
-In architecture, we know of large and monumental temple structures,
-which were built on elaborate high terraces. The plans and decoration
-of these temples follow the pattern set in the Ubaid phase: the chief
-difference is one of size. The German excavators at the site of Warka
-reckoned that the construction of only one of the Proto-Literate temple
-complexes there must have taken 1,500 men, each working a ten-hour day,
-five years to build.
-
-
-ART AND WRITING
-
-If the architecture, even in its monumental forms, can be seen to
-stem from Ubaidian developments, this is not so with our other
-evidence of Proto-Literate artistic expression. In relief and applied
-sculpture, in sculpture in the round, and on the engraved cylinder
-seals--all of which now make their appearance--several completely
-new artistic principles are apparent. These include the composition
-of subject-matter in groups, commemorative scenes, and especially
-the ability and apparent desire to render the human form and face.
-Excellent as the animals of the Franco-Cantabrian art may have been
-(see p. 85), and however handsome were the carefully drafted
-geometric designs and conventionalized figures on the pottery of the
-early farmers, there seems to have been, up to this time, a mental
-block about the drawing of the human figure and especially the human
-face. We do not yet know what caused this self-consciousness about
-picturing themselves which seems characteristic of men before the
-appearance of civilization. We do know that with civilization, the
-mental block seems to have been removed.
-
-Clay tablets bearing pictographic signs are the Proto-Literate
-forerunners of cuneiform writing. The earliest examples are not well
-understood but they seem to be “devices for making accounts and
-for remembering accounts.” Different from the later case in Egypt,
-where writing appears fully formed in the earliest examples, the
-development from simple pictographic signs to proper cuneiform writing
-may be traced, step by step, in Mesopotamia. It is most probable
-that the development of writing was connected with the temple and
-the need for keeping account of the temple’s possessions. Professor
-Jacobsen sees writing as a means for overcoming space, time, and the
-increasing complications of human affairs: “Literacy, which began
-with ... civilization, enhanced mightily those very tendencies in its
-development which characterize it as a civilization and mark it off as
-such from other types of culture.”
-
-[Illustration: RELIEF ON A PROTO-LITERATE STONE VASE, WARKA
-
-Unrolled drawing, with restoration suggested by figures from
-contemporary cylinder seals]
-
-While the new principles in art and the idea of writing are not
-foreshadowed in the Ubaid phase, or in what little we know of the
-Warkan, I do not think we need to look outside southern Mesopotamia
-for their beginnings. We do know something of the adjacent areas,
-too, and these beginnings are not there. I think we must accept them
-as completely new discoveries, made by the people who were developing
-the whole new culture pattern of classic southern Mesopotamia. Full
-description of the art, architecture, and writing of the Proto-Literate
-phase would call for many details. Men like Professor Jacobsen and Dr.
-Adams can give you these details much better than I can. Nor shall I do
-more than tell you that the common pottery of the Proto-Literate phase
-was so well standardized that it looks factory made. There was also
-some handsome painted pottery, and there were stone bowls with inlaid
-decoration. Well-made tools in metal had by now become fairly common,
-and the metallurgist was experimenting with the casting process. Signs
-for plows have been identified in the early pictographs, and a wheeled
-chariot is shown on a cylinder seal engraving. But if I were forced to
-a guess in the matter, I would say that the development of plows and
-draft-animals probably began in the Ubaid period and was another of the
-great innovations of that time.
-
-The Proto-Literate assemblage clearly suggests a highly developed and
-sophisticated culture. While perhaps not yet fully urban, it is on
-the threshold of urbanization. There seems to have been a very dense
-settlement of Proto-Literate sites in classic southern Mesopotamia,
-many of them newly founded on virgin soil where no earlier settlements
-had been. When we think for a moment of what all this implies, of the
-growth of an irrigation system which must have existed to allow the
-flourish of this culture, and of the social and political organization
-necessary to maintain the irrigation system, I think we will agree that
-at last we are dealing with civilization proper.
-
-
-FROM PREHISTORY TO HISTORY
-
-Now it is time for the conventional ancient historians to take over
-the story from me. Remember this when you read what they write. Their
-real base-line is with cultures ruled over by later kings and emperors,
-whose writings describe military campaigns and the administration of
-laws and fully organized trading ventures. To these historians, the
-Proto-Literate phase is still a simple beginning for what is to follow.
-If they mention the Ubaid assemblage at all--the one I was so lyrical
-about--it will be as some dim and fumbling step on the path to the
-civilized way of life.
-
-I suppose you could say that the difference in the approach is that as
-a prehistorian I have been looking forward or upward in time, while the
-historians look backward to glimpse what I’ve been describing here. My
-base-line was half a million years ago with a being who had little more
-than the capacity to make tools and fire to distinguish him from the
-animals about him. Thus my point of view and that of the conventional
-historian are bound to be different. You will need both if you want to
-understand all of the story of men, as they lived through time to the
-present.
-
-
-
-
-End of PREHISTORY
-
-[Illustration]
-
-
-You’ll doubtless easily recall your general course in ancient history:
-how the Sumerian dynasties of Mesopotamia were supplanted by those of
-Babylonia, how the Hittite kingdom appeared in Anatolian Turkey, and
-about the three great phases of Egyptian history. The literate kingdom
-of Crete arose, and by 1500 B.C. there were splendid fortified Mycenean
-towns on the mainland of Greece. This was the time--about the whole
-eastern end of the Mediterranean--of what Professor Breasted called the
-“first great internationalism,” with flourishing trade, international
-treaties, and royal marriages between Egyptians, Babylonians, and
-Hittites. By 1200 B.C., the whole thing had fragmented: “the peoples of
-the sea were restless in their isles,” and the great ancient centers in
-Egypt, Mesopotamia, and Anatolia were eclipsed. Numerous smaller states
-arose--Assyria, Phoenicia, Israel--and the Trojan war was fought.
-Finally Assyria became the paramount power of all the Near East,
-presently to be replaced by Persia.
-
-A new culture, partaking of older west Asiatic and Egyptian elements,
-but casting them with its own tradition into a new mould, arose in
-mainland Greece.
-
-I once shocked my Classical colleagues to the core by referring to
-Greece as “a second degree derived civilization,” but there is much
-truth in this. The principles of bronze- and then of iron-working, of
-the alphabet, and of many other elements in Greek culture were borrowed
-from western Asia. Our debt to the Greeks is too well known for me even
-to mention it, beyond recalling to you that it is to Greece we owe the
-beginnings of rational or empirical science and thought in general. But
-Greece fell in its turn to Rome, and in 55 B.C. Caesar invaded Britain.
-
-I last spoke of Britain on page 142; I had chosen it as my single
-example for telling you something of how the earliest farming
-communities were established in Europe. Now I will continue with
-Britain’s later prehistory, so you may sense something of the end of
-prehistory itself. Remember that Britain is simply a single example
-we select; the same thing could be done for all the other countries
-of Europe, and will be possible also, some day, for further Asia and
-Africa. Remember, too, that prehistory in most of Europe runs on for
-three thousand or more years _after_ conventional ancient history
-begins in the Near East. Britain is a good example to use in showing
-how prehistory ended in Europe. As we said earlier, it lies at the
-opposite end of Europe from the area of highest cultural achievement in
-those times, and should you care to read more of the story in detail,
-you may do so in the English language.
-
-
-METAL USERS REACH ENGLAND
-
-We left the story of Britain with the peoples who made three different
-assemblages--the Windmill Hill, the megalith-builders, and the
-Peterborough--making adjustments to their environments, to the original
-inhabitants of the island, and to each other. They had first arrived
-about 2500 B.C., and were simple pastoralists and hoe cultivators who
-lived in little village communities. Some of them planted little if any
-grain. By 2000 B.C., they were well settled in. Then, somewhere in the
-range from about 1900 to 1800 B.C., the traces of the invasion of a new
-series of peoples began to appear.
-
-The first newcomers are called the Beaker folk, after the name of a
-peculiar form of pottery they made. The beaker type of pottery seems
-oldest in Spain, where it occurs with great collective tombs of
-megalithic construction and with copper tools. But the Beaker folk who
-reached England seem already to have moved first from Spain(?) to the
-Rhineland and Holland. While in the Rhineland, and before leaving for
-England, the Beaker folk seem to have mixed with the local population
-and also with incomers from northeastern Europe whose culture included
-elements brought originally from the Near East by the eastern way
-through the steppes. This last group has also been named for a peculiar
-article in its assemblage; the group is called the Battle-axe folk. A
-few Battle-axe folk elements, including, in fact, stone battle-axes,
-reached England with the earliest Beaker folk,[6] coming from the
-Rhineland.
-
-  [6] The British authors use the term “Beaker folk” to mean both
-      archeological assemblage and human physical type. They speak
-      of a “... tall, heavy-boned, rugged, and round-headed” strain
-      which they take to have developed, apparently in the Rhineland,
-      by a mixture of the original (Spanish?) beaker-makers and
-      the northeast European battle-axe makers. However, since the
-      science of physical anthropology is very much in flux at the
-      moment, and since I am not able to assess the evidence for these
-      physical types, I _do not_ use the term “folk” in this book with
-      its usual meaning of standardized physical type. When I use
-      “folk” here, I mean simply _the makers of a given archeological
-      assemblage_. The difficulty only comes when assemblages are
-      named for some item in them; it is too clumsy to make an
-      adjective of the item and refer to a “beakerian” assemblage.
-
-The Beaker folk settled earliest in the agriculturally fertile south
-and east. There seem to have been several phases of Beaker folk
-invasions, and it is not clear whether these all came strictly from the
-Rhineland or Holland. We do know that their copper daggers and awls
-and armlets are more of Irish or Atlantic European than of Rhineland
-origin. A few simple habitation sites and many burials of the Beaker
-folk are known. They buried their dead singly, sometimes in conspicuous
-individual barrows with the dead warrior in his full trappings. The
-spectacular element in the assemblage of the Beaker folk is a group
-of large circular monuments with ditches and with uprights of wood or
-stone. These “henges” became truly monumental several hundred years
-later; while they were occasionally dedicated with a burial, they were
-not primarily tombs. The effect of the invasion of the Beaker folk
-seems to cut across the whole fabric of life in Britain.
-
-[Illustration: BEAKER]
-
-There was, however, a second major element in British life at this
-time. It shows itself in the less well understood traces of a group
-again called after one of the items in their catalogue, the Food-vessel
-folk. There are many burials in these “food-vessel” pots in northern
-England, Scotland, and Ireland, and the pottery itself seems to
-link back to that of the Peterborough assemblage. Like the earlier
-Peterborough people in the highland zone before them, the makers of
-the food-vessels seem to have been heavily involved in trade. It is
-quite proper to wonder whether the food-vessel pottery itself was made
-by local women who were married to traders who were middlemen in the
-transmission of Irish metal objects to north Germany and Scandinavia.
-The belt of high, relatively woodless country, from southwest to
-northeast, was already established as a natural route for inland trade.
-
-
-MORE INVASIONS
-
-About 1500 B.C., the situation became further complicated by the
-arrival of new people in the region of southern England anciently
-called Wessex. The traces suggest the Brittany coast of France as a
-source, and the people seem at first to have been a small but “heroic”
-group of aristocrats. Their “heroes” are buried with wealth and
-ceremony, surrounded by their axes and daggers of bronze, their gold
-ornaments, and amber and jet beads. These rich finds show that the
-trade-linkage these warriors patronized spread from the Baltic sources
-of amber to Mycenean Greece or even Egypt, as evidenced by glazed blue
-beads.
-
-The great visual trace of Wessex achievement is the final form of
-the spectacular sanctuary at Stonehenge. A wooden henge or circular
-monument was first made several hundred years earlier, but the site
-now received its great circles of stone uprights and lintels. The
-diameter of the surrounding ditch at Stonehenge is about 350 feet, the
-diameter of the inner circle of large stones is about 100 feet, and
-the tallest stone of the innermost horseshoe-shaped enclosure is 29
-feet 8 inches high. One circle is made of blue stones which must have
-been transported from Pembrokeshire, 145 miles away as the crow flies.
-Recently, many carvings representing the profile of a standard type of
-bronze axe of the time, and several profiles of bronze daggers--one of
-which has been called Mycenean in type--have been found carved in the
-stones. We cannot, of course, describe the details of the religious
-ceremonies which must have been staged in Stonehenge, but we can
-certainly imagine the well-integrated and smoothly working culture
-which must have been necessary before such a great monument could have
-been built.
-
-
-“THIS ENGLAND”
-
-The range from 1900 to about 1400 B.C. includes the time of development
-of the archeological features usually called the “Early Bronze Age”
-in Britain. In fact, traces of the Wessex warriors persisted down to
-about 1200 B.C. The main regions of the island were populated, and the
-adjustments to the highland and lowland zones were distinct and well
-marked. The different aspects of the assemblages of the Beaker folk and
-the clearly expressed activities of the Food-vessel folk and the Wessex
-warriors show that Britain was already taking on her characteristic
-trading role, separated from the European continent but conveniently
-adjacent to it. The tin of Cornwall--so important in the production
-of good bronze--as well as the copper of the west and of Ireland,
-taken with the gold of Ireland and the general excellence of Irish
-metal work, assured Britain a trader’s place in the then known world.
-Contacts with the eastern Mediterranean may have been by sea, with
-Cornish tin as the attraction, or may have been made by the Food-vessel
-middlemen on their trips to the Baltic coast. There they would have
-encountered traders who traveled the great north-south European road,
-by which Baltic amber moved southward to Greece and the Levant, and
-ideas and things moved northward again.
-
-There was, however, the Channel between England and Europe, and this
-relative isolation gave some peace and also gave time for a leveling
-and further fusion of culture. The separate cultural traditions began
-to have more in common. The growing of barley, the herding of sheep and
-cattle, and the production of woolen garments were already features
-common to all Britain’s inhabitants save a few in the remote highlands,
-the far north, and the distant islands not yet fully touched by
-food-production. The “personality of Britain” was being formed.
-
-
-CREMATION BURIALS BEGIN
-
-Along with people of certain religious faiths, archeologists are
-against cremation (for other people!). Individuals to be cremated seem
-in past times to have been dressed in their trappings and put upon a
-large pyre: it takes a lot of wood and a very hot fire for a thorough
-cremation. When the burning had been completed, the few fragile scraps
-of bone and such odd beads of stone or other rare items as had resisted
-the great heat seem to have been whisked into a pot and the pot buried.
-The archeologist is left with the pot and the unsatisfactory scraps in
-it.
-
-Tentatively, after about 1400 B.C. and almost completely over the whole
-island by 1200 B.C., Britain became the scene of cremation burials
-in urns. We know very little of the people themselves. None of their
-settlements have been identified, although there is evidence that they
-grew barley and made enclosures for cattle. The urns used for the
-burials seem to have antecedents in the pottery of the Food-vessel
-folk, and there are some other links with earlier British traditions.
-In Lancashire, a wooden circle seems to have been built about a grave
-with cremated burials in urns. Even occasional instances of cremation
-may be noticed earlier in Britain, and it is not clear what, if any,
-connection the British cremation burials in urns have with the classic
-_Urnfields_ which were now beginning in the east Mediterranean and
-which we shall mention below.
-
-The British cremation-burial-in-urns folk survived a long time in the
-highland zone. In the general British scheme, they make up what is
-called the “Middle Bronze Age,” but in the highland zone they last
-until after 900 B.C. and are considered to be a specialized highland
-“Late Bronze Age.” In the highland zone, these later cremation-burial
-folk seem to have continued the older Food-vessel tradition of being
-middlemen in the metal market.
-
-Granting that our knowledge of this phase of British prehistory is
-very restricted because the cremations have left so little for the
-archeologist, it does not appear that the cremation-burial-urn folk can
-be sharply set off from their immediate predecessors. But change on a
-grander scale was on the way.
-
-
-REVERBERATIONS FROM CENTRAL EUROPE
-
-In the centuries immediately following 1000 B.C., we see with fair
-clarity two phases of a cultural process which must have been going
-on for some time. Certainly several of the invasions we have already
-described in this chapter were due to earlier phases of the same
-cultural process, but we could not see the details.
-
-[Illustration: SLASHING SWORD]
-
-Around 1200 B.C. central Europe was upset by the spread of the
-so-called Urnfield folk, who practiced cremation burial in urns and
-whom we also know to have been possessors of long, slashing swords and
-the horse. I told you above that we have no idea that the Urnfield
-folk proper were in any way connected with the people who made
-cremation-burial-urn cemeteries a century or so earlier in Britain. It
-has been supposed that the Urnfield folk themselves may have shared
-ideas with the people who sacked Troy. We know that the Urnfield
-pressure from central Europe displaced other people in northern France,
-and perhaps in northwestern Germany, and that this reverberated into
-Britain about 1000 B.C.
-
-Soon after 750 B.C., the same thing happened again. This time, the
-pressure from central Europe came from the Hallstatt folk who were iron
-tool makers: the reverberation brought people from the western Alpine
-region across the Channel into Britain.
-
-At first it is possible to see the separate results of these folk
-movements, but the developing cultures soon fused with each other and
-with earlier British elements. Presently there were also strains of
-other northern and western European pottery and traces of Urnfield
-practices themselves which appeared in the finished British product. I
-hope you will sense that I am vastly over-simplifying the details.
-
-The result seems to have been--among other things--a new kind of
-agricultural system. The land was marked off by ditched divisions.
-Rectangular fields imply the plow rather than hoe cultivation. We seem
-to get a picture of estate or tribal boundaries which included village
-communities; we find a variety of tools in bronze, and even whetstones
-which show that iron has been honed on them (although the scarce iron
-has not been found). Let me give you the picture in Professor S.
-Piggott’s words: “The ... Late Bronze Age of southern England was but
-the forerunner of the earliest Iron Age in the same region, not only in
-the techniques of agriculture, but almost certainly in terms of ethnic
-kinship ... we can with some assurance talk of the Celts ... the great
-early Celtic expansion of the Continent is recognized to be that of the
-Urnfield people.”
-
-Thus, certainly by 500 B.C., there were people in Britain, some of
-whose descendants we may recognize today in name or language in remote
-parts of Wales, Scotland, and the Hebrides.
-
-
-THE COMING OF IRON
-
-Iron--once the know-how of reducing it from its ore in a very hot,
-closed fire has been achieved--produces a far cheaper and much more
-efficient set of tools than does bronze. Iron tools seem first to
-have been made in quantity in Hittite Anatolia about 1500 B.C. In
-continental Europe, the earliest, so-called Hallstatt, iron-using
-cultures appeared in Germany soon after 750 B.C. Somewhat later,
-Greek and especially Etruscan exports of _objets d’art_--which moved
-with a flourishing trans-Alpine wine trade--influenced the Hallstatt
-iron-working tradition. Still later new classical motifs, together with
-older Hallstatt, oriental, and northern nomad motifs, gave rise to a
-new style in metal decoration which characterizes the so-called La Tène
-phase.
-
-A few iron users reached Britain a little before 400 B.C. Not long
-after that, a number of allied groups appeared in southern and
-southeastern England. They came over the Channel from France and must
-have been Celts with dialects related to those already in England. A
-second wave of Celts arrived from the Marne district in France about
-250 B.C. Finally, in the second quarter of the first century B.C.,
-there were several groups of newcomers, some of whom were Belgae of
-a mixed Teutonic-Celtic confederacy of tribes in northern France and
-Belgium. The Belgae preceded the Romans by only a few years.
-
-
-HILL-FORTS AND FARMS
-
-The earliest iron-users seem to have entrenched themselves temporarily
-within hill-top forts, mainly in the south. Gradually, they moved
-inland, establishing _individual_ farm sites with extensive systems
-of rectangular fields. We recognize these fields by the “lynchets” or
-lines of soil-creep which plowing left on the slopes of hills. New
-crops appeared; there were now bread wheat, oats, and rye, as well as
-barley.
-
-At Little Woodbury, near the town of Salisbury, a farmstead has been
-rather completely excavated. The rustic buildings were within a
-palisade, the round house itself was built of wood, and there were
-various outbuildings and pits for the storage of grain. Weaving was
-done on the farm, but not blacksmithing, which must have been a
-specialized trade. Save for the lack of firearms, the place might
-almost be taken for a farmstead on the American frontier in the early
-1800’s.
-
-Toward 250 B.C. there seems to have been a hasty attempt to repair the
-hill-forts and to build new ones, evidently in response to signs of
-restlessness being shown by remote relatives in France.
-
-
-THE SECOND PHASE
-
-Perhaps the hill-forts were not entirely effective or perhaps a
-compromise was reached. In any case, the newcomers from the Marne
-district did establish themselves, first in the southeast and then to
-the north and west. They brought iron with decoration of the La Tène
-type and also the two-wheeled chariot. Like the Wessex warriors of
-over a thousand years earlier, they made “heroes’” graves, with their
-warriors buried in the war-chariots and dressed in full trappings.
-
-[Illustration: CELTIC BUCKLE]
-
-The metal work of these Marnian newcomers is excellent. The peculiar
-Celtic art style, based originally on the classic tendril motif,
-is colorful and virile, and fits with Greek and Roman descriptions
-of Celtic love of color in dress. There is a strong trace of these
-newcomers northward in Yorkshire, linked by Ptolemy’s description to
-the Parisii, doubtless part of the Celtic tribe which originally gave
-its name to Paris on the Seine. Near Glastonbury, in Somerset, two
-villages in swamps have been excavated. They seem to date toward the
-middle of the first century B.C., which was a troubled time in Britain.
-The circular houses were built on timber platforms surrounded with
-palisades. The preservation of antiquities by the water-logged peat of
-the swamp has yielded us a long catalogue of the materials of these
-villagers.
-
-In Scotland, which yields its first iron tools at a date of about 100
-B.C., and in northern Ireland even slightly earlier, the effects of the
-two phases of newcomers tend especially to blend. Hill-forts, “brochs”
-(stone-built round towers) and a variety of other strange structures
-seem to appear as the new ideas develop in the comparative isolation of
-northern Britain.
-
-
-THE THIRD PHASE
-
-For the time of about the middle of the first century B.C., we again
-see traces of frantic hill-fort construction. This simple military
-architecture now took some new forms. Its multiple ramparts must
-reflect the use of slings as missiles, rather than spears. We probably
-know the reason. In 56 B.C., Julius Caesar chastised the Veneti of
-Brittany for outraging the dignity of Roman ambassadors. The Veneti
-were famous slingers, and doubtless the reverberations of escaping
-Veneti were felt across the Channel. The military architecture suggests
-that some Veneti did escape to Britain.
-
-Also, through Caesar, we learn the names of newcomers who arrived in
-two waves, about 75 B.C. and about 50 B.C. These were the Belgae. Now,
-at last, we can even begin to speak of dynasties and individuals.
-Some time before 55 B.C., the Catuvellauni, originally from the Marne
-district in France, had possessed themselves of a large part of
-southeastern England. They evidently sailed up the Thames and built a
-town of over a hundred acres in area. Here ruled Cassivellaunus, “the
-first man in England whose name we know,” and whose town Caesar sacked.
-The town sprang up elsewhere again, however.
-
-
-THE END OF PREHISTORY
-
-Prehistory, strictly speaking, is now over in southern Britain.
-Claudius’ effective invasion took place in 43 A.D.; by 83 A.D., a raid
-had been made as far north as Aberdeen in Scotland. But by 127 A.D.,
-Hadrian had completed his wall from the Solway to the Tyne, and the
-Romans settled behind it. In Scotland, Romanization can have affected
-the countryside very little. Professor Piggott adds that “... it is
-when the pressure of Romanization is relaxed by the break-up of the
-Dark Ages that we see again the Celtic metal-smiths handling their
-material with the same consummate skill as they had before the Roman
-Conquest, and with traditional styles that had not even then forgotten
-their Marnian and Belgic heritage.”
-
-In fact, many centuries go by, in Britain as well as in the rest of
-Europe, before the archeologist’s task is complete and the historian on
-his own is able to describe the ways of men in the past.
-
-
-BRITAIN AS A SAMPLE OF THE GENERAL COURSE OF PREHISTORY IN EUROPE
-
-In giving this very brief outline of the later prehistory of Britain,
-you will have noticed how often I had to refer to the European
-continent itself. Britain, beyond the English Channel for all of her
-later prehistory, had a much simpler course of events than did most of
-the rest of Europe in later prehistoric times. This holds, in spite
-of all the “invasions” and “reverberations” from the continent. Most
-of Europe was the scene of an even more complicated ebb and flow of
-cultural change, save in some of its more remote mountain valleys and
-peninsulas.
-
-The whole course of later prehistory in Europe is, in fact, so very
-complicated that there is no single good book to cover it all;
-certainly there is none in English. There are some good regional
-accounts and some good general accounts of part of the range from about
-3000 B.C. to A.D. 1. I suspect that the difficulty of making a good
-book that covers all of its later prehistory is another aspect of what
-makes Europe so very complicated a continent today. The prehistoric
-foundations for Europe’s very complicated set of civilizations,
-cultures, and sub-cultures--which begin to appear as history
-proceeds--were in themselves very complicated.
-
-Hence, I selected the case of Britain as a single example of how
-prehistory ends in Europe. It could have been more complicated than we
-found it to be. Even in the subject matter on Britain in the chapter
-before the last, we did not see direct traces of the effect on Britain
-of the very important developments which took place in the Danubian
-way from the Near East. Apparently Britain was not affected. Britain
-received the impulses which brought copper, bronze, and iron tools from
-an original east Mediterranean homeland into Europe, almost at the ends
-of their journeys. But by the same token, they had had time en route to
-take on their characteristic European aspects.
-
-Some time ago, Sir Cyril Fox wrote a famous book called _The
-Personality of Britain_, sub-titled “Its Influence on Inhabitant and
-Invader in Prehistoric and Early Historic Times.” We have not gone
-into the post-Roman early historic period here; there are still the
-Anglo-Saxons and Normans to account for as well as the effects of
-the Romans. But what I have tried to do was to begin the story of
-how the personality of Britain was formed. The principles that Fox
-used, in trying to balance cultural and environmental factors and
-interrelationships would not be greatly different for other lands.
-
-
-
-
-Summary
-
-[Illustration]
-
-
-In the pages you have read so far, you have been brought through the
-earliest 99 per cent of the story of man’s life on this planet. I have
-left only 1 per cent of the story for the historians to tell.
-
-
-THE DRAMA OF THE PAST
-
-Men first became men when evolution had carried them to a certain
-point. This was the point where the eye-hand-brain co-ordination was
-good enough so that tools could be made. When tools began to be made
-according to sets of lasting habits, we know that men had appeared.
-This happened over a half million years ago. The stage for the play
-may have been as broad as all of Europe, Africa, and Asia. At least,
-it seems unlikely that it was only one little region that saw the
-beginning of the drama.
-
-Glaciers and different climates came and went, to change the settings.
-But the play went on in the same first act for a very long time. The
-men who were the players had simple roles. They had to feed themselves
-and protect themselves as best they could. They did this by hunting,
-catching, and finding food wherever they could, and by taking such
-protection as caves, fire, and their simple tools would give them.
-Before the first act was over, the last of the glaciers was melting
-away, and the players had added the New World to their stage. If
-we want a special name for the first act, we could call it _The
-Food-Gatherers_.
-
-There were not many climaxes in the first act, so far as we can see.
-But I think there may have been a few. Certainly the pace of the
-first act accelerated with the swing from simple gathering to more
-intensified collecting. The great cave art of France and Spain was
-probably an expression of a climax. Even the ideas of burying the dead
-and of the “Venus” figurines must also point to levels of human thought
-and activity that were over and above pure food-getting.
-
-
-THE SECOND ACT
-
-The second act began only about ten thousand years ago. A few of the
-players started it by themselves near the center of the Old World part
-of the stage, in the Near East. It began as a plant and animal act, but
-it soon became much more complicated.
-
-But the players in this one part of the stage--in the Near East--were
-not the only ones to start off on the second act by themselves. Other
-players, possibly in several places in the Far East, and certainly in
-the New World, also started second acts that began as plant and animal
-acts, and then became complicated. We can call the whole second act
-_The Food-Producers_.
-
-
-THE FIRST GREAT CLIMAX OF THE SECOND ACT
-
-In the Near East, the first marked climax of the second act happened
-in Mesopotamia and Egypt. The play and the players reached that great
-climax that we call civilization. This seems to have come less than
-five thousand years after the second act began. But it could never have
-happened in the first act at all.
-
-There is another curious thing about the first act. Many of the players
-didn’t know it was over and they kept on with their roles long after
-the second act had begun. On the edges of the stage there are today
-some players who are still going on with the first act. The Eskimos,
-and the native Australians, and certain tribes in the Amazon jungle are
-some of these players. They seem perfectly happy to keep on with the
-first act.
-
-The second act moved from climax to climax. The civilizations of
-Mesopotamia and Egypt were only the earliest of these climaxes. The
-players to the west caught the spirit of the thing, and climaxes
-followed there. So also did climaxes come in the Far Eastern and New
-World portions of the stage.
-
-The greater part of the second act should really be described to you
-by a historian. Although it was a very short act when compared to the
-first one, the climaxes complicate it a great deal. I, a prehistorian,
-have told you about only the first act, and the very beginning of the
-second.
-
-
-THE THIRD ACT
-
-Also, as a prehistorian I probably should not even mention the third
-act--it began so recently. The third act is _The Industrialization_.
-It is the one in which we ourselves are players. If the pace of the
-second act was so much faster than that of the first, the pace of the
-third act is terrific. The danger is that it may wear down the players
-completely.
-
-What sort of climaxes will the third act have, and are we already in
-one? You have seen by now that the acts of my play are given in terms
-of modes or basic patterns of human economy--ways in which people
-get food and protection and safety. The climaxes involve more than
-human economy. Economics and technological factors may be part of the
-climaxes, but they are not all. The climaxes may be revolutions in
-their own way, intellectual and social revolutions if you like.
-
-If the third act follows the pattern of the second act, a climax should
-come soon after the act begins. We may be due for one soon if we are
-not already in it. Remember the terrific pace of this third act.
-
-
-WHY BOTHER WITH PREHISTORY?
-
-Why do we bother about prehistory? The main reason is that we think it
-may point to useful ideas for the present. We are in the troublesome
-beginnings of the third act of the play. The beginnings of the second
-act may have lessons for us and give depth to our thinking. I know
-there are at least _some_ lessons, even in the present incomplete
-state of our knowledge. The players who began the second act--that of
-food-production--separately, in different parts of the world, were not
-all of one “pure race” nor did they have “pure” cultural traditions.
-Some apparently quite mixed Mediterraneans got off to the first start
-on the second act and brought it to its first two climaxes as well.
-Peoples of quite different physical type achieved the first climaxes in
-China and in the New World.
-
-In our British example of how the late prehistory of Europe worked, we
-listed a continuous series of “invasions” and “reverberations.” After
-each of these came fusion. Even though the Channel protected Britain
-from some of the extreme complications of the mixture and fusion of
-continental Europe, you can see how silly it would be to refer to a
-“pure” British race or a “pure” British culture. We speak of the United
-States as a “melting pot.” But this is nothing new. Actually, Britain
-and all the rest of the world have been “melting pots” at one time or
-another.
-
-By the time the written records of Mesopotamia and Egypt begin to turn
-up in number, the climaxes there are well under way. To understand the
-beginnings of the climaxes, and the real beginnings of the second act
-itself, we are thrown back on prehistoric archeology. And this is as
-true for China, India, Middle America, and the Andes, as it is for the
-Near East.
-
-There are lessons to be learned from all of man’s past, not simply
-lessons of how to fight battles or win peace conferences, but of how
-human society evolves from one stage to another. Many of these lessons
-can only be looked for in the prehistoric past. So far, we have only
-made a beginning. There is much still to do, and many gaps in the story
-are yet to be filled. The prehistorian’s job is to find the evidence,
-to fill the gaps, and to discover the lessons men have learned in the
-past. As I see it, this is not only an exciting but a very practical
-goal for which to strive.
-
-
-
-
-List of Books
-
-
-BOOKS OF GENERAL INTEREST
-
-(Chosen from a variety of the increasingly useful list of cheap
-paperbound books.)
-
-  Childe, V. Gordon
-    _What Happened in History._ 1954. Penguin.
-    _Man Makes Himself._ 1955. Mentor.
-    _The Prehistory of European Society._ 1958. Penguin.
-
-  Dunn, L. C., and Dobzhansky, Th.
-    _Heredity, Race, and Society._ 1952. Mentor.
-
-  Frankfort, Henri, Frankfort, H. A., Jacobsen, Thorkild, and Wilson,
-        John A.
-    _Before Philosophy._ 1954. Penguin.
-
-  Simpson, George G.
-    _The Meaning of Evolution._ 1955. Mentor.
-
-  Wheeler, Sir Mortimer
-    _Archaeology from the Earth._ 1956. Penguin.
-
-
-GEOCHRONOLOGY AND THE ICE AGE
-
-(Two general books. Some Pleistocene geologists disagree with Zeuner’s
-interpretation of the dating evidence, but their points of view appear
-in professional journals, in articles too cumbersome to list here.)
-
-  Flint, R. F.
-    _Glacial Geology and the Pleistocene Epoch._ 1947. John Wiley
-        and Sons.
-
-  Zeuner, F. E.
-    _Dating the Past._ 1952 (3rd ed.). Methuen and Co.
-
-
-FOSSIL MEN AND RACE
-
-(The points of view of physical anthropologists and human
-paleontologists are changing very quickly. Two of the different points
-of view are listed here.)
-
-  Clark, W. E. Le Gros
-    _History of the Primates._ 1956 (5th ed.). British Museum
-       (Natural History). (Also in Phoenix edition, 1957.)
-
-  Howells, W. W.
-    _Mankind So Far._ 1944. Doubleday, Doran.
-
-
-GENERAL ANTHROPOLOGY
-
-(These are standard texts not absolutely up to date in every detail, or
-interpretative essays concerned with cultural change through time as
-well as in space.)
-
-  Kroeber, A. L.
-    _Anthropology._ 1948. Harcourt, Brace.
-
-  Linton, Ralph
-    _The Tree of Culture._ 1955. Alfred A. Knopf, Inc.
-
-  Redfield, Robert
-    _The Primitive World and Its Transformations._ 1953. Cornell
-        University Press.
-
-  Steward, Julian H.
-    _Theory of Culture Change._ 1955. University of Illinois Press.
-
-  White, Leslie
-    _The Science of Culture._ 1949. Farrar, Strauss.
-
-
-GENERAL PREHISTORY
-
-(A sampling of the more useful and current standard works in English.)
-
-  Childe, V. Gordon
-    _The Dawn of European Civilization._ 1957. Kegan Paul, Trench,
-        Trubner.
-    _Prehistoric Migrations in Europe._ 1950. Instituttet for
-        Sammenlignende Kulturforskning.
-
-  Clark, Grahame
-    _Archaeology and Society._ 1957. Harvard University Press.
-
-  Clark, J. G. D.
-    _Prehistoric Europe: The Economic Basis._ 1952. Methuen and Co.
-
-  Garrod, D. A. E.
-    _Environment, Tools, and Man._ 1946. Cambridge University
-        Press.
-
-  Movius, Hallam L., Jr.
-    “Old World Prehistory: Paleolithic” in _Anthropology Today_.
-        Kroeber, A. L., ed. 1953. University of Chicago Press.
-
-  Oakley, Kenneth P.
-    _Man the Tool-Maker._ 1956. British Museum (Natural History).
-        (Also in Phoenix edition, 1957.)
-
-  Piggott, Stuart
-    _British Prehistory._ 1949. Oxford University Press.
-
-  Pittioni, Richard
-    _Die Urgeschichtlichen Grundlagen der Europäischen Kultur._
-        1949. Deuticke. (A single book which does attempt to cover the
-        whole range of European prehistory to ca. 1 A.D.)
-
-
-THE NEAR EAST
-
-  Adams, Robert M.
-    “Developmental Stages in Ancient Mesopotamia,” _in_ Steward,
-        Julian, _et al_, _Irrigation Civilizations: A Comparative
-        Study_. 1955. Pan American Union.
-
-  Braidwood, Robert J.
-    _The Near East and the Foundations for Civilization._ 1952.
-        University of Oregon.
-
-  Childe, V. Gordon
-    _New Light on the Most Ancient East._ 1952. Oriental Dept.,
-        Routledge and Kegan Paul.
-
-  Frankfort, Henri
-    _The Birth of Civilization in the Near East._ 1951. University
-        of Indiana Press. (Also in Anchor edition, 1956.)
-
-  Pallis, Svend A.
-    _The Antiquity of Iraq._ 1956. Munksgaard.
-
-  Wilson, John A.
-    _The Burden of Egypt._ 1951. University of Chicago Press. (Also
-        in Phoenix edition, called _The Culture of Ancient Egypt_,
-        1956.)
-
-
-HOW DIGGING IS DONE
-
-  Braidwood, Linda
-    _Digging beyond the Tigris._ 1953. Schuman, New York.
-
-  Wheeler, Sir Mortimer
-    _Archaeology from the Earth._ 1954. Oxford, London.
-
-
-
-
-Index
-
-
-  Abbevillian, 48;
-    core-biface tool, 44, 48
-
-  Acheulean, 48, 60
-
-  Acheuleo-Levalloisian, 63
-
-  Acheuleo-Mousterian, 63
-
-  Adams, R. M., 106
-
-  Adzes, 45
-
-  Africa, east, 67, 89;
-    north, 70, 89;
-    south, 22, 25, 34, 40, 67
-
-  Agriculture, incipient, in England, 140;
-    in Near East, 123
-
-  Ain Hanech, 48
-
-  Amber, taken from Baltic to Greece, 167
-
-  American Indians, 90, 142
-
-  Anatolia, used as route to Europe, 138
-
-  Animals, in caves, 54, 64;
-    in cave art, 85
-
-  Antevs, Ernst, 19
-
-  Anyathian, 47
-
-  Archeological interpretation, 8
-
-  Archeology, defined, 8
-
-  Architecture, at Jarmo, 128;
-    at Jericho, 133
-
-  Arrow, points, 94;
-    shaft straightener, 83
-
-  Art, in caves, 84;
-    East Spanish, 85;
-    figurines, 84;
-    Franco-Cantabrian, 84, 85;
-    movable (engravings, modeling, scratchings), 83;
-    painting, 83;
-    sculpture, 83
-
-  Asia, western, 67
-
-  Assemblage, defined, 13, 14;
-    European, 94;
-    Jarmo, 129;
-    Maglemosian, 94;
-    Natufian, 113
-
-  Aterian, industry, 67;
-    point, 89
-
-  Australopithecinae, 24
-
-  Australopithecine, 25, 26
-
-  Awls, 77
-
-  Axes, 62, 94
-
-  Ax-heads, 15
-
-  Azilian, 97
-
-  Aztecs, 145
-
-
-  Baghouz, 152
-
-  Bakun, 134
-
-  Baltic sea, 93
-
-  Banana, 107
-
-  Barley, wild, 108
-
-  Barrow, 141
-
-  Battle-axe folk, 164;
-    assemblage, 164
-
-  Beads, 80;
-    bone, 114
-
-  Beaker folk, 164;
-    assemblage, 164-165
-
-  Bear, in cave art, 85;
-    cult, 68
-
-  Belgium, 94
-
-  Belt cave, 126
-
-  Bering Strait, used as route to New World, 98
-
-  Bison, in cave art, 85
-
-  Blade, awl, 77;
-    backed, 75;
-    blade-core, 71;
-    end-scraper, 77;
-    stone, defined, 71;
-    strangulated (notched), 76;
-    tanged point, 76;
-    tools, 71, 75-80, 90;
-    tool tradition, 70
-
-  Boar, wild, in cave art, 85
-
-  Bogs, source of archeological materials, 94
-
-  Bolas, 54
-
-  Bordes, François, 62
-
-  Borer, 77
-
-  Boskop skull, 34
-
-  Boyd, William C., 35
-
-  Bracelets, 118
-
-  Brain, development of, 24
-
-  Breadfruit, 107
-
-  Breasted, James H., 107
-
-  Brick, at Jericho, 133
-
-  Britain, 94;
-    late prehistory, 163-175;
-    invaders, 173
-
-  Broch, 172
-
-  Buffalo, in China, 54;
-    killed by stampede, 86
-
-  Burials, 66, 86;
-    in “henges,” 164;
-    in urns, 168
-
-  Burins, 75
-
-  Burma, 90
-
-  Byblos, 134
-
-
-  Camel, 54
-
-  Cannibalism, 55
-
-  Cattle, wild, 85, 112;
-    in cave art, 85;
-    domesticated, 15;
-    at Skara Brae, 142
-
-  Caucasoids, 34
-
-  Cave men, 29
-
-  Caves, 62;
-    art in, 84
-
-  Celts, 170
-
-  Chariot, 160
-
-  Chicken, domestication of, 107
-
-  Chiefs, in food-gathering groups, 68
-
-  Childe, V. Gordon, 8
-
-  China, 136
-
-  Choukoutien, 28, 35
-
-  Choukoutienian, 47
-
-  Civilization, beginnings, 144, 149, 157;
-    meaning of, 144
-
-  Clactonian, 45, 47
-
-  Clay, used in modeling, 128;
-    baked, used for tools, 153
-
-  Club-heads, 82, 94
-
-  Colonization, in America, 142;
-    in Europe, 142
-
-  Combe Capelle, 30
-
-  Combe Capelle-Brünn group, 34
-
-  Commont, Victor, 51
-
-  Coon, Carlton S., 73
-
-  Copper, 134
-
-  Corn, in America, 145
-
-  Corrals for cattle, 140
-
-  “Cradle of mankind,” 136
-
-  Cremation, 167
-
-  Crete, 162
-
-  Cro-Magnon, 30, 34
-
-  Cultivation, incipient, 105, 109, 111
-
-  Culture, change, 99;
-    characteristics, defined, 38, 49;
-    prehistoric, 39
-
-
-  Danube Valley, used as route from Asia, 138
-
-  Dates, 153
-
-  Deer, 54, 96
-
-  Dog, domesticated, 96
-
-  Domestication, of animals, 100, 105, 107;
-    of plants, 100
-
-  “Dragon teeth” fossils in China, 28
-
-  Drill, 77
-
-  Dubois, Eugene, 26
-
-
-  Early Dynastic Period, Mesopotamia, 147
-
-  East Spanish art, 72, 85
-
-  Egypt, 70, 126
-
-  Ehringsdorf, 31
-
-  Elephant, 54
-
-  Emiliani, Cesare, 18
-
-  Emiran flake point, 73
-
-  England, 163-168;
-    prehistoric, 19, 40;
-    farmers in, 140
-
-  Eoanthropus dawsoni, 29
-
-  Eoliths, 41
-
-  Erich, 152
-
-  Eridu, 152
-
-  Euphrates River, floods in, 148
-
-  Europe, cave dwellings, 58;
-    at end of Ice Age, 93;
-    early farmers, 140;
-    glaciers in, 40;
-    huts in, 86;
-    routes into, 137-140;
-    spread of food-production to, 136
-
-
-  Far East, 69, 90
-
-  Farmers, 103
-
-  Fauresmith industry, 67
-
-  Fayum, 135;
-    radiocarbon date, 146
-
-  “Fertile Crescent,” 107, 146
-
-  Figurines, “Venus,” 84;
-    at Jarmo, 128;
-    at Ubaid, 153
-
-  Fire, used by Peking man, 54
-
-  First Dynasty, Egypt, 147
-
-  Fish-hooks, 80, 94
-
-  Fishing, 80;
-    by food-producers, 122
-
-  Fish-lines, 80
-
-  Fish spears, 94
-
-  Flint industry, 127
-
-  Fontéchevade, 32, 56, 58
-
-  Food-collecting, 104, 121;
-    end of, 104
-
-  Food-gatherers, 53, 176
-
-  Food-gathering, 99, 104;
-    in Old World, 104;
-    stages of, 104
-
-  Food-producers, 176
-
-  Food-producing economy, 122;
-    in America, 145;
-    in Asia, 105
-
-  Food-producing revolution, 99, 105;
-    causes of, 101;
-    preconditions for, 100
-
-  Food-production, beginnings of, 99;
-    carried to Europe, 110
-
-  Food-vessel folk, 164
-
-  “Forest folk,” 97, 98, 104, 110
-
-  Fox, Sir Cyril, 174
-
-  France, caves in, 56
-
-
-  Galley Hill (fossil type), 29
-
-  Garrod, D. A., 73
-
-  Gazelle, 114
-
-  Germany, 94
-
-  Ghassul, 156
-
-  Glaciers, 18, 30;
-    destruction by, 40
-
-  Goat, wild, 108;
-    domesticated, 128
-
-  Grain, first planted, 20
-
-  Graves, passage, 141;
-    gallery, 141
-
-  Greece, civilization in, 163;
-    as route to western Europe, 138;
-    towns in, 162
-
-  Grimaldi skeletons, 34
-
-
-  Hackberry seeds used as food, 55
-
-  Halaf, 151;
-    assemblage, 151
-
-  Hallstatt, tradition, 169
-
-  Hand, development of, 24, 25
-
-  Hand adzes, 46
-
-  Hand axes, 44
-
-  Harpoons, antler, 83, 94;
-    bone, 82, 94
-
-  Hassuna, 131;
-    assemblage, 131, 132
-
-  Heidelberg, fossil type, 28
-
-  Hill-forts, in England, 171;
-    in Scotland, 172
-
-  Hilly flanks of Near East, 107, 108, 125, 131, 146, 147
-
-  History, beginning of, 7, 17
-
-  Hoes, 112
-
-  Holland, 164
-
-  Homo sapiens, 32
-
-  Hooton, E. A., 34
-
-  Horse, 112;
-    wild, in cave art, 85;
-    in China, 54
-
-  Hotu cave, 126
-
-  Houses, 122;
-    at Jarmo, 128;
-    at Halaf, 151
-
-  Howe, Bruce, 116
-
-  Howell, F. Clark, 30
-
-  Hunting, 93
-
-
-  Ice Age, in Asia, 99;
-    beginning of, 18;
-    glaciers in, 41;
-    last glaciation, 93
-
-  Incas, 145
-
-  India, 90, 136
-
-  Industrialization, 178
-
-  Industry, blade-tool, 88;
-    defined, 58;
-    ground stone, 94
-
-  Internationalism, 162
-
-  Iran, 107, 147
-
-  Iraq, 107, 124, 127, 136, 147
-
-  Iron, introduction of, 170
-
-  Irrigation, 123, 149, 155
-
-  Italy, 138
-
-
-  Jacobsen, T. J., 157
-
-  Jarmo, 109, 126, 128, 130;
-    assemblage, 129
-
-  Java, 23, 29
-
-  Java man, 26, 27, 29
-
-  Jefferson, Thomas, 11
-
-  Jericho, 119, 133
-
-  Judaidah, 134
-
-
-  Kafuan, 48
-
-  Kanam, 23, 36
-
-  Karim Shahir, 116-119, 124;
-    assemblage, 116, 117
-
-  Keith, Sir Arthur, 33
-
-  Kelley, Harper, 51
-
-  Kharga, 126
-
-  Khartoum, 136
-
-  Knives, 80
-
-  Krogman, W. M., 3, 25
-
-
-  Lamps, 85
-
-  Land bridges in Mediterranean, 19
-
-  La Tène phase, 170
-
-  Laurel leaf point, 78, 89
-
-  Leakey, L. S. B., 40
-
-  Le Moustier, 57
-
-  Levalloisian, 47, 61, 62
-
-  Levalloiso-Mousterian, 47, 63
-
-  Little Woodbury, 170
-
-
-  Magic, used by hunters, 123
-
-  Maglemosian, assemblage, 94, 95;
-    folk, 98
-
-  Makapan, 40
-
-  Mammoth, 93;
-    in cave art, 85
-
-  “Man-apes,” 26
-
-  Mango, 107
-
-  Mankind, age, 17
-
-  Maringer, J., 45
-
-  Markets, 155
-
-  Marston, A. T., 11
-
-  Mathiassen, T., 97
-
-  McCown, T. D., 33
-
-  Meganthropus, 26, 27, 36
-
-  Men, defined, 25;
-    modern, 32
-
-  Merimde, 135
-
-  Mersin, 133
-
-  Metal-workers, 160, 163, 167, 172
-
-  Micoquian, 48, 60
-
-  Microliths, 87;
-    at Jarmo, 130;
-    “lunates,” 87;
-    trapezoids, 87;
-    triangles, 87
-
-  Minerals used as coloring matter, 66
-
-  Mine-shafts, 140
-
-  M’lefaat, 126, 127
-
-  Mongoloids, 29, 90
-
-  Mortars, 114, 118, 127
-
-  Mounds, how formed, 12
-
-  Mount Carmel, 11, 33, 52, 59, 64, 69, 113, 114
-
-  “Mousterian man,” 64
-
-  “Mousterian” tools, 61, 62;
-    of Acheulean tradition, 62
-
-  Movius, H. L., 47
-
-
-  Natufian, animals in, 114;
-    assemblage, 113, 114, 115;
-    burials, 114;
-    date of, 113
-
-  Neanderthal man, 29, 30, 31, 56
-
-  Near East, beginnings of civilization in, 20, 144;
-    cave sites, 58;
-    climate in Ice Age, 99;
-    “Fertile Crescent,” 107, 146;
-    food-production in, 99;
-    Natufian assemblage in, 113-115;
-    stone tools, 114
-
-  Needles, 80
-
-  Negroid, 34
-
-  New World, 90
-
-  Nile River valley, 102, 134;
-    floods in, 148
-
-  Nuclear area, 106, 110;
-    in Near East, 107
-
-
-  Obsidian, used for blade tools, 71;
-    at Jarmo, 130
-
-  Ochre, red, with burials, 86
-
-  Oldowan, 48
-
-  Old World, 67, 70, 90;
-    continental phases in, 18
-
-  Olorgesailie, 40, 51
-
-  Ostrich, in China, 54
-
-  Ovens, 128
-
-  Oxygen isotopes, 18
-
-
-  Paintings in caves, 83
-
-  Paleoanthropic man, 50
-
-  Palestine, burials, 56;
-    cave sites, 52;
-    types of man, 69
-
-  Parpallo, 89
-
-  Patjitanian, 45, 47
-
-  Pebble tools, 42
-
-  Peking cave, 54;
-    animals in, 54
-
-  Peking man, 27, 28, 29, 54, 58
-
-  Pendants, 80;
-    bone, 114
-
-  Pestle, 114
-
-  Peterborough, 141;
-    assemblage, 141
-
-  Pictographic signs, 158
-
-  Pig, wild, 108
-
-  “Piltdown man,” 29
-
-  Pins, 80
-
-  Pithecanthropus, 26, 27, 30, 36
-
-  Pleistocene, 18, 25
-
-  Plows developed, 123
-
-  Points, arrow, 76;
-    laurel leaf, 78;
-    shouldered, 78, 79;
-    split-based bone, 80, 82;
-    tanged, 76;
-    willow leaf, 78
-
-  Potatoes, in America, 145
-
-  Pottery, 122, 130, 156;
-    decorated, 142;
-    painted, 131, 151, 152;
-    Susa style, 156;
-    in tombs, 141
-
-  Prehistory, defined, 7;
-    range of, 18
-
-  Pre-neanderthaloids, 30, 31, 37
-
-  Pre-Solutrean point, 89
-
-  Pre-Stellenbosch, 48
-
-  Proto-Literate assemblage, 157-160
-
-
-  Race, 35;
-    biological, 36;
-    “pure,” 16
-
-  Radioactivity, 9, 10
-
-  Radioactive carbon dates, 18, 92, 120, 130, 135, 156
-
-  Redfield, Robert, 38, 49
-
-  Reed, C. A., 128
-
-  Reindeer, 94
-
-  Rhinoceros, 93;
-    in cave art, 85
-
-  Rhodesian man, 32
-
-  Riss glaciation, 58
-
-  Rock-shelters, 58;
-    art in, 85
-
-
-  Saccopastore, 31
-
-  Sahara Desert, 34, 102
-
-  Samarra, 152;
-    pottery, 131, 152
-
-  Sangoan industry, 67
-
-  Sauer, Carl, 136
-
-  Sbaikian point, 89
-
-  Schliemann, H., 11, 12
-
-  Scotland, 171
-
-  Scraper, flake, 79;
-    end-scraper on blade, 77, 78;
-    keel-shaped, 79, 80, 81
-
-  Sculpture in caves, 83
-
-  Sebilian III, 126
-
-  Shaheinab, 135
-
-  Sheep, wild, 108;
-    at Skara Brae, 142;
-    in China, 54
-
-  Shellfish, 142
-
-  Ship, Ubaidian, 153
-
-  Sialk, 126, 134;
-    assemblage, 134
-
-  Siberia, 88;
-    pathway to New World, 98
-
-  Sickle, 112, 153;
-    blade, 113, 130
-
-  Silo, 122
-
-  Sinanthropus, 27, 30, 35
-
-  Skara Brae, 142
-
-  Snails used as food, 128
-
-  Soan, 47
-
-  Solecki, R., 116
-
-  Solo (fossil type), 29, 32
-
-  Solutrean industry, 77
-
-  Spear, shaft, 78;
-    thrower, 82, 83
-
-  Speech, development of organs of, 25
-
-  Squash, in America, 145
-
-  Steinheim fossil skull, 28
-
-  Stillbay industry, 67
-
-  Stonehenge, 166
-
-  Stratification, in caves, 12, 57;
-    in sites, 12
-
-  Swanscombe (fossil type), 11, 28
-
-  Syria, 107
-
-
-  Tabun, 60, 71
-
-  Tardenoisian, 97
-
-  Taro, 107
-
-  Tasa, 135
-
-  Tayacian, 47, 59
-
-  Teeth, pierced, in beads and pendants, 114
-
-  Temples, 123, 155
-
-  Tepe Gawra, 156
-
-  Ternafine, 29
-
-  Teshik Tash, 69
-
-  Textiles, 122
-
-  Thong-stropper, 80
-
-  Tigris River, floods in, 148
-
-  Toggle, 80
-
-  Tomatoes, in America, 145
-
-  Tombs, megalithic, 141
-
-  Tool-making, 42, 49
-
-  Tool-preparation traditions, 65
-
-  Tools, 62;
-    antler, 80;
-    blade, 70, 71, 75;
-    bone, 66;
-    chopper, 47;
-    core-biface, 43, 48, 60, 61;
-    flake, 44, 47, 51, 60, 64;
-    flint, 80, 127;
-    ground stone, 68, 127;
-    handles, 94;
-    pebble, 42, 43, 48, 53;
-    use of, 24
-
-  Touf (mud wall), 128
-
-  Toynbee, A. J., 101
-
-  Trade, 130, 155, 162
-
-  Traders, 167
-
-  Traditions, 15;
-    blade tool, 70;
-    definition of, 51;
-    interpretation of, 49;
-    tool-making, 42, 48;
-    chopper-tool, 47;
-    chopper-chopping tool, 45;
-    core-biface, 43, 48;
-    flake, 44, 47;
-    pebble tool, 42, 48
-
-  Tool-making, prehistory of, 42
-
-  Turkey, 107, 108
-
-
-  Ubaid, 153;
-    assemblage, 153-155
-
-  Urnfields, 168, 169
-
-
-  Village-farming community era, 105, 119
-
-
-  Wad B, 72
-
-  Wadjak, 34
-
-  Warka phase, 156;
-    assemblage, 156
-
-  Washburn, Sherwood L., 36
-
-  Water buffalo, domestication of, 107
-
-  Weidenreich, F., 29, 34
-
-  Wessex, 166, 167
-
-  Wheat, wild, 108;
-    partially domesticated, 127
-
-  Willow leaf point, 78
-
-  Windmill Hill, 138;
-    assemblage, 138, 140
-
-  Witch doctors, 68
-
-  Wool, 112;
-    in garments, 167
-
-  Writing, 158;
-    cuneiform, 158
-
-  Würm I glaciation, 58
-
-
-  Zebu cattle, domestication of, 107
-
-  Zeuner, F. E., 73
-
-
-
-
-      *      *      *      *      *      *
-
-
-
-
-Transcriber’s note:
-
-Punctuation, hyphenation, and spelling were made consistent when a
-predominant preference was found in this book; otherwise they were not
-changed.
-
-Simple typographical errors were corrected; occasional unbalanced
-quotation marks retained.
-
-Ambiguous hyphens at the ends of lines were retained.
-
-Index not checked for proper alphabetization or correct page references.
-
-In the original book, chapter headings were accompanied by
-illustrations, sometimes above, sometimes below, and sometimes
-adjacent. In this eBook those ilustrations always appear below the
-headings.
-
-
-
-***END OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK PREHISTORIC MEN***
-
-
-******* This file should be named 52664-0.txt or 52664-0.zip *******
-
-
-This and all associated files of various formats will be found in:
-http://www.gutenberg.org/dirs/5/2/6/6/52664
-
-
-Updated editions will replace the previous one--the old editions will
-be renamed.
-
-Creating the works from print editions not protected by U.S. copyright
-law means that no one owns a United States copyright in these works,
-so the Foundation (and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United
-States without permission and without paying copyright
-royalties. Special rules, set forth in the General Terms of Use part
-of this license, apply to copying and distributing Project
-Gutenberg-tm electronic works to protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm
-concept and trademark. Project Gutenberg is a registered trademark,
-and may not be used if you charge for the eBooks, unless you receive
-specific permission. If you do not charge anything for copies of this
-eBook, complying with the rules is very easy. You may use this eBook
-for nearly any purpose such as creation of derivative works, reports,
-performances and research. They may be modified and printed and given
-away--you may do practically ANYTHING in the United States with eBooks
-not protected by U.S. copyright law. Redistribution is subject to the
-trademark license, especially commercial redistribution.
-
-START: FULL LICENSE
-
-THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE
-PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK
-
-To protect the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting the free
-distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work
-(or any other work associated in any way with the phrase "Project
-Gutenberg"), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full
-Project Gutenberg-tm License available with this file or online at
-www.gutenberg.org/license.
-
-Section 1. General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project
-Gutenberg-tm electronic works
-
-1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg-tm
-electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to
-and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property
-(trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all
-the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or
-destroy all copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in your
-possession. If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a
-Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work and you do not agree to be bound
-by the terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the
-person or entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph
-1.E.8.
-
-1.B. "Project Gutenberg" is a registered trademark. It may only be
-used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who
-agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a few
-things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works
-even without complying with the full terms of this agreement. See
-paragraph 1.C below. There are a lot of things you can do with Project
-Gutenberg-tm electronic works if you follow the terms of this
-agreement and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg-tm
-electronic works. See paragraph 1.E below.
-
-1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation ("the
-Foundation" or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection
-of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works. Nearly all the individual
-works in the collection are in the public domain in the United
-States. If an individual work is unprotected by copyright law in the
-United States and you are located in the United States, we do not
-claim a right to prevent you from copying, distributing, performing,
-displaying or creating derivative works based on the work as long as
-all references to Project Gutenberg are removed. Of course, we hope
-that you will support the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting
-free access to electronic works by freely sharing Project Gutenberg-tm
-works in compliance with the terms of this agreement for keeping the
-Project Gutenberg-tm name associated with the work. You can easily
-comply with the terms of this agreement by keeping this work in the
-same format with its attached full Project Gutenberg-tm License when
-you share it without charge with others.
-
-1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern
-what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most countries are
-in a constant state of change. If you are outside the United States,
-check the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this
-agreement before downloading, copying, displaying, performing,
-distributing or creating derivative works based on this work or any
-other Project Gutenberg-tm work. The Foundation makes no
-representations concerning the copyright status of any work in any
-country outside the United States.
-
-1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg:
-
-1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other
-immediate access to, the full Project Gutenberg-tm License must appear
-prominently whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg-tm work (any work
-on which the phrase "Project Gutenberg" appears, or with which the
-phrase "Project Gutenberg" is associated) is accessed, displayed,
-performed, viewed, copied or distributed:
-
-  This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and
-  most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no
-  restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it
-  under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included with this
-  eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the
-  United States, you'll have to check the laws of the country where you
-  are located before using this ebook.
-
-1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is
-derived from texts not protected by U.S. copyright law (does not
-contain a notice indicating that it is posted with permission of the
-copyright holder), the work can be copied and distributed to anyone in
-the United States without paying any fees or charges. If you are
-redistributing or providing access to a work with the phrase "Project
-Gutenberg" associated with or appearing on the work, you must comply
-either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 or
-obtain permission for the use of the work and the Project Gutenberg-tm
-trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.
-
-1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is posted
-with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution
-must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any
-additional terms imposed by the copyright holder. Additional terms
-will be linked to the Project Gutenberg-tm License for all works
-posted with the permission of the copyright holder found at the
-beginning of this work.
-
-1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg-tm
-License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this
-work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg-tm.
-
-1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this
-electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without
-prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with
-active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project
-Gutenberg-tm License.
-
-1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary,
-compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including
-any word processing or hypertext form. However, if you provide access
-to or distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg-tm work in a format
-other than "Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other format used in the official
-version posted on the official Project Gutenberg-tm web site
-(www.gutenberg.org), you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense
-to the user, provide a copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means
-of obtaining a copy upon request, of the work in its original "Plain
-Vanilla ASCII" or other form. Any alternate format must include the
-full Project Gutenberg-tm License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1.
-
-1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying,
-performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg-tm works
-unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.
-
-1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing
-access to or distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works
-provided that
-
-* You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from
-  the use of Project Gutenberg-tm works calculated using the method
-  you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The fee is owed
-  to the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark, but he has
-  agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the Project
-  Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty payments must be paid
-  within 60 days following each date on which you prepare (or are
-  legally required to prepare) your periodic tax returns. Royalty
-  payments should be clearly marked as such and sent to the Project
-  Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the address specified in
-  Section 4, "Information about donations to the Project Gutenberg
-  Literary Archive Foundation."
-
-* You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies
-  you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he
-  does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg-tm
-  License. You must require such a user to return or destroy all
-  copies of the works possessed in a physical medium and discontinue
-  all use of and all access to other copies of Project Gutenberg-tm
-  works.
-
-* You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of
-  any money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the
-  electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days of
-  receipt of the work.
-
-* You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free
-  distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm works.
-
-1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project
-Gutenberg-tm electronic work or group of works on different terms than
-are set forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing
-from both the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and The
-Project Gutenberg Trademark LLC, the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm
-trademark. Contact the Foundation as set forth in Section 3 below.
-
-1.F.
-
-1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable
-effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread
-works not protected by U.S. copyright law in creating the Project
-Gutenberg-tm collection. Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg-tm
-electronic works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may
-contain "Defects," such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate
-or corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other
-intellectual property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or
-other medium, a computer virus, or computer codes that damage or
-cannot be read by your equipment.
-
-1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the "Right
-of Replacement or Refund" described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project
-Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project
-Gutenberg-tm trademark, and any other party distributing a Project
-Gutenberg-tm electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all
-liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal
-fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT
-LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE
-PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH 1.F.3. YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE
-TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE
-LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR
-INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH
-DAMAGE.
-
-1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a
-defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can
-receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a
-written explanation to the person you received the work from. If you
-received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium
-with your written explanation. The person or entity that provided you
-with the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in
-lieu of a refund. If you received the work electronically, the person
-or entity providing it to you may choose to give you a second
-opportunity to receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund. If
-the second copy is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing
-without further opportunities to fix the problem.
-
-1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth
-in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you 'AS-IS', WITH NO
-OTHER WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT
-LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE.
-
-1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied
-warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of
-damages. If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement
-violates the law of the state applicable to this agreement, the
-agreement shall be interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or
-limitation permitted by the applicable state law. The invalidity or
-unenforceability of any provision of this agreement shall not void the
-remaining provisions.
-
-1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the
-trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone
-providing copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in
-accordance with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the
-production, promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm
-electronic works, harmless from all liability, costs and expenses,
-including legal fees, that arise directly or indirectly from any of
-the following which you do or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this
-or any Project Gutenberg-tm work, (b) alteration, modification, or
-additions or deletions to any Project Gutenberg-tm work, and (c) any
-Defect you cause.
-
-Section 2. Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg-tm
-
-Project Gutenberg-tm is synonymous with the free distribution of
-electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of
-computers including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers. It
-exists because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations
-from people in all walks of life.
-
-Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the
-assistance they need are critical to reaching Project Gutenberg-tm's
-goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg-tm collection will
-remain freely available for generations to come. In 2001, the Project
-Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure
-and permanent future for Project Gutenberg-tm and future
-generations. To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary
-Archive Foundation and how your efforts and donations can help, see
-Sections 3 and 4 and the Foundation information page at
-www.gutenberg.org 
-
-Section 3. Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary 
-Archive Foundation
-
-The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non profit
-501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the
-state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal
-Revenue Service. The Foundation's EIN or federal tax identification
-number is 64-6221541. Contributions to the Project Gutenberg Literary
-Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent permitted by
-U.S. federal laws and your state's laws.
-
-The Foundation's principal office is in Fairbanks, Alaska, with the
-mailing address: PO Box 750175, Fairbanks, AK 99775, but its
-volunteers and employees are scattered throughout numerous
-locations. Its business office is located at 809 North 1500 West, Salt
-Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887. Email contact links and up to
-date contact information can be found at the Foundation's web site and
-official page at www.gutenberg.org/contact
-
-For additional contact information:
-
-    Dr. Gregory B. Newby
-    Chief Executive and Director
-    gbnewby@pglaf.org
-
-Section 4. Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg
-Literary Archive Foundation
-
-Project Gutenberg-tm depends upon and cannot survive without wide
-spread public support and donations to carry out its mission of
-increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be
-freely distributed in machine readable form accessible by the widest
-array of equipment including outdated equipment. Many small donations
-($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt
-status with the IRS.
-
-The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating
-charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United
-States. Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a
-considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up
-with these requirements. We do not solicit donations in locations
-where we have not received written confirmation of compliance. To SEND
-DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any particular
-state visit www.gutenberg.org/donate
-
-While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we
-have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition
-against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who
-approach us with offers to donate.
-
-International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make
-any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from
-outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff.
-
-Please check the Project Gutenberg Web pages for current donation
-methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of other
-ways including checks, online payments and credit card donations. To
-donate, please visit: www.gutenberg.org/donate
-
-Section 5. General Information About Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works.
-
-Professor Michael S. Hart was the originator of the Project
-Gutenberg-tm concept of a library of electronic works that could be
-freely shared with anyone. For forty years, he produced and
-distributed Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks with only a loose network of
-volunteer support.
-
-Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks are often created from several printed
-editions, all of which are confirmed as not protected by copyright in
-the U.S. unless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not
-necessarily keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper
-edition.
-
-Most people start at our Web site which has the main PG search
-facility: www.gutenberg.org
-
-This Web site includes information about Project Gutenberg-tm,
-including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary
-Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to
-subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks.
-
diff --git a/old/52664-0.zip b/old/52664-0.zip
deleted file mode 100644
index a25aabf..0000000
--- a/old/52664-0.zip
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/52664-h.zip b/old/52664-h.zip
deleted file mode 100644
index 8f9d731..0000000
--- a/old/52664-h.zip
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/52664-h/52664-h.htm b/old/52664-h/52664-h.htm
deleted file mode 100644
index 2daeb19..0000000
--- a/old/52664-h/52664-h.htm
+++ /dev/null
@@ -1,8160 +0,0 @@
-<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN"
-    "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd">
-<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
-<head>
-<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" />
-<title>The Project Gutenberg eBook of Prehistoric Men, by Robert J. (Robert John) Braidwood</title>
-    <link rel="coverpage" href="images/cover.jpg" />
-    <style type="text/css">
-
-body {
-    margin-left: 2.5em;
-    margin-right: 2.5em;
-}
-
-h1,h2, h3 {
-    text-align: center;
-    clear: both;
-    margin-top: 2.5em;
-    margin-bottom: 1em;
-}
-
-h1 {line-height: 1;}
-
-h2 {margin-bottom: 0;}
-h2+p {margin-top: 1.5em;}
-h3 {
-    text-align: left;
-    letter-spacing: .1em; margin-right: -.1em;
-    font-size: 100%;
-}
-h3.center {text-align: center;}
-
-.transnote h2 {
-    margin-top: .5em;
-    margin-bottom: 1em;
-}
-
-p {
-    text-indent: 1.75em;
-    margin-top: .51em;
-    margin-bottom: .24em;
-    text-align: justify;
-}
-.caption p {text-align: center; text-indent: 0;}
-p.center {text-indent: 0;}
-
-.p1 {margin-top: 1em;}
-.p2 {margin-top: 2em;}
-.p4 {margin-top: 4em;}
-.vspace {line-height: 1.5;}
-
-.in0 {text-indent: 0;}
-.in2 {padding-left: 2em;}
-
-.small   {font-size: 70%;}
-.smaller {font-size: 85%;}
-.larger  {font-size: 125%;}
-
-.center   {text-align: center;}
-
-.smcap    {font-variant: small-caps;}
-.smcap.smaller {font-size: 75%;}
-
-.species {font-style: italic;}
-
-hr {
-    width: 33%;
-    margin-top: 4em;
-    margin-bottom: 4em;
-    margin-left: 33%;
-    margin-right: auto;
-    clear: both;
-}
-
-.tb {
-    text-align: center;
-    padding-top: .76em;
-    padding-bottom: .24em;
-}
-
-table {
-    margin-left: auto;
-    margin-right: auto;
-    max-width: 80%;
-    border-collapse: collapse;
-}
-
-.tdl {
-    text-align: left;
-    vertical-align: top;
-    padding-right: 1em;
-    padding-left: 1.5em;
-    text-indent: -1.5em;
-}
-
-.tdr {
-    text-align: right;
-    vertical-align: bottom;
-    padding-left: .3em;
-    white-space: nowrap;
-}
-
-.pagenum {
-  position: absolute;
-  right: 4px;
-  text-indent: 0em;
-  text-align: right;
-  font-size: 70%;
-  font-weight: normal;
-  font-variant: normal;
-  font-style: normal;
-  letter-spacing: normal;
-  line-height: normal;
-  color: #acacac;
-  border: 1px solid #acacac;
-  background: #ffffff;
-  padding: 1px 2px;
-}
-
-.figcenter   {
-    margin: 2em auto 2em auto;
-    text-align: center;
-    page-break-inside: avoid;
-    max-width: 100%;
-}
-
-h2+div.figcenter {margin-top: 0;}
-
-img {
-    padding: 1em 0 .5em 0;
-    max-width: 100%;
-    height: auto;
-}
-
-.caption  {
-    font-weight: bold;
-    text-align: center;
-    margin-top: .5em;
-}
-.caption .sans {font-family: sans-serif, serif; font-size: 80%; font-weight: normal;}
-.orange {color: #d57a4b;}
-
-ul {margin-left: 3em; padding-left: 0;}
-li {list-style-type: none; padding-left: 2em; text-indent: -2.5em; text-align: left;}
-
-.footnote {
-    border: thin dashed black;
-    margin: 1.5em;
-    padding: .5em;
-    font-size: 95%;
-}
-
-.footnote p {text-indent: 1em;}
-
-.fnanchor {
-    vertical-align: 80%;
-    line-height: .7;
-    font-size: .75em;
-    text-decoration: none;
-}
-.footnote .fnanchor {font-size: .8em;}
-
-a.ref {text-decoration: none;}
-
-.index {margin-left: 2em;}
-ul.index {padding-left: 0;}
-li {list-style-type: none;}
-li.indx, li.ifrst {list-style-type: none; padding-left: 3em; text-indent: -3em; padding-top: .2em;}
-li.isub1 {padding-left: 4em;}
-li.ifrst {padding-top: 1em;}
-
-blockquote {
-    margin-left: 5%;
-    margin-right: 5%;
-    font-size: 95%;
-}
-
-.hang {
-    margin: .75em auto 0 1.5em;
-    text-align: justify;
-    padding-left: 1.2em;
-    text-indent: -1.2em;
-}
-#booklist p.hang {font-size: 100%; margin: 0 auto 0 1.5em; text-align: left;}
-#booklist p.in0 {margin-bottom: 0;}
-
-.transnote {
-    background-color: #EEE;
-    border: thin dotted;
-    font-family: sans-serif, serif;
-    color: #000;
-    margin-left: 5%;
-    margin-right: 5%;
-    margin-top: 4em;
-    margin-bottom: 2em;
-    padding: 1em;
-}
-
-.sigright {
-     margin-right: 2em;
-     text-align: right;}
-
-.gesperrt {
-    letter-spacing: 0.2em;
-    margin-right: -0.2em;
-}
-.wspace {word-spacing: .3em;}
-
-.hidev {visibility: hidden; display: none;}
-
-@media print, handheld
-{
-    h1, .chapter, .newpage {page-break-before: always;}
-    h1.nobreak, h2.nobreak, .nobreak {page-break-before: avoid; padding-top: 0;}
-
-    p {
-        margin-top: .5em;
-        text-align: justify;
-        margin-bottom: .25em;
-    }
-
-    table {width: 100%; max-width: 100%;}
-
-    .tdl {
-        padding-left: .5em;
-        text-indent: -.5em;
-        padding-right: 0;
-    }
-
-}
-
-@media handheld
-{
-    body {margin: 0;}
-
-    hr {
-        margin-top: .1em;
-        margin-bottom: .1em;
-        visibility: hidden;
-        color: white;
-        width: .01em;
-        display: none;
-    }
-
-    ul {margin-left: 1em; padding-left: 0;}
-    li {list-style-type: none; padding-left: 1em; text-indent: -1.5em;}
-
-    blockquote {margin: 1.5em 3% 1.5em 3%;}
-
-    .transnote {
-        page-break-inside: avoid;
-        margin-left: 2%;
-        margin-right: 2%;
-        margin-top: 1em;
-        margin-bottom: 1em;
-        padding: .5em;
-    }
-}
-
-    h1.pg   { margin-top: 0em; }
-    h2.pg   { margin-bottom: 1em; }
-    h3.pg   { text-align: center;
-              letter-spacing: 0em;
-              margin-right: 0em;
-              font-size: 110%; }
-    hr.full { width: 100%;
-              margin-top: 3em;
-              margin-bottom: 0em;
-              margin-left: auto;
-              margin-right: auto;
-              height: 4px;
-              border-width: 4px 0 0 0; /* remove all borders except the top one */
-              border-style: solid;
-              border-color: #000000;
-              clear: both; }
-  </style>
-</head>
-<body>
-<h1 class="pg">The Project Gutenberg eBook, Prehistoric Men, by Robert J. (Robert John)
-Braidwood, Illustrated by Susan T. Richert</h1>
-<p>This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States
-and most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no
-restrictions whatsoever.  You may copy it, give it away or re-use it
-under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included with this
-eBook or online at <a
-href="http://www.gutenberg.org">www.gutenberg.org</a>.  If you are not
-located in the United States, you'll have to check the laws of the
-country where you are located before using this ebook.</p>
-<p>Title: Prehistoric Men</p>
-<p>Author: Robert J. (Robert John) Braidwood</p>
-<p>Release Date: July 28, 2016  [eBook #52664]</p>
-<p>Language: English</p>
-<p>Character set encoding: UTF-8</p>
-<p>***START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK PREHISTORIC MEN***</p>
-<p>&nbsp;</p>
-<h3 class="pg">E-text prepared by<br />
-    Stephen Hutcheson, Dave Morgan, Charlie Howard,<br />
-    and the Online Distributed Proofreading Team<br />
-    (http://www.pgdp.net)</h3>
-<p>&nbsp;</p>
-<hr class="full" />
-<p>&nbsp;</p>
-<p>&nbsp;</p>
-<p>&nbsp;</p>
-
-<div class="figcenter" style="width: 388px;">
-<img src="images/cover.jpg" width="518" height="800" alt="Cover" />
-</div>
-
-<h1 class="newpage gesperrt">Prehistoric Men</h1>
-
-<p class="p2 center">BY</p>
-<p class="p1 center larger">ROBERT J. BRAIDWOOD</p>
-
-<p class="center">RESEARCH ASSOCIATE, OLD WORLD PREHISTORY</p>
-
-<p class="center">PROFESSOR<br />
-ORIENTAL INSTITUTE AND DEPARTMENT OF ANTHROPOLOGY<br />
-UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO</p>
-
-<p class="p2 center larger">Drawings by SUSAN T. RICHERT</p>
-
-<div id="if_i_001" class="figcenter" style="width: 231px;">
-  <img src="images/i_001.jpg" width="231" height="166" alt="" /></div>
-
-<p class="p2 center vspace wspace"><span class="larger">CHICAGO NATURAL HISTORY MUSEUM<br />
-POPULAR SERIES</span><br />
-ANTHROPOLOGY, NUMBER 37
-</p>
-
-<hr />
-
-<p class="newpage p4 center vspace larger">
-Third Edition Issued in Co-operation with<br />
-The Oriental Institute, The University of Chicago</p>
-
-<p class="p2 center wspace larger">Edited by Lillian A. Ross</p>
-
-<p class="p2 center wspace vspace">PRINTED IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA<br />
-BY CHICAGO NATURAL HISTORY MUSEUM PRESS</p>
-
-<p class="p1 center smaller vspace">Copyright 1948, 1951, and 1957 by Chicago Natural History Museum<br />
-First edition 1948<br />
-Second edition 1951<br />
-Third edition 1957<br />
-Fourth edition 1959
-</p>
-
-<hr />
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_3">3</a></span></p>
-
-<div class="chapter">
-<h2><a id="Preface"></a>Preface</h2>
-
-<div id="if_i_002" class="figcenter" style="width: 274px;">
-  <img src="images/i_002.jpg" width="274" height="209" alt="" /></div>
-</div>
-
-<p>Like the writing of most professional archeologists, mine
-has been confined to so-called learned papers. Good, bad,
-or indifferent, these papers were in a jargon that only my
-colleagues and a few advanced students could understand.
-Hence, when I was asked to do this little book, I soon found
-it extremely difficult to say what I meant in simple fashion.
-The style is new to me, but I hope the reader will not find it
-forced or pedantic; at least I have done my very best to tell
-the story simply and clearly.</p>
-
-<p>Many friends have aided in the preparation of the book.
-The whimsical charm of Miss Susan Richert’s illustrations
-add enormously to the spirit I wanted. She gave freely of
-her own time on the drawings and in planning the book with
-me. My colleagues at the University of Chicago, especially
-Professor Wilton M. Krogman (now of the University of
-Pennsylvania), and also Mrs. Linda Braidwood, Associate of
-the Oriental Institute, and Professors Fay-Cooper Cole and
-Sol Tax, of the Department of Anthropology, gave me counsel
-in matters bearing on their special fields, and the Department
-of Anthropology bore some of the expense of the illustrations.
-From Mrs. Irma Hunter and Mr. Arnold Maremont, who are
-not archeologists at all and have only an intelligent layman’s
-notion of archeology, I had sound advice on how best to tell
-the story. I am deeply indebted to all these friends.</p>
-
-<p>While I was preparing the second edition, I had the great
-fortune to be able to rework the third chapter with Professor
-Sherwood L. Washburn, now of the Department of Anthropology
-of the University of California, and the fourth, fifth, and<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_4">4</a></span>
-sixth chapters with Professor Hallum L. Movius, Jr., of the
-Peabody Museum, Harvard University. The book has gained
-greatly in accuracy thereby. In matters of dating, Professor
-Movius and the indications of Professor W.&nbsp;F. Libby’s Carbon
-14 chronology project have both encouraged me to choose the
-lowest dates now current for the events of the Pleistocene Ice
-Age. There is still no certain way of fixing a direct chronology
-for most of the Pleistocene, but Professor Libby’s method
-appears very promising for its end range and for proto-historic
-dates. In any case, this book names “periods,” and new
-dates may be written in against mine, if new and better
-dating systems appear.</p>
-
-<p>I wish to thank Dr. Clifford C. Gregg, Director of
-Chicago Natural History Museum, for the opportunity to
-publish this book. My old friend, Dr. Paul S. Martin, Chief
-Curator in the Department of Anthropology, asked me to
-undertake the job and inspired me to complete it. I am also
-indebted to Miss Lillian A. Ross, Associate Editor of Scientific
-Publications, and to Mr. George I. Quimby, Curator of
-Exhibits in Anthropology, for all the time they have given
-me in getting the manuscript into proper shape.</p>
-
-<p class="sigright"><span class="smcap">Robert J. Braidwood</span></p>
-<p class="in0 smaller"><i>June 15, 1950</i></p>
-
-<h2 class="nobreak"><a id="Preface_to_the_Third_Edition"></a>Preface to the Third Edition</h2>
-
-<p>In preparing the enlarged third edition, many of the above
-mentioned friends have again helped me. I have picked the
-brains of Professor F. Clark Howell of the Department of
-Anthropology of the University of Chicago in reworking the
-earlier chapters, and he was very patient in the matter, which
-I sincerely appreciate.</p>
-
-<p>All of Mrs. Susan Richert Allen’s original drawings appear,
-but a few necessary corrections have been made in some of the
-charts and some new drawings have been added by Mr. John
-Pfiffner, Staff Artist, Chicago Natural History Museum.</p>
-
-<p class="sigright"><span class="smcap">Robert J. Braidwood</span></p>
-<p class="in0 smaller"><i>March 1, 1959</i></p>
-
-<hr />
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_5">5</a></span></p>
-
-<div class="chapter">
-<h2><a id="Contents"></a>Contents</h2>
-</div>
-
-<table summary="Contents">
-  <tr class="small">
-    <td class="tdl"> </td>
-    <td class="tdr">PAGE</td></tr>
-  <tr>
-    <td class="tdl">How We Learn about Prehistoric Men</td>
-    <td class="tdr"><a href="#hdr_1">7</a></td></tr>
-  <tr>
-    <td class="tdl">The Changing World in Which Prehistoric Men Lived</td>
-    <td class="tdr"><a href="#hdr_2">17</a></td></tr>
-  <tr>
-    <td class="tdl">Prehistoric Men Themselves</td>
-    <td class="tdr"><a href="#hdr_3">22</a></td></tr>
-  <tr>
-    <td class="tdl">Cultural Beginnings</td>
-    <td class="tdr"><a href="#hdr_4">38</a></td></tr>
-  <tr>
-    <td class="tdl">More Evidence of Culture</td>
-    <td class="tdr"><a href="#hdr_5">56</a></td></tr>
-  <tr>
-    <td class="tdl">Early Moderns</td>
-    <td class="tdr"><a href="#hdr_6">70</a></td></tr>
-  <tr>
-    <td class="tdl">End and Prelude</td>
-    <td class="tdr"><a href="#hdr_7">92</a></td></tr>
-  <tr>
-    <td class="tdl">The First Revolution</td>
-    <td class="tdr"><a href="#hdr_8">121</a></td></tr>
-  <tr>
-    <td class="tdl">The Conquest of Civilization</td>
-    <td class="tdr"><a href="#hdr_9">144</a></td></tr>
-  <tr>
-    <td class="tdl">End of Prehistory</td>
-    <td class="tdr"><a href="#hdr_10">162</a></td></tr>
-  <tr>
-    <td class="tdl">Summary</td>
-    <td class="tdr"><a href="#hdr_11">176</a></td></tr>
-  <tr>
-    <td class="tdl">List of Books</td>
-    <td class="tdr"><a href="#hdr_12">180</a></td></tr>
-  <tr>
-    <td class="tdl">Index</td>
-    <td class="tdr"><a href="#hdr_13">184</a></td></tr>
-</table>
-
-<hr />
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_7">7</a></span></p>
-
-<div class="chapter">
-<h2 id="hdr_1">HOW WE LEARN about Prehistoric Men</h2>
-
-<div id="if_i_003" class="figcenter" style="width: 366px;">
-  <img src="images/i_003.jpg" width="366" height="219" alt="" /></div>
-</div>
-
-<p>Prehistory means the time before written history began.
-Actually, more than 99 per cent of man’s story is prehistory.
-Man is at least half a million years old, but he did not begin
-to write history (or to write anything) until about 5,000 years
-ago.</p>
-
-<p>The men who lived in prehistoric times left us no history
-books, but they did unintentionally leave a record of their
-presence and their way of life. This record is studied and
-interpreted by different kinds of scientists.</p>
-
-<h3>SCIENTISTS WHO FIND OUT ABOUT PREHISTORIC MEN</h3>
-
-<p>The scientists who study the bones and teeth and any other
-parts they find of the bodies of prehistoric men, are called
-<em>physical anthropologists</em>. Physical anthropologists are trained,
-much like doctors, to know all about the human body. They
-study living people, too; they know more about the biological
-facts of human “races” than anybody else. If the police find
-a badly decayed body in a trunk, they ask a physical anthropologist
-to tell them what the person originally looked like.<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_8">8</a></span>
-The physical anthropologists who specialize in prehistoric
-men work with fossils, so they are sometimes called <em>human
-paleontologists</em>.</p>
-
-<h3>ARCHEOLOGISTS</h3>
-
-<p>There is a kind of scientist who studies the things that prehistoric
-men made and did. Such a scientist is called an
-<em>archeologist</em>. It is the archeologist’s business to look for
-the stone and metal tools, the pottery, the graves, and the caves
-or huts of the men who lived before history began.</p>
-
-<p>But there is more to archeology than just looking for
-things. In Professor V. Gordon Childe’s words, archeology
-“furnishes a sort of history of human activity, provided always
-that the actions have produced concrete results and left
-recognizable material traces.” You will see that there are
-at least three points in what Childe says:</p>
-
-<blockquote class="hang">
-
-<p class="hang">1. The archeologists have to find the traces of things
-left behind by ancient man, and</p>
-
-<p class="hang">2. Only a few objects may be found, for most of these
-were probably too soft or too breakable to last through
-the years. However,</p>
-
-<p class="hang">3. The archeologist must use whatever he can find to
-tell a story&mdash;to make a “sort of history”&mdash;from the
-objects and living-places and graves that have escaped
-destruction.</p></blockquote>
-
-<p>What I mean is this: Let us say you are walking through
-a dump yard, and you find a rusty old spark plug. If you
-want to think about what the spark plug means, you quickly
-remember that it is a part of an automobile motor. This tells
-you something about the man who threw the spark plug on
-the dump. He either had an automobile, or he knew or lived
-near someone who did. He can’t have lived so very long ago,
-you’ll remember, because spark plugs and automobiles are
-only about sixty years old.</p>
-
-<p>When you think about the old spark plug in this way you
-have just been making the beginnings of what we call an
-archeological <em>interpretation</em>; you have been making the spark<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_9">9</a></span>
-plug tell a story. It is the same way with the man-made
-things we archeologists find and put in museums. Usually,
-only a few of these objects are pretty to look at; but each of
-them has some sort of story to tell. Making the interpretation
-of his finds is the most important part of the archeologist’s
-job. It is the way he gets at the “sort of history of human
-activity” which is expected of archeology.</p>
-
-<h3>SOME OTHER SCIENTISTS</h3>
-
-<p>There are many other scientists who help the archeologist
-and the physical anthropologist find out about prehistoric men.
-The geologists help us tell the age of the rocks or caves or
-gravel beds in which human bones or man-made objects are
-found. There are other scientists with names which all begin
-with “paleo” (the Greek word for “old”). The <em>paleontologists</em>
-study fossil animals. There are also, for example, such
-scientists as <em>paleobotanists</em> and <em>paleoclimatologists</em>, who study
-ancient plants and climates. These scientists help us to know
-the kinds of animals and plants that were living in prehistoric
-times and so could be used for food by ancient man; what
-the weather was like; and whether there were glaciers. Also,
-when I tell you that prehistoric men did not appear until
-long after the great dinosaurs had disappeared, I go on the
-say-so of the paleontologists. They know that fossils of men
-and of dinosaurs are not found in the same geological period.
-The dinosaur fossils come in early periods, the fossils of men
-much later.</p>
-
-<p>Since World War II even the atomic scientists have been
-helping the archeologists. By testing the amount of radioactivity
-left in charcoal, wood, or other vegetable matter
-obtained from archeological sites, they have been able to
-date the sites. Shell has been used also, and even the hair
-of Egyptian mummies. The dates of geological and climatic
-events have also been discovered. Some of this work has
-been done from drillings taken from the bottom of the sea.</p>
-
-<p>This dating by radioactivity has considerably shortened
-the dates which the archeologists used to give. If you find
-that some of the dates I give here are more recent than the<span class="pagenum"><a class="hidev" id="Page_10">10</a><a  id="Page_11">11</a></span>
-dates you see in other books on prehistory, it is because I am
-using one of the new lower dating systems.</p>
-
-<div id="if_i_004" class="figcenter" style="width: 492px;">
-  <img src="images/i_004.jpg" width="492" height="599" alt="" />
-  <div class="caption"><p>RADIOCARBON CHART</p>
-
-<p>The rate of disappearance of radioactivity as time passes.<a id="FNanchor_1" href="#Footnote_1" class="fnanchor">1</a></p></div></div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_1" href="#FNanchor_1" class="fnanchor">1</a> It is important that the limitations of the radioactive carbon
-“dating” system be held in mind. As the statistics involved in the system
-are used, there are two chances in three that the “date” of the sample
-falls within the range given as plus or minus an added number of years.
-For example, the “date” for the Jarmo village (see chart), given as
-6750 ± 200 <span class="smcap smaller">B.C.</span>, really means that there are only two chances in three
-that the real date of the charcoal sampled fell between 6950 and 6550
-<span class="smcap smaller">B.C.</span> We have also begun to suspect that there are ways in which the
-samples themselves may have become “contaminated,” either on the
-early or on the late side. We now tend to be suspicious of single radioactive
-carbon determinations, or of determinations from one site alone.
-But as a fabric of consistent determinations for several or more sites of
-one archeological period, we gain confidence in the “dates.”</p></div>
-
-<h3>HOW THE SCIENTISTS FIND OUT</h3>
-
-<p>So far, this chapter has been mainly about the people who
-find out about prehistoric men. We also need a word about
-<em>how</em> they find out.</p>
-
-<p>All our finds came by accident until about a hundred
-years ago. Men digging wells, or digging in caves for fertilizer,
-often turned up ancient swords or pots or stone arrowheads.
-People also found some odd pieces of stone that didn’t look
-like natural forms, but they also didn’t look like any known
-tool. As a result, the people who found them gave them queer
-names; for example, “thunderbolts.” The people thought
-the strange stones came to earth as bolts of lightning. We
-know now that these strange stones were prehistoric stone
-tools.</p>
-
-<p>Many important finds still come to us by accident. In
-1935, a British dentist, A.&nbsp;T. Marston, found the first of two
-fragments of a very important fossil human skull, in a gravel
-pit at Swanscombe, on the River Thames, England. He had
-to wait nine months, until the face of the gravel pit had been
-dug eight yards farther back, before the second fragment
-appeared. They fitted! Then, twenty years later, still
-another piece appeared. In 1928 workmen who were blasting
-out rock for the breakwater in the port of Haifa began to
-notice flint tools. Thus the story of cave men on Mount
-Carmel, in Palestine, began to be known.</p>
-
-<p>Planned archeological digging is only about a century
-old. Even before this, however, a few men realized the significance
-of objects they dug from the ground; one of these
-early archeologists was our own Thomas Jefferson. The first
-real mound-digger was a German grocer’s clerk, Heinrich
-Schliemann. Schliemann made a fortune as a merchant, first
-in Europe and then in the California gold-rush of 1849. He
-became an American citizen. Then he retired and had both
-money and time to test an old idea of his. He believed that
-the heroes of ancient Troy and Mycenae were once real Trojans<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_12">12</a></span>
-and Greeks. He proved it by going to Turkey and Greece and
-digging up the remains of both cities.</p>
-
-<p>Schliemann had the great good fortune to find rich and
-spectacular treasures, and he also had the common sense to
-keep notes and make descriptions of what he found. He proved
-beyond doubt that many ancient city mounds can be <em>stratified</em>.
-This means that there may be the remains of many towns in
-a mound, one above another, like layers in a cake.</p>
-
-<p>You might like to have an idea of how mounds come to
-be in layers. The original settlers may have chosen the spot
-because it had a good spring and there were good fertile lands
-nearby, or perhaps because it was close to some road or river
-or harbor. These settlers probably built their town of stone
-and mud-brick. Finally, something would have happened to
-the town&mdash;a flood, or a burning, or a raid by enemies&mdash;and
-the walls of the houses would have fallen in or would have
-melted down as mud in the rain. Nothing would have remained
-but the mud and debris of a low mound of <em>one</em> layer.</p>
-
-<p>The second settlers would have wanted the spot for the
-same reasons the first settlers did&mdash;good water, land, and
-roads. Also, the second settlers would have found a nice low
-mound to build their houses on, a protection from floods.
-But again, something would finally have happened to the
-second town, and the walls of <em>its</em> houses would have come
-tumbling down. This makes the <em>second</em> layer. And so on....</p>
-
-<p>In Syria I once had the good fortune to dig on a large
-mound that had no less than fifteen layers. Also, most of the
-layers were thick, and there were signs of rebuilding and
-repairs within each layer. The mound was more than a
-hundred feet high. In each layer, the building material used
-had been a soft, unbaked mud-brick, and most of the debris
-consisted of fallen or rain-melted mud from these mud-bricks.</p>
-
-<p>This idea of <em>stratification</em>, like the cake layers, was already
-a familiar one to the geologists by Schliemann’s time. They
-could show that their lowest layer of rock was oldest or
-earliest, and that the overlying layers became more recent as
-one moved upward. Schliemann’s digging proved the same
-thing at Troy. His first (lowest and earliest) city had at least
-nine layers above it; he thought that the second layer contained<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_13">13</a></span>
-the remains of Homer’s Troy. We now know that
-Homeric Troy was layer VIIa from the bottom; also, we
-count eleven layers or sub-layers in total.</p>
-
-<p>Schliemann’s work marks the beginnings of modern
-archeology. Scholars soon set out to dig on ancient sites,
-from Egypt to Central America.</p>
-
-<h3>ARCHEOLOGICAL INFORMATION</h3>
-
-<p>As time went on, the study of archeological materials&mdash;found
-either by accident or by digging on purpose&mdash;began to show
-certain things. Archeologists began to get ideas as to the
-kinds of objects that belonged together. If you compared a
-mail-order catalogue of 1890 with one of today, you would see
-a lot of differences. If you really studied the two catalogues
-hard, you would also begin to see that certain objects “go
-together.” Horseshoes and metal buggy tires and pieces of
-harness would begin to fit into a picture with certain kinds
-of coal stoves and furniture and china dishes and kerosene
-lamps. Our friend the spark plug, and radios and electric
-refrigerators and light bulbs would fit into a picture with
-different kinds of furniture and dishes and tools. You won’t
-be old enough to remember the kind of hats that women wore
-in 1890, but you’ve probably seen pictures of them, and you
-know very well they couldn’t be worn with the fashions of
-today.</p>
-
-<p>This is one of the ways that archeologists study their
-materials. The various tools and weapons and jewelry, the
-pottery, the kinds of houses, and even the ways of burying the
-dead tend to fit into pictures. Some archeologists call all
-of the things that go together to make such a picture an
-<em>assemblage</em>. The assemblage of the first layer of Schliemann’s
-Troy was as different from that of the seventh layer as our
-1900 mail-order catalogue is from the one of today.</p>
-
-<p>The archeologists who came after Schliemann began to
-notice other things and to compare them with occurrences in
-modern times. The idea that people will buy better mousetraps
-goes back into very ancient times. Today, if we make
-good automobiles or radios, we can sell some of them in<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_14">14</a></span>
-Turkey or even in Timbuktu. This means that a few present-day
-types of American automobiles and radios form part of
-present-day “assemblages” in both Turkey and Timbuktu.
-The total present-day “assemblage” of Turkey is quite
-different from that of Timbuktu or that of America, but they
-have at least some automobiles and some radios in common.</p>
-
-<p>Now these automobiles and radios will eventually wear out.
-Let us suppose we could go to some remote part of Turkey or
-to Timbuktu in a dream. We don’t know what the date is, in
-our dream, but we see all sorts of strange things and ways of
-living in both places. Nobody tells us what the date is. But
-suddenly we see a 1936 Ford; so we know that in our dream
-it has to be at least the year 1936, and only as many years
-after that as we could reasonably expect a Ford to keep in
-running order. The Ford would probably break down in
-twenty years’ time, so the Turkish or Timbuktu “assemblage”
-we’re seeing in our dream has to date at about <span class="smcap smaller">A.D.</span> 1936–56.</p>
-
-<p>Archeologists not only “date” their ancient materials in
-this way; they also see over what distances and between which
-peoples trading was done. It turns out that there was a good
-deal of trading in ancient times, probably all on a barter and
-exchange basis.</p>
-
-<h3>EVERYTHING BEGINS TO FIT TOGETHER</h3>
-
-<p>Now we need to pull these ideas all together and see the
-complicated structure the archeologists can build with their
-materials.</p>
-
-<p>Even the earliest archeologists soon found that there
-was a very long range of prehistoric time which would yield
-only very simple things. For this very long early part of
-prehistory, there was little to be found but the flint tools which
-wandering, hunting and gathering people made, and the bones
-of the wild animals they ate. Toward the end of prehistoric
-time there was a general settling down with the coming of
-agriculture, and all sorts of new things began to be made.
-Archeologists soon got a general notion of what ought to
-appear with what. Thus, it would upset a French prehistorian
-digging at the bottom of a very early cave if he found<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_15">15</a></span>
-a fine bronze sword, just as much as it would upset him if he
-found a beer bottle. The people of his very early cave layer
-simply could not have made bronze swords, which came later,
-just as do beer bottles. Some accidental disturbance of the
-layers of his cave must have happened.</p>
-
-<p>With any luck, archeologists do their digging in a layered,
-stratified site. They find the remains of everything that would
-last through time, in several different layers. They know that
-the assemblage in the bottom layer was laid down earlier than
-the assemblage in the next layer above, and so on up to the
-topmost layer, which is the latest. They look at the results
-of other “digs” and find that some other archeologist 900
-miles away has found ax-heads in his lowest layer, exactly like
-the ax-heads of their fifth layer. This means that their fifth
-layer must have been lived in at about the same time as was the
-first layer in the site 200 miles away. It also may mean that
-the people who lived in the two layers knew and traded with
-each other. Or it could mean that they didn’t necessarily
-know each other, but simply that both traded with a third
-group at about the same time.</p>
-
-<p>You can see that the more we dig and find, the more clearly
-the main facts begin to stand out. We begin to be more sure of
-which people lived at the same time, which earlier and which
-later. We begin to know who traded with whom, and which
-peoples seemed to live off by themselves. We begin to find
-enough skeletons in burials so that the physical anthropologists
-can tell us what the people looked like. We get animal bones,
-and a paleontologist may tell us they are all bones of wild
-animals; or he may tell us that some or most of the bones are
-those of domesticated animals, for instance, sheep or cattle,
-and therefore the people must have kept herds.</p>
-
-<p>More important than anything else&mdash;as our structure grows
-more complicated and our materials increase&mdash;is the fact that
-“a sort of history of human activity” does begin to appear.
-The habits or traditions that men formed in the making of
-their tools and in the ways they did things, begin to stand out
-for us. How characteristic were these habits and traditions?
-What areas did they spread over? How long did they last?
-We watch the different tools and the traces of the way things<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_16">16</a></span>
-were done&mdash;how the burials were arranged, what the living-places
-were like, and so on. We wonder about the people
-themselves, for the traces of habits and traditions are useful
-to us only as clues to the men who once had them. So we ask
-the physical anthropologists about the skeletons that we found
-in the burials. The physical anthropologists tell us about the
-anatomy and the similarities and differences which the
-skeletons show when compared with other skeletons. The
-physical anthropologists are even working on a method&mdash;chemical
-tests of the bones&mdash;that will enable them to discover
-what the blood-type may have been. One thing is sure.
-We have never found a group of skeletons so absolutely
-similar among themselves&mdash;so cast from a single mould, so to
-speak&mdash;that we could claim to have a “pure” race. I am
-sure we never shall.</p>
-
-<p>We become particularly interested in any signs of change&mdash;when
-new materials and tool types and ways of doing things
-replace old ones. We watch for signs of social change and
-progress in one way or another.</p>
-
-<p>We must do all this without one word of written history
-to aid us. Everything we are concerned with goes back to the
-time <em>before</em> men learned to write. That is the prehistorian’s
-job&mdash;to find out what happened before history began.</p>
-
-<hr />
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_17">17</a></span></p>
-
-<div class="chapter">
-<h2 id="hdr_2"><span class="smcap smaller">THE CHANGING WORLD</span> in which Prehistoric Men Lived</h2>
-
-<div id="if_i_005" class="figcenter" style="width: 375px;">
-  <img src="images/i_005.jpg" width="375" height="209" alt="" /></div>
-</div>
-
-<p>Mankind, we’ll say, is at least a half million years old. It
-is very hard to understand how long a time half a million years
-really is. If we were to compare this whole length of time to
-one day, we’d get something like this: The present time is midnight,
-and Jesus was born just five minutes and thirty-six
-seconds ago. Earliest history began less than fifteen minutes
-ago. Everything before 11:45 was in prehistoric time.</p>
-
-<p>Or maybe we can grasp the length of time better in terms
-of generations. As you know, primitive peoples tend to marry
-and have children rather early in life. So suppose we say that
-twenty years will make an average generation. At this rate
-there would be 25,000 generations in a half-million years.
-But our United States is much less than ten generations old,
-twenty-five generations take us back before the time of
-Columbus, Julius Caesar was alive just 100 generations ago,
-David was king of Israel less than 150 generations ago, 250
-generations take us back to the beginning of written history.
-And there were 24,750 generations of men before written
-history began!</p>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_18">18</a></span>
-I should probably tell you that there is a new method of
-prehistoric dating which would cut the earliest dates in my
-reckoning almost in half. Dr. Cesare Emiliani, combining
-radioactive (C14) and chemical (oxygen isotope) methods
-in the study of deep-sea borings, has developed a system
-which would lower the total range of human prehistory to
-about 300,000 years. The system is still too new to have had
-general examination and testing. Hence, I have not used it
-in this book; it would mainly affect the dates earlier than
-25,000 years ago.</p>
-
-<h3>CHANGES IN ENVIRONMENT</h3>
-
-<p>The earth probably hasn’t changed much in the last 5,000
-years (250 generations). Men have built things on its surface
-and dug into it and drawn boundaries on maps of it, but the
-places where rivers, lakes, seas, and mountains now stand
-have changed very little.</p>
-
-<p>In earlier times the earth looked very different. Geologists
-call the last great geological period the <em>Pleistocene</em>. It began
-somewhere between a half million and a million years ago, and
-was a time of great changes. Sometimes we call it the Ice Age,
-for in the Pleistocene there were at least three or four times
-when large areas of earth were covered with glaciers. The
-reason for my uncertainty is that while there seem to have been
-four major mountain or alpine phases of glaciation, there may
-only have been three general continental phases in the
-Old World.<a id="FNanchor_2" href="#Footnote_2" class="fnanchor">2</a></p>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_2" href="#FNanchor_2" class="fnanchor">2</a> This is a complicated affair and I do not want to bother you with
-its details. Both the alpine and the continental ice sheets seem to have
-had minor fluctuations during their <em>main</em> phases, and the advances of the
-later phases destroyed many of the traces of the earlier phases. The
-general textbooks have tended to follow the names and numbers established
-for the Alps early in this century by two German geologists.
-I will not bother you with the names, but there were <em>four</em> major phases.
-It is the second of these alpine phases which seems to fit the traces of the
-earliest of the great continental glaciations. In this book, I will use
-the four-part system, since it is the most familiar, but will add the word
-<em>alpine</em> so you may remember to make the transition to the continental
-system if you wish to do so.</p></div>
-
-<p>Glaciers are great sheets of ice, sometimes over a thousand
-feet thick, which are now known only in Greenland and
-Antarctica and in high mountains. During several of the<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_19">19</a></span>
-glacial periods in the Ice Age, the glaciers covered most of
-Canada and the northern United States and reached down
-to southern England and France in Europe. Smaller ice
-sheets sat like caps on the Rockies, the Alps, and the Himalayas.
-The continental glaciation only happened north of the
-equator, however, so remember that “Ice Age” is only
-half true.</p>
-
-<p>As you know, the amount of water on and about the earth
-does not vary. These large glaciers contained millions of
-tons of water frozen into ice. Because so much water was
-frozen and contained in the glaciers, the water level of lakes
-and oceans was lowered. Flooded areas were drained and
-appeared as dry land. There were times in the Ice Age when
-there was no English Channel, so that England was not an
-island, and a land bridge at the Dardanelles probably divided
-the Mediterranean from the Black Sea.</p>
-
-<p>A very important thing for people living during the time
-of a glaciation was the region adjacent to the glacier. They
-could not, of course, live on the ice itself. The questions
-would be how close could they live to it, and how would they
-have had to change their way of life to do so.</p>
-
-<h3>GLACIERS CHANGE THE WEATHER</h3>
-
-<p>Great sheets of ice change the weather. When the front of a
-glacier stood at Milwaukee, the weather must have been
-bitterly cold in Chicago. The climate of the whole world
-would have been different, and you can see how animals and
-men would have been forced to move from one place to
-another in search of food and warmth.</p>
-
-<p>On the other hand, it looks as if only a minor proportion
-of the whole Ice Age was really taken up by times of glaciation.
-In between came the <em>interglacial</em> periods. During these times
-the climate around Chicago was as warm as it is now, and
-sometimes even warmer. It may interest you to know that the
-last great glacier melted away less than 10,000 years ago.
-Professor Ernst Antevs thinks we may be living in an interglacial
-period and that the Ice Age may not be over yet. So
-if you want to make a killing in real estate for your several<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_20">20</a></span>
-hundred times great-grandchildren, you might buy some land
-in the Arizona desert or the Sahara.</p>
-
-<p>We do not yet know just why the glaciers appeared and
-disappeared, as they did. It surely had something to do with
-an increase in rainfall and a fall in temperature. It probably
-also had to do with a general tendency for the land to rise at
-the beginning of the Pleistocene. We know there was some
-mountain-building at that time. Hence, rain-bearing winds
-nourished the rising and cooler uplands with snow. An increase
-in all three of these factors&mdash;if they came together&mdash;would
-only have needed to be slight. But exactly why this
-happened we do not know.</p>
-
-<p>The reason I tell you about the glaciers is simply to remind
-you of the changing world in which prehistoric men lived.
-Their surroundings&mdash;the animals and plants they used for
-food, and the weather they had to protect themselves from&mdash;were
-always changing. On the other hand, this change
-happened over so long a period of time and was so slow that
-individual people could not have noticed it. Glaciers, about
-which they probably knew nothing, moved in hundreds of
-miles to the north of them. The people must simply have
-wandered ever more southward in search of the plants and
-animals on which they lived. Or some men may have stayed
-where they were and learned to hunt different animals and
-eat different foods. Prehistoric men had to keep adapting
-themselves to new environments and those who were most
-adaptive were most successful.</p>
-
-<h3>OTHER CHANGES</h3>
-
-<p>Changes took place in the men themselves as well as in the
-ways they lived. As time went on, they made better tools and
-weapons. Then, too, we begin to find signs of how they
-started thinking of other things than food and the tools to get
-it with. We find that they painted on the walls of caves, and
-decorated their tools; we find that they buried their dead.</p>
-
-<p>At about the time when the last great glacier was finally
-melting away, men in the Near East made the first basic
-change in human economy. They began to plant grain, and<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_21">21</a></span>
-they learned to raise and herd certain animals. This meant
-that they could store food in granaries and “on the hoof”
-against the bad times of the year. This first really basic change
-in man’s way of living has been called the “food-producing
-revolution.” By the time it happened, a modern kind of
-climate was beginning. Men had already grown to look as
-they do now. Know-how in ways of living had developed and
-progressed, slowly but surely, up to a point. It was impossible
-for men to go beyond that point if they only hunted and fished
-and gathered wild foods. Once the basic change was made&mdash;once
-the food-producing revolution became effective&mdash;technology
-leaped ahead and civilization and written history
-soon began.</p>
-
-<hr />
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_22">22</a></span></p>
-
-<div class="chapter">
-<h2 id="hdr_3">Prehistoric Men <span class="smcap smaller">THEMSELVES</span></h2>
-
-<div id="if_i_006" class="figcenter" style="width: 385px;">
-  <img src="images/i_006.jpg" width="385" height="219" alt="" /></div>
-</div>
-
-<h3>DO WE KNOW WHERE MAN ORIGINATED?</h3>
-
-<p>For a long time some scientists thought the “cradle of mankind”
-was in central Asia. Other scientists insisted it was in
-Africa, and still others said it might have been in Europe.
-Actually, we don’t know where it was. We don’t even know
-that there was only <em>one</em> “cradle.” If we had to choose a
-“cradle” at this moment, we would probably say Africa. But
-the southern portions of Asia and Europe may also have been
-included in the general area. The scene of the early development
-of mankind was certainly the Old World. It is pretty
-certain men didn’t reach North or South America until
-almost the end of the Ice Age&mdash;had they done so earlier we
-would certainly have found some trace of them by now.</p>
-
-<p>The earliest tools we have yet found come from central and
-south Africa. By the dating system I’m using, these tools must
-be over 500,000 years old. There are now reports that a few
-such early tools have been found&mdash;at the Sterkfontein cave in
-South Africa&mdash;along with the bones of small fossil men called
-“australopithecines.”</p>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_23">23</a></span>
-Not all scientists would agree that the australopithecines
-were “men,” or would agree that the tools were made by the
-australopithecines themselves. For these sticklers, the earliest
-bones of men come from the island of Java. The date would
-be about 450,000 years ago. So far, we have not yet found
-the tools which we suppose these earliest men in the Far East
-must have made.</p>
-
-<p>Let me say it another way. How old are the earliest traces
-of men we now have? Over half a million years. This was
-a time when the first alpine glaciation was happening in
-the north. What has been found so far? The tools which the
-men of those times made, in different parts of Africa. It is
-now fairly generally agreed that the “men” who made the
-tools were the australopithecines. There is also a more “man-like”
-jawbone at Kanam in Kenya, but its find-spot has been
-questioned. The next earliest bones we have were found in
-Java, and they may be almost a hundred thousand years
-younger than the earliest African finds. We haven’t yet
-found the tools of these early Javanese. Our knowledge of
-tool-using in Africa spreads quickly as time goes on: soon
-after the appearance of tools in the south we shall have them
-from as far north as Algeria.</p>
-
-<p>Very soon after the earliest Javanese come the bones of
-slightly more developed people in Java, and the jawbone of
-a man who once lived in what is now Germany. The same
-general glacial beds which yielded the later Javanese bones
-and the German jawbone also include tools. These finds come
-from the time of the second alpine glaciation.</p>
-
-<p>So this is the situation. By the time of the end of the
-second alpine or first continental glaciation (say 400,000
-years ago) we have traces of men from the extremes of the
-more southerly portions of the Old World&mdash;South Africa,
-eastern Asia, and western Europe. There are also some traces
-of men in the middle ground. In fact, Professor Franz
-Weidenreich believed that creatures who were the immediate
-ancestors of men had already spread over Europe, Africa, and
-Asia by the time the Ice Age began. We certainly have no
-reason to disbelieve this, but fortunate accidents of discovery
-have not yet given us the evidence to prove it.</p>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_24">24</a></span></p>
-
-<h3>MEN AND APES</h3>
-
-<p>Many people used to get extremely upset at the ill-formed
-notion that “man descended from the apes.” Such words
-were much more likely to start fights or “monkey trials”
-than the correct notion that all living animals, including man,
-ascended or evolved from a single-celled organism which
-lived in the primeval seas hundreds of millions of years ago.
-Men are mammals, of the order called Primates, and man’s
-living relatives are the great apes. Men didn’t “descend”
-from the apes or apes from men, and mankind must have had
-much closer relatives who have since become extinct.</p>
-
-<p>Men stand erect. They also walk and run on their two
-feet. Apes are happiest in trees, swinging with their arms
-from branch to branch. Few branches of trees will hold the
-mighty gorilla, although he still manages to sleep in trees.
-Apes can’t stand really erect in our sense, and when they have
-to run on the ground, they use the knuckles of their hands
-as well as their feet.</p>
-
-<p>A key group of fossil bones here are the south African
-australopithecines. These are called the <i class="species">Australopithecinae</i> or
-“man-apes” or sometimes even “ape-men.” We do not <em>know</em>
-that they were directly ancestral to men but they can hardly
-have been so to apes. Presently I’ll describe them a bit more.
-The reason I mention them here is that while they had brains
-no larger than those of apes, their hipbones were enough like
-ours so that they must have stood erect. There is no good
-reason to think they couldn’t have walked as we do.</p>
-
-<h3>BRAINS, HANDS, AND TOOLS</h3>
-
-<p>Whether the australopithecines were our ancestors or not, the
-proper ancestors of men must have been able to stand erect and
-to walk on their two feet. Three further important things
-probably were involved, next, before they could become men
-proper. These are:</p>
-
-<p class="hang">1. The increasing size and development of the brain.</p>
-<p class="hang">2. The increasing usefulness (specialization) of the thumb and hand.</p>
-<p class="hang">3. The use of tools.</p>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_25">25</a></span>
-Nobody knows which of these three is most important, or
-which came first. Most probably the growth of all three things
-was very much blended together. If you think about each of
-the things, you will see what I mean. Unless your hand is
-more flexible than a paw, and your thumb will work against
-(or oppose) your fingers, you can’t hold a tool very well. But
-you wouldn’t get the idea of using a tool unless you had enough
-brain to help you see cause and effect. And it is rather hard
-to see how your hand and brain would develop unless they
-had something to practice on&mdash;like using tools. In Professor
-Krogman’s words, “the hand must become the obedient
-servant of the eye and the brain.” It is the <em>co-ordination</em> of
-these things that counts.</p>
-
-<p>Many other things must have been happening to the bodies
-of the creatures who were the ancestors of men. Our ancestors
-had to develop organs of speech. More than that, they had
-to get the idea of letting <em>certain sounds</em> made with these speech
-organs have <em>certain meanings</em>.</p>
-
-<p>All this must have gone very slowly. Probably everything
-was developing little by little, all together. Men became men
-very slowly.</p>
-
-<h3>WHEN SHALL WE CALL MEN MEN?</h3>
-
-<p>What do I mean when I say “men”? People who looked
-pretty much as we do, and who used different tools to do
-different things, are men to me. We’ll probably never know
-whether the earliest ones talked or not. They probably had
-vocal cords, so they could make sounds, but did they know
-how to make sounds work as symbols to carry meanings?
-But if the fossil bones look like our skeletons, and if we find
-tools which we’ll agree couldn’t have been made by nature
-or by animals, then I’d say we had traces of <em>men</em>.</p>
-
-<p>The australopithecine finds of the Transvaal and Bechuanaland,
-in south Africa, are bound to come into the discussion
-here. I’ve already told you that the australopithecines could
-have stood upright and walked on their two hind legs. They
-come from the very base of the Pleistocene or Ice Age, and
-a few coarse stone tools have been found with the australopithecine<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_26">26</a></span>
-fossils. But there are three varieties of the australopithecines
-and they last on until a time equal to that of the
-second alpine glaciation. They are the best suggestion we
-have yet as to what the ancestors of men <em>may</em> have looked like.
-They were certainly closer to men than to apes. Although
-their brain size was no larger than the brains of modern apes
-their body size and stature were quite small; hence, relative
-to their small size, their brains were large. We have not
-been able to prove without doubt that the australopithecines
-were <em>tool-making</em> creatures, even though the recent news has
-it that tools have been found with australopithecine bones.
-The doubt as to whether the australopithecines used the tools
-themselves goes like this&mdash;just suppose some man-like creature
-(whose bones we have not yet found) made the tools and used
-them to kill and butcher australopithecines. Hence a few
-experts tend to let australopithecines still hang in limbo as
-“man-apes.”</p>
-
-<h3>THE EARLIEST MEN WE KNOW</h3>
-
-<p>I’ll postpone talking about the tools of early men until the next
-chapter. The men whose bones were the earliest of the Java
-lot have been given the name <i class="species">Meganthropus</i>. The bones are
-very fragmentary. We would not understand them very well
-unless we had the somewhat later Javanese lot&mdash;the more
-commonly known <i class="species">Pithecanthropus</i> or “Java man”&mdash;against
-which to refer them for study. One of the less well-known
-and earliest fragments, a piece of lower jaw and some teeth,
-rather strongly resembles the lower jaws and teeth of the
-australopithecine type. Was <i class="species">Meganthropus</i> a sort of half-way
-point between the australopithecines and <i class="species">Pithecanthropus</i>? It is
-still too early to say. We shall need more finds before we can
-be definite one way or the other.</p>
-
-<p>Java man, <i class="species">Pithecanthropus</i>, comes from geological beds
-equal in age to the latter part of the second alpine glaciation;
-the <i class="species">Meganthropus</i> finds refer to beds of the beginning of this
-glaciation. The first finds of Java man were made in 1891–92
-by Dr. Eugene Dubois, a Dutch doctor in the colonial service.
-Finds have continued to be made. There are now bones
-enough to account for four skulls. There are also four jaws<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_27">27</a></span>
-and some odd teeth and thigh bones. Java man, generally
-speaking, was about five feet six inches tall, and didn’t hold
-his head very erect. His skull was very thick and heavy and
-had room for little more than two-thirds as large a brain as
-we have. He had big teeth and a big jaw and enormous
-eyebrow ridges.</p>
-
-<p>No tools were found in the geological deposits where bones
-of Java man appeared. There are some tools in the same
-general area, but they come a bit later in time. One reason
-we accept the Java man as man&mdash;aside from his general
-anatomical appearance&mdash;is that these tools probably belonged
-to his near descendants.</p>
-
-<p>Remember that there are several varieties of men in the
-whole early Java lot, at least two of which are earlier than
-the <i class="species">Pithecanthropus</i>, “Java man.” Some of the earlier ones
-seem to have gone in for bigness, in tooth-size at least. <i class="species">Meganthropus</i>
-is one of these earlier varieties. As we said, he <em>may</em>
-turn out to be a link to the australopithecines, who <em>may</em> or
-<em>may not</em> be ancestral to men. <i class="species">Meganthropus</i> is best understandable
-in terms of <i class="species">Pithecanthropus</i>, who appeared later in the
-same general area. <i class="species">Pithecanthropus</i> is pretty well understandable
-from the bones he left us, and also because of his strong
-resemblance to the fully tool-using cave-dwelling “Peking
-man,” <i class="species">Sinanthropus</i>, about whom we shall talk next. But you
-can see that the physical anthropologists and prehistoric
-archeologists still have a lot of work to do on the problem
-of earliest men.</p>
-
-<h3>PEKING MEN AND SOME EARLY WESTERNERS</h3>
-
-<p>The earliest known Chinese are called <i class="species">Sinanthropus</i>, or “Peking
-man,” because the finds were made near that city. In World
-War II, the United States Marine guard at our Embassy in
-Peking tried to help get the bones out of the city before the
-Japanese attack. Nobody knows where these bones are now.
-The Red Chinese accuse us of having stolen them. They were
-last seen on a dock-side at a Chinese port. But should you
-catch a Marine with a sack of old bones, perhaps we could
-achieve peace in Asia by returning them! Fortunately, there
-is a complete set of casts of the bones.</p>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_28">28</a></span>
-Peking man lived in a cave in a limestone hill, made tools,
-cracked animal bones to get the marrow out, and used fire.
-Incidentally, the bones of Peking man were found because
-Chinese dig for what they call “dragon bones” and “dragon
-teeth.” Uneducated Chinese buy these things in their drug
-stores and grind them into powder for medicine. The “dragon
-teeth” and “bones” are really fossils of ancient animals, and
-sometimes of men. The people who supply the drug stores
-have learned where to dig for strange bones and teeth.
-Paleontologists who get to China go to the drug stores to buy
-fossils. In a roundabout way, this is how the fallen-in cave of
-Peking man at Choukoutien was discovered.</p>
-
-<p>Peking man was not quite as tall as Java man but he
-probably stood straighter. His skull looked very much like
-that of the Java skull except that it had room for a slightly
-larger brain. His face was less brutish than was Java man’s
-face, but this isn’t saying much.</p>
-
-<p>Peking man dates from early in the interglacial period
-following the second alpine glaciation. He probably lived
-close to 350,000 years ago. There are several finds to account
-for in Europe by about this time, and one from northwest
-Africa. The very large jawbone found near Heidelberg in
-Germany is doubtless even earlier than Peking man. The
-beds where it was found are of second alpine glacial times, and
-recently some tools have been said to have come from the
-same beds. There is not much I need tell you about the
-Heidelberg jaw save that it seems certainly to have belonged
-to an early man, and that it is very big.</p>
-
-<p>Another find in Germany was made at Steinheim. It
-consists of the fragmentary skull of a man. It is very important
-because of its relative completeness, but it has not yet
-been fully studied. The bone is thick, but the back of the head
-is neither very low nor primitive, and the face is also not
-primitive. The forehead does, however, have big ridges over
-the eyes. The more fragmentary skull from Swanscombe in
-England (p. 11) has been much more carefully studied. Only
-the top and back of that skull have been found. Since the skull
-rounds up nicely, it has been assumed that the face and
-forehead must have been quite “modern.” Careful comparison<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_29">29</a></span>
-with Steinheim shows that this was not necessarily
-so. This is important because it bears on the question of how
-early truly “modern” man appeared.</p>
-
-<p>Recently two fragmentary jaws were found at Ternafine in
-Algeria, northwest Africa. They look like the jaws of Peking
-man. Tools were found with them. Since no jaws have yet
-been found at Steinheim or Swanscombe, but the time is the
-same, one wonders if these people had jaws like those of
-Ternafine.</p>
-
-<h3>WHAT HAPPENED TO JAVA AND PEKING MEN</h3>
-
-<p>Professor Weidenreich thought that there were at least a dozen
-ways in which the Peking man resembled the modern Mongoloids.
-This would seem to indicate that Peking man was
-really just a very early Chinese.</p>
-
-<p>Several later fossil men have been found in the Java-Australian
-area. The best known of these is the so-called Solo
-man. There are some finds from Australia itself which we
-now know to be quite late. But it looks as if we may assume
-a line of evolution from Java man down to the modern
-Australian natives. During parts of the Ice Age there was
-a land bridge all the way from Java to Australia.</p>
-
-<h3>TWO ENGLISHMEN WHO WEREN’T OLD</h3>
-
-<p>The older textbooks contain descriptions of two English finds
-which were thought to be very old. These were called Piltdown
-(<i class="species">Eoanthropus dawsoni</i>) and Galley Hill. The skulls were
-very modern in appearance. In 1948–49, British scientists
-began making chemical tests which proved that neither of
-these finds is very old. It is now known that both “Piltdown
-man” and the tools which were said to have been found with
-him were part of an elaborate fake!</p>
-
-<h3>TYPICAL “CAVE MEN”</h3>
-
-<p>The next men we have to talk about are all members of
-a related group. These are the Neanderthal group. “Neanderthal
-man” himself was found in the Neander Valley, near
-Düsseldorf, Germany, in 1856. He was the first human fossil
-to be recognized as such.</p>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_30">30</a></span></p>
-
-<div id="if_i_007" class="figcenter" style="width: 513px;">
-  <img src="images/i_007.jpg" width="513" height="509" alt="" />
-  <div class="caption"><p>PRINCIPAL KNOWN TYPES OF FOSSIL MEN</p>
-
-<p class="sans">
-CRO-MAGNON<br />
-NEANDERTHAL<br />
-<span class="orange">MODERN SKULL</span><br />
-COMBE-CAPELLE<br />
-SINANTHROPUS<br />
-PITHECANTHROPUS<br />
-</p></div></div>
-
-<p>Some of us think that the neanderthaloids proper are only
-those people of western Europe who didn’t get out before the
-beginning of the last great glaciation, and who found themselves
-hemmed in by the glaciers in the Alps and northern
-Europe. Being hemmed in, they intermarried a bit too much
-and developed into a special type. Professor F. Clark Howell
-sees it this way. In Europe, the earliest trace of men we now
-know is the Heidelberg jaw. Evolution continued in Europe,
-from Heidelberg through the Swanscombe and Steinheim
-types to a group of pre-neanderthaloids. There are traces of
-these pre-neanderthaloids pretty much throughout Europe
-during the third interglacial period&mdash;say 100,000 years ago.<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_31">31</a></span>
-The pre-neanderthaloids are represented by such finds as the
-ones at Ehringsdorf in Germany and Saccopastore in Italy.
-I won’t describe them for you, since they are simply less
-extreme than the neanderthaloids proper&mdash;about half way
-between Steinheim and the classic Neanderthal people.</p>
-
-<p>Professor Howell believes that the pre-neanderthaloids who
-happened to get caught in the pocket of the southwest corner
-of Europe at the onset of the last great glaciation became the
-classic Neanderthalers. Out in the Near East, Howell thinks,
-it is possible to see traces of people evolving from the pre-neanderthaloid
-type toward that of fully modern man.
-Certainly, we don’t see such extreme cases of “neanderthaloidism”
-outside of western Europe.</p>
-
-<p>There are at least a dozen good examples in the main or
-classic Neanderthal group in Europe. They date to just
-before and in the earlier part of the last great glaciation
-(85,000 to 40,000 years ago). Many of the finds have been
-made in caves. The “cave men” the movies and the cartoonists
-show you are probably meant to be Neanderthalers. I’m
-not at all sure they dragged their women by the hair; the
-women were probably pretty tough, too!</p>
-
-<p>Neanderthal men had large bony heads, but plenty of room
-for brains. Some had brain cases even larger than the average
-for modern man. Their faces were heavy, and they had eyebrow
-ridges of bone, but the ridges were not as big as those of
-Java man. Their foreheads were very low, and they didn’t
-have much chin. They were about five feet three inches tall,
-but were heavy and barrel-chested. But the Neanderthalers
-didn’t slouch as much as they’ve been blamed for, either.</p>
-
-<p>One important thing about the Neanderthal group is that
-there is a fair number of them to study. Just as important
-is the fact that we know something about how they lived, and
-about some of the tools they made.</p>
-
-<h3>OTHER MEN CONTEMPORARY WITH THE NEANDERTHALOIDS</h3>
-
-<p>We have seen that the neanderthaloids seem to be a specialization
-in a corner of Europe. What was going on elsewhere?<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_32">32</a></span>
-We think that the pre-neanderthaloid type was a generally
-widespread form of men. From this type evolved other more
-or less extreme although generally related men. The Solo
-finds in Java form one such case. Another was the Rhodesian
-man of Africa, and the more recent Hopefield finds show more
-of the general Rhodesian type. It is more confusing than it
-needs to be if these cases outside western Europe are called
-neanderthaloids. They lived during the same approximate
-time range but they were all somewhat different-looking
-people.</p>
-
-<h3>EARLY MODERN MEN</h3>
-
-<p>How early is modern man (<i class="species">Homo sapiens</i>), the “wise man”?
-Some people have thought that he was very early, a few still
-think so. Piltdown and Galley Hill, which were quite modern
-in anatomical appearance and <em>supposedly</em> very early in date,
-were the best “evidence” for very early modern men. Now
-that Piltdown has been liquidated and Galley Hill is known
-to be very late, what is left of the idea?</p>
-
-<p>The backs of the skulls of the Swanscombe and Steinheim
-finds look rather modern. Unless you pay attention to the
-face and forehead of the Steinheim find&mdash;which not many
-people have&mdash;and perhaps also consider the Ternafine jaws,
-you might come to the conclusion that the crown of the
-Swanscombe head was that of a modern-like man.</p>
-
-<p>Two more skulls, again without faces, are available from
-a French cave site, Fontéchevade. They come from the time
-of the last great interglacial, as did the pre-neanderthaloids.
-The crowns of the Fontéchevade skulls also look quite modern.
-There is a bit of the forehead preserved on one of these skulls
-and the brow-ridge is not heavy. Nevertheless, there is a
-suggestion that the bones belonged to an immature individual.
-In this case, his (or even more so, if <em>her</em>) brow-ridges would
-have been weak anyway. The case for the Fontéchevade
-fossils, as modern type men, is little stronger than that for
-Swanscombe, although Professor Vallois believes it a good case.</p>
-
-<p>It seems to add up to the fact that there were people
-living in Europe&mdash;before the classic neanderthaloids&mdash;who
-looked more modern, in some features, than the classic western<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_33">33</a></span>
-neanderthaloids did. Our best suggestion of what men
-looked like&mdash;just before they became fully modern&mdash;comes
-from a cave on Mount Carmel in Palestine.</p>
-
-<h3>THE FIRST MODERNS</h3>
-
-<p>Professor T.&nbsp;D. McCown and the late Sir Arthur Keith, who
-studied the Mount Carmel bones, figured out that one of the
-two groups involved was as much as 70 per cent modern.
-There were, in fact, two groups or varieties of men in the
-Mount Carmel caves and in at least two other Palestinian
-caves of about the same time. The time would be about that
-of the onset of colder weather, when the last glaciation was
-beginning in the north&mdash;say 75,000 years ago.</p>
-
-<p>The 70 per cent modern group came from only one cave,
-Mugharet es-Skhul (“cave of the kids”). The other group,
-from several caves, had bones of men of the type we’ve been
-calling pre-neanderthaloid which we noted were widespread
-in Europe and beyond. The tools which came with each of
-these finds were generally similar, and McCown and Keith,
-and other scholars since their study, have tended to assume
-that both the Skhul group and the pre-neanderthaloid group
-came from exactly the same time. The conclusion was quite
-natural: here was a population of men in the act of evolving
-in two different directions. But the time may not be exactly
-the same. It is very difficult to be precise, within say
-10,000 years, for a time some 75,000 years ago. If the
-Skhul men are in fact later than the pre-neanderthaloid group
-of Palestine, as some of us think, then they show how relatively
-modern some men were&mdash;men who lived at the same time as
-the classic Neanderthalers of the European pocket.</p>
-
-<p>Soon after the first extremely cold phase of the last glaciation,
-we begin to get a number of bones of completely
-modern men in Europe. We also get great numbers of the
-tools they made, and their living places in caves. Completely
-modern skeletons begin turning up in caves dating back to
-toward 40,000 years ago. The time is about that of the
-beginning of the second phase of the last glaciation. These
-skeletons belonged to people no different from many people
-we see today. Like people today, not everybody looked alike.<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_34">34</a></span>
-(The positions of the more important fossil men of later
-Europe are shown in the chart on <a href="#if_i_019">page 72</a>.)</p>
-
-<h3>DIFFERENCES IN THE EARLY MODERNS</h3>
-
-<p>The main early European moderns have been divided into
-two groups, the Cro-Magnon group and the Combe Capelle-Brünn
-group. Cro-Magnon people were tall and big-boned,
-with large, long, and rugged heads. They must have been
-built like many present-day Scandinavians. The Combe
-Capelle-Brünn people were shorter; they had narrow heads
-and faces, and big eyebrow-ridges. Of course we don’t find
-the skin or hair of these people. But there is little doubt they
-were Caucasoids (“Whites”).</p>
-
-<p>Another important find came in the Italian Riviera, near
-Monte Carlo. Here, in a cave near Grimaldi, there was
-a grave containing a woman and a young boy, buried together.
-The two skeletons were first called “Negroid” because some
-features of their bones were thought to resemble certain
-features of modern African Negro bones. But more recently,
-Professor E.&nbsp;A. Hooton and other experts questioned the use
-of the word “Negroid” in describing the Grimaldi skeletons.
-It is true that nothing is known of the skin color, hair form,
-or any other fleshy feature of the Grimaldi people, so that
-the word “Negroid” in its usual meaning is not proper here.
-It is also not clear whether the features of the bones claimed
-to be “Negroid” are really so at all.</p>
-
-<p>From a place called Wadjak, in Java, we have “proto-Australoid”
-skulls which closely resemble those of modern
-Australian natives. Some of the skulls found in South Africa,
-especially the Boskop skull, look like those of modern Bushmen,
-but are much bigger. The ancestors of the Bushmen seem to
-have once been very widespread south of the Sahara Desert.
-True African Negroes were forest people who apparently
-expanded out of the west central African area only in the last
-several thousand years. Although dark in skin color, neither
-the Australians nor the Bushmen are Negroes; neither the
-Wadjak nor the Boskop skulls are “Negroid.”</p>
-
-<p>As we’ve already mentioned, Professor Weidenreich
-believed that Peking man was already on the way to becoming<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_35">35</a></span>
-a Mongoloid. Anyway, the Mongoloids would seem to have
-been present by the time of the “Upper Cave” at Choukoutien,
-the <i class="species">Sinanthropus</i> find-spot.</p>
-
-<h3>WHAT THE DIFFERENCES MEAN</h3>
-
-<p>What does all this difference mean? It means that, at one
-moment in time, within each different area, men tended to
-look somewhat alike. From area to area, men tended to look
-somewhat different, just as they do today. This is all quite
-natural. People <em>tended</em> to mate near home; in the anthropological
-jargon, they made up geographically localized
-breeding populations. The simple continental division of
-“stocks”&mdash;black = Africa, yellow = Asia, white = Europe&mdash;is
-too simple a picture to fit the facts. People became accustomed
-to life in some particular area within a continent (we
-might call it a “natural area”). As they went on living there,
-they evolved towards some particular physical variety. It
-would, of course, have been difficult to draw a clear boundary
-between two adjacent areas. There must always have been
-some mating across the boundaries in every case. One thing
-human beings don’t do, and never have done, is to mate for
-“purity.” It is self-righteous nonsense when we try to kid
-ourselves into thinking that they do.</p>
-
-<p>I am not going to struggle with the whole business of
-modern stocks and races. This is a book about prehistoric
-men, not recent historic or modern men. My physical
-anthropologist friends have been very patient in helping me
-to write and rewrite this chapter&mdash;I am not going to break
-their patience completely. Races are their business, not mine,
-and they must do the writing about races. I shall, however,
-give two modern definitions of race, and then make one
-comment.</p>
-
-<blockquote>
-
-<p class="hang">Dr. William G. Boyd, professor of Immunochemistry,
-School of Medicine, Boston University: “We may
-define a human race as a population which differs
-significantly from other human populations in regard
-to the frequency of one or more of the genes it possesses.”</p>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_36">36</a></span></p>
-
-<p class="hang">Professor Sherwood L. Washburn, professor of Physical
-Anthropology, Department of Anthropology, the
-University of California: “A ‘race’ is a group of genetically
-similar populations, and races intergrade
-because there are always intermediate populations.”</p></blockquote>
-
-<p>My comment is that the ideas involved here are all biological:
-they concern groups, <em>not</em> individuals. Boyd and Washburn
-may differ a bit on what they want to consider a “population,”
-but a population is a group nevertheless, and genetics
-is biology to the hilt. Now a lot of people still think of race
-in terms of how people dress or fix their food or of other habits
-or customs they have. The next step is to talk about racial
-“purity.” None of this has anything whatever to do with race
-proper, which is a matter of the biology of groups.</p>
-
-<p>Incidentally, I’m told that if man very carefully <em>controls</em>
-the breeding of certain animals over generations&mdash;dogs, cattle,
-chickens&mdash;he might achieve a “pure” race of animals. But he
-doesn’t do it. Some unfortunate genetic trait soon turns up,
-so this has just as carefully to be bred out again, and so on.</p>
-
-<h3>SUMMARY OF PRESENT KNOWLEDGE OF FOSSIL MEN</h3>
-
-<p>The earliest bones of men we now have&mdash;upon which all the
-experts would probably agree&mdash;are those of <i class="species">Meganthropus</i>,
-from Java, of about 450,000 years ago. The earlier australopithecines
-of Africa were possibly not tool-users and may not
-have been ancestral to men at all. But there is an alternate
-and evidently increasingly stronger chance that some of them
-may have been. The Kanam jaw from Kenya, another early
-possibility, is not only very incomplete but its find-spot is very
-questionable.</p>
-
-<p>Java man proper, <i class="species">Pithecanthropus</i>, comes next, at about
-400,000 years ago, and the big Heidelberg jaw in Germany
-must be of about the same date. Next comes Swanscombe in
-England, Steinheim in Germany, the Ternafine jaws in
-Algeria, and Peking man, <i class="species">Sinanthropus</i>. They all date to the
-second great interglacial period, about 350,000 years ago.</p>
-
-<p>Piltdown and Galley Hill are out, and with them, much of
-the starch in the old idea that there were two distinct lines<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_37">37</a></span>
-of development in human evolution: (1) a line of “paleoanthropic”
-development from Heidelberg to the Neanderthalers
-where it became extinct, and (2) a very early “modern” line,
-through Piltdown, Galley Hill, Swanscombe, to us. Swanscombe,
-Steinheim, and Ternafine are just as easily cases of
-very early pre-neanderthaloids.</p>
-
-<p>The pre-neanderthaloids were very widespread during the
-third interglacial: Ehringsdorf, Saccopastore, some of the
-Mount Carmel people, and probably Fontéchevade are cases
-in point. A variety of their descendants can be seen, from
-Java (Solo), Africa (Rhodesian man), and about the Mediterranean
-and in western Europe. As the acute cold of the
-last glaciation set in, the western Europeans found themselves
-surrounded by water, ice, or bitter cold tundra. To vastly
-over-simplify it, they “bred in” and became classic neanderthaloids.
-But on Mount Carmel, the Skhul cave-find with its
-70 per cent modern features shows what could happen elsewhere
-at the same time.</p>
-
-<p>Lastly, from about 40,000 or 35,000 years ago&mdash;the time
-of the onset of the second phase of the last glaciation&mdash;we
-begin to find the fully modern skeletons of men. The modern
-skeletons differ from place to place, just as different groups
-of men living in different places still look different.</p>
-
-<p>What became of the Neanderthalers? Nobody can tell me
-for sure. I’ve a hunch they were simply “bred out” again
-when the cold weather was over. Many Americans, as the
-years go by, are no longer ashamed to claim they have “Indian
-blood in their veins.” Give us a few more generations and
-there will not be very many other Americans left to whom we
-can brag about it. It certainly isn’t inconceivable to me to
-imagine a little Cro-Magnon boy bragging to his friends about
-his tough, strong, Neanderthaler great-great-great-great-grandfather!</p>
-
-<hr />
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_38">38</a></span></p>
-
-<div class="chapter">
-<h2 id="hdr_4">Cultural <span class="smcap smaller">BEGINNINGS</span></h2>
-
-<div id="if_i_008" class="figcenter" style="width: 190px;">
-  <img src="images/i_008.jpg" width="190" height="195" alt="" /></div>
-</div>
-
-<p>Men, unlike the lower animals, are made up of much more
-than flesh and blood and bones; for men have “culture.”</p>
-
-<h3>WHAT IS CULTURE?</h3>
-
-<p>“Culture” is a word with many meanings. The doctors speak
-of making a “culture” of a certain kind of bacteria, and
-ants are said to have a “culture.” Then there is the Emily
-Post kind of “culture”&mdash;you say a person is “cultured,” or
-that he isn’t, depending on such things as whether or not he
-eats peas with his knife.</p>
-
-<p>The anthropologists use the word too, and argue heatedly
-over its finer meanings; but they all agree that every human
-being is part of or has some kind of culture. Each particular
-human group has a particular culture; that is one of the ways
-in which we can tell one group of men from another. In this
-sense, a <span class="smcap smaller">CULTURE</span> means the way the members of a group of
-people think and believe and live, the tools they make, and
-the way they do things. Professor Robert Redfield says a
-culture is an organized or formalized body of conventional
-understandings. “Conventional understandings” means the
-whole set of rules, beliefs, and standards which a group of
-people lives by. These understandings show themselves in
-art, and in the other things a people may make and do. The<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_39">39</a></span>
-understandings continue to last, through tradition, from one
-generation to another. They are what really characterize
-different human groups.</p>
-
-<h3>SOME CHARACTERISTICS OF CULTURE</h3>
-
-<p>A culture lasts, although individual men in the group die off.
-On the other hand, a culture changes as the different conventions
-and understandings change. You could almost say that
-a culture lives in the minds of the men who have it. But
-people are not born with it; they get it as they grow up.
-Suppose a day-old Hungarian baby is adopted by a family in
-Oshkosh, Wisconsin, and the child is not told that he is
-Hungarian. He will grow up with no more idea of Hungarian
-culture than anyone else in Oshkosh.</p>
-
-<p>So when I speak of ancient Egyptian culture, I mean
-the whole body of understandings and beliefs and knowledge
-possessed by the ancient Egyptians. I mean their beliefs
-as to why grain grew, as well as their ability to make tools
-with which to reap the grain. I mean their beliefs about life
-after death. What I am thinking about as culture is a thing
-which lasted in time. If any one Egyptian, even the Pharaoh,
-died, it didn’t affect the Egyptian culture of that particular
-moment.</p>
-
-<h3>PREHISTORIC CULTURES</h3>
-
-<p>For that long period of man’s history that is all prehistory,
-we have no written descriptions of cultures. We find only the
-tools men made, the places where they lived, the graves in
-which they buried their dead. Fortunately for us, these tools
-and living places and graves all tell us something about the
-ways these men lived and the things they believed. But the
-story we learn of the very early cultures must be only a very
-small part of the whole, for we find so few things. The rest
-of the story is gone forever. We have to do what we can with
-what we find.</p>
-
-<p>For all of the time up to about 75,000 years ago, which
-was the time of the classic European Neanderthal group of
-men, we have found few cave-dwelling places of very early
-prehistoric men. First, there is the fallen-in cave where<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_40">40</a></span>
-Peking man was found, near Peking. Then there are two or
-three other <em>early</em>, but not <em>very early</em>, possibilities. The finds at
-the base of the French cave of Fontéchevade, those in one of
-the Makapan caves in South Africa, and several open sites such
-as Dr. L.&nbsp;S.&nbsp;B. Leakey’s Olorgesailie in Kenya doubtless all lie
-earlier than the time of the main European Neanderthal
-group, but none are so early as the Peking finds.</p>
-
-<p>You can see that we know very little about the home life
-of earlier prehistoric men. We find different kinds of early
-stone tools, but we can’t even be really sure which tools may
-have been used together.</p>
-
-<h3>WHY LITTLE HAS LASTED FROM EARLY TIMES</h3>
-
-<p>Except for the rare find-spots mentioned above, all our very
-early finds come from geological deposits, or from the wind-blown
-surfaces of deserts. Here is what the business of geological
-deposits really means. Let us say that a group of
-people was living in England about 300,000 years ago. They
-made the tools they needed, lived in some sort of camp, almost
-certainly built fires, and perhaps buried their dead. While the
-climate was still warm, many generations may have lived in
-the same place, hunting, and gathering nuts and berries; but
-after some few thousand years, the weather began very
-gradually to grow colder. These early Englishmen would not
-have known that a glacier was forming over northern Europe.
-They would only have noticed that the animals they hunted
-seemed to be moving south, and that the berries grew larger
-toward the south. So they would have moved south, too.</p>
-
-<p>The camp site they left is the place we archeologists
-would really have liked to find. All of the different tools
-the people used would have been there together&mdash;many
-broken, some whole. The graves, and traces of fire, and the
-tools would have been there. But the glacier got there first!
-The front of this enormous sheet of ice moved down over the
-country, crushing and breaking and plowing up everything,
-like a gigantic bulldozer. You can see what happened to our
-camp site.</p>
-
-<p>Everything the glacier couldn’t break, it pushed along in
-front of it or plowed beneath it. Rocks were ground to gravel,<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_41">41</a></span>
-and soil was caught into the ice, which afterwards melted and
-ran off as muddy water. Hard tools of flint sometimes remained
-whole. Human bones weren’t so hard; it’s a wonder
-<em>any</em> of them lasted. Gushing streams of melt water flushed out
-the debris from underneath the glacier, and water flowed off
-the surface and through great crevasses. The hard materials
-these waters carried were even more rolled and ground up.
-Finally, such materials were dropped by the rushing waters
-as gravels, miles from the front of the glacier. At last the
-glacier reached its greatest extent; then it melted backward
-toward the north. Debris held in the ice was dropped where
-the ice melted, or was flushed off by more melt water. When
-the glacier, leaving the land, had withdrawn to the sea, great
-hunks of ice were broken off as icebergs. These icebergs
-probably dropped the materials held in their ice wherever they
-floated and melted. There must be many tools and fragmentary
-bones of prehistoric men on the bottom of the Atlantic
-Ocean and the North Sea.</p>
-
-<p>Remember, too, that these glaciers came and went at least
-three or four times during the Ice Age. Then you will realize
-why the earlier things we find are all mixed up. Stone tools
-from one camp site got mixed up with stone tools from many
-other camp sites&mdash;tools which may have been made tens of
-thousands or more years apart. The glaciers mixed them all
-up, and so we cannot say which particular sets of tools belonged
-together in the first place.</p>
-
-<h3>“EOLITHS”</h3>
-
-<p>But what sort of tools do we find earliest? For almost a
-century, people have been picking up odd bits of flint and
-other stone in the oldest Ice Age gravels in England and
-France. It is now thought these odd bits of stone weren’t
-actually worked by prehistoric men. The stones were given
-a name, <em>eoliths</em>, or “dawn stones.” You can see them in many
-museums; but you can be pretty sure that very few of them
-were actually fashioned by men.</p>
-
-<p>It is impossible to pick out “eoliths” that seem to be
-made in any one <em>tradition</em>. By “tradition” I mean a set of
-habits for making one kind of tool for some particular job. No<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_42">42</a></span>
-two “eoliths” look very much alike: tools made as part of some
-one tradition all look much alike. Now it’s easy to suppose
-that the very earliest prehistoric men picked up and used
-almost any sort of stone. This wouldn’t be surprising; you
-and I do it when we go camping. In other words, some of
-these “eoliths” may actually have been used by prehistoric
-men. They must have used anything that might be handy
-when they needed it. We could have figured that out without
-the “eoliths.”</p>
-
-<h3>THE ROAD TO STANDARDIZATION</h3>
-
-<p>Reasoning from what we know or can easily imagine, there
-should have been three major steps in the prehistory of tool-making.
-The first step would have been simple <em>utilization</em> of
-what was at hand. This is the step into which the “eoliths”
-would fall. The second step would have been <em>fashioning</em>&mdash;the
-haphazard preparation of a tool when there was a need for it.
-Probably many of the earlier pebble tools, which I shall
-describe next, fall into this group. The third step would have
-been <em>standardization</em>. Here, men began to make tools according
-to certain set traditions. Counting the better-made
-pebble tools, there are four such traditions or sets of habits
-for the production of stone tools in earliest prehistoric times.
-Toward the end of the Pleistocene, a fifth tradition appears.</p>
-
-<h3>PEBBLE TOOLS</h3>
-
-<p>At the beginning of the last chapter, you’ll remember that
-I said there were tools from very early geological beds.
-The earliest bones of men have not yet been found in such
-early beds although the Sterkfontein australopithecine cave
-approaches this early date. The earliest tools come from
-Africa. They date back to the time of the first great alpine
-glaciation and are at least 500,000 years old. The earliest
-ones are made of split pebbles, about the size of your fist or a
-bit bigger. They go under the name of pebble tools. There
-are many natural exposures of early Pleistocene geological
-beds in Africa, and the prehistoric archeologists of south and
-central Africa have concentrated on searching for early tools.<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_43">43</a></span>
-Other finds of early pebble tools have recently been made in
-Algeria and Morocco.</p>
-
-<div id="if_i_009" class="figcenter" style="width: 420px;">
-  <img src="images/i_009.jpg" width="420" height="322" alt="" />
-  <div class="caption">SOUTH AFRICAN PEBBLE TOOL</div></div>
-
-<p>There are probably early pebble tools to be found in areas
-of the Old World besides Africa; in fact, some prehistorians
-already claim to have identified a few. Since the forms and
-the distinct ways of making the earlier pebble tools had not yet
-sufficiently jelled into a set tradition, they are difficult for
-us to recognize. It is not so difficult, however, if there are
-great numbers of “possibles” available. A little later in
-time the tradition becomes more clearly set, and pebble tools
-are easier to recognize. So far, really large collections of
-pebble tools have only been found and examined in Africa.</p>
-
-<h3>CORE-BIFACE TOOLS</h3>
-
-<p>The next tradition we’ll look at is the <em>core</em> or biface one.
-The tools are large pear-shaped pieces of stone trimmed flat on
-the two opposite sides or “faces.” Hence “biface” has been
-used to describe these tools. The front view is like that of a
-pear with a rather pointed top, and the back view looks almost
-exactly the same. Look at them side on, and you can see that
-the front and back faces are the same and have been trimmed
-to a thin tip. The real purpose in trimming down the two<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_44">44</a></span>
-faces was to get a good cutting edge all around. You can see
-all this in the illustration.</p>
-
-<div id="if_i_010" class="figcenter" style="width: 494px;">
-  <img src="images/i_010.jpg" width="494" height="331" alt="" />
-  <div class="caption">ABBEVILLIAN BIFACE</div></div>
-
-<p>We have very little idea of the way in which these core-bifaces
-were used. They have been called “hand axes,” but
-this probably gives the wrong idea, for an ax, to us, is not
-a pointed tool. All of these early tools must have been used
-for a number of jobs&mdash;chopping, scraping, cutting, hitting,
-picking, and prying. Since the core-bifaces tend to be pointed,
-it seems likely that they were used for hitting, picking, and
-prying. But they have rough cutting edges, so they could
-have been used for chopping, scraping, and cutting.</p>
-
-<h3>FLAKE TOOLS</h3>
-
-<p>The third tradition is the <em>flake</em> tradition. The idea was to
-get a tool with a good cutting edge by simply knocking a nice
-large flake off a big block of stone. You had to break off
-the flake in such a way that it was broad and thin, and
-also had a good sharp cutting edge. Once you really got on
-to the trick of doing it, this was probably a simpler way
-to make a good cutting tool than preparing a biface. You<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_45">45</a></span>
-have to know how, though; I’ve tried it and have mashed my
-fingers more than once.</p>
-
-<p>The flake tools look as if they were meant mainly for
-chopping, scraping, and cutting jobs. When one made a flake
-tool, the idea seems to have been to produce a broad, sharp,
-cutting edge.</p>
-
-<div id="if_i_010a" class="figcenter" style="width: 405px;">
-  <img src="images/i_010a.jpg" width="405" height="240" alt="" />
-  <div class="caption">CLACTONIAN FLAKE</div></div>
-
-<p>The core-biface and the flake traditions were spread,
-from earliest times, over much of Europe, Africa, and western
-Asia. The map on <a href="#if_i_012">page 52</a> shows the general area. Over
-much of this great region there was flint. Both of these
-traditions seem well adapted to flint, although good core-bifaces
-and flakes were made from other kinds of stone,
-especially in Africa south of the Sahara.</p>
-
-<h3>CHOPPERS AND ADZE-LIKE TOOLS</h3>
-
-<p>The fourth early tradition is found in southern and eastern
-Asia, from northwestern India through Java and Burma into
-China. Father Maringer recently reported an early group of
-tools in Japan, which most resemble those of Java, called
-Patjitanian. The prehistoric men in this general area mostly
-used quartz and tuff and even petrified wood for their stone
-tools (see illustration, <a href="#if_i_011">p. 46</a>).</p>
-
-<p>This fourth early tradition is called the <em>chopper-chopping
-tool</em> tradition. It probably has its earliest roots in the pebble
-tool tradition of African type. There are several kinds of<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_46">46</a></span>
-tools in this tradition, but all differ from the western core-bifaces
-and flakes. There are broad, heavy scrapers or
-cleavers, and tools with an adze-like cutting edge. These
-last-named tools are called “hand adzes,” just as the core-bifaces
-of the west have often been called “hand axes.” The
-section of an adze cutting edge is ∠ shaped; the section of an
-ax is &lt; shaped.</p>
-
-<div id="if_i_011" class="figcenter" style="width: 272px;">
-  <img src="images/i_011.jpg" width="272" height="557" alt="" />
-  <div class="caption">ANYATHIAN ADZE-LIKE TOOL</div></div>
-
-<p>There are also pointed pebble tools. Thus the tool kit of
-these early south and east Asiatic peoples seems to have included<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_47">47</a></span>
-tools for doing as many different jobs as did the tools
-of the Western traditions.</p>
-
-<p>Dr. H.&nbsp;L. Movius has emphasized that the tools which
-were found in the Peking cave with Peking man belong to the
-chopper-tool tradition. This is the only case as yet where the
-tools and the man have been found together from very earliest
-times&mdash;if we except Sterkfontein.</p>
-
-<h3>DIFFERENCES WITHIN THE TOOL-MAKING TRADITIONS</h3>
-
-<p>The latter three great traditions in the manufacture of stone
-tools&mdash;and the less clear-cut pebble tools before them&mdash;are
-all we have to show of the cultures of the men of those times.
-Changes happened in each of the traditions. As time went
-on, the tools in each tradition were better made. There
-could also be slight regional differences in the tools within
-one tradition. Thus, tools with small differences, but all
-belonging to one tradition, can be given special group (facies)
-names.</p>
-
-<p>This naming of special groups has been going on for some
-time. Here are some of these names, since you may see them
-used in museum displays of flint tools, or in books. Within
-each tradition of tool-making (save the chopper tools), the
-earliest tool type is at the bottom of the list, just as it appears
-in the lowest beds of a geological stratification.<a id="FNanchor_3" href="#Footnote_3" class="fnanchor">3</a></p>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_3" href="#FNanchor_3" class="fnanchor">3</a> Archeologists usually make their charts and lists with the earliest
-materials at the bottom and the latest on top, since this is the way they
-find them in the ground.</p></div>
-
-<div class="in2">
-<p class="hang">
-Chopper tool (all about equally early):<br />
-Anyathian (Burma)<br />
-Choukoutienian (China)<br />
-Patjitanian (Java)<br />
-Soan (India)</p>
-
-<p class="hang">Flake:<br />
-“Typical Mousterian”<br />
-Levalloiso-Mousterian<br />
-Levalloisian<br />
-Tayacian<br />
-<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_48">48</a></span>Clactonian (localized in England)</p>
-
-<p class="hang">Core-biface:<br />
-Some blended elements in “Mousterian”<br />
-Micoquian (= Acheulean 6 and 7)<br />
-Acheulean<br />
-Abbevillian (once called “Chellean”)</p>
-
-<p class="hang">Pebble tool:<br />
-Oldowan<br />
-Ain Hanech<br />
-pre-Stellenbosch<br />
-Kafuan
-</p>
-</div>
-
-<p>The core-biface and the flake traditions appear in the
-chart (<a href="#if_i_016a">p. 65</a>).</p>
-
-<p>The early archeologists had many of the tool groups
-named before they ever realized that there were broader tool
-preparation traditions. This was understandable, for in dealing
-with the mixture of things that come out of glacial gravels
-the easiest thing to do first is to isolate individual types of
-tools into groups. First you put a bushel-basketful of tools
-on a table and begin matching up types. Then you give names
-to the groups of each type. The groups and the types are
-really matters of the archeologists’ choice; in real life, they
-were probably less exact than the archeologists’ lists of them.
-We now know pretty well in which of the early traditions the
-various early groups belong.</p>
-
-<h3>THE MEANING OF THE DIFFERENT TRADITIONS</h3>
-
-<p>What do the traditions really mean? I see them as the
-standardization of ways to make tools for particular jobs.
-We may not know exactly what job the maker of a particular
-core-biface or flake tool had in mind. We can easily see,
-however, that he already enjoyed a know-how, a set of
-persistent habits of tool preparation, which would always give
-him the same type of tool when he wanted to make it. Therefore,
-the traditions show us that persistent habits already
-existed for the preparation of one type of tool or another.</p>
-
-<p>This tells us that one of the characteristic aspects of
-human culture was already present. There must have been,
-in the minds of these early men, a notion of the ideal type of<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_49">49</a></span>
-tool for a particular job. Furthermore, since we find so many
-thousands upon thousands of tools of one type or another, the
-notion of the ideal types of tools <em>and</em> the know-how for the
-making of each type must have been held in common by many
-men. The notions of the ideal types and the know-how for
-their production must have been passed on from one generation
-to another.</p>
-
-<p>I could even guess that the notions of the ideal type of
-one or the other of these tools stood out in the minds of men
-of those times somewhat like a symbol of “perfect tool for
-good job.” If this were so&mdash;remember it’s only a wild guess
-of mine&mdash;then men were already symbol users. Now let’s
-go on a further step to the fact that the words men speak are
-simply sounds, each different sound being a symbol for a
-different meaning. If standardized tool-making suggests
-symbol-making, is it also possible that crude word-symbols
-were also being made? I suppose that it is not impossible.</p>
-
-<p>There may, of course, be a real question whether tool-utilizing
-creatures&mdash;our first step, on <a href="#Page_42">page 42</a>&mdash;were actually
-men. Other animals utilize things at hand as tools. The tool-fashioning
-creature of our second step is more suggestive,
-although we may not yet feel sure that many of the earlier
-pebble tools were man-made products. But with the step to
-standardization and the appearance of the traditions, I believe
-we must surely be dealing with the traces of culture-bearing
-<em>men</em>. The “conventional understandings” which Professor
-Redfield’s definition of culture suggests are now evidenced for
-us in the persistent habits for the preparation of stone tools.
-Were we able to see the other things these prehistoric men
-must have made&mdash;in materials no longer preserved for the
-archeologist to find&mdash;I believe there would be clear signs of
-further conventional understandings. The men may have
-been physically primitive and pretty shaggy in appearance,
-but I think we must surely call them men.</p>
-
-<h3>AN OLDER INTERPRETATION OF THE WESTERN TRADITIONS</h3>
-
-<p>In the last chapter, I told you that many of the older archeologists
-and human paleontologists used to think that modern<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_50">50</a></span>
-man was very old. The supposed ages of Piltdown and Galley
-Hill were given as evidence of the great age of anatomically
-modern man, and some interpretations of the Swanscombe
-and Fontéchevade fossils were taken to support this view.
-The conclusion was that there were two parallel lines or
-“phyla” of men already present well back in the Pleistocene.
-The first of these, the more primitive or “paleoanthropic”
-line, was said to include Heidelberg, the proto-neanderthaloids
-and classic Neanderthal. The more anatomically modern or
-“neanthropic” line was thought to consist of Piltdown and the
-others mentioned above. The Neanderthaler or paleoanthropic
-line was thought to have become extinct after the first phase
-of the last great glaciation. Of course, the modern or neanthropic
-line was believed to have persisted into the present,
-as the basis for the world’s population today. But with
-Piltdown liquidated, Galley Hill known to be very late, and
-Swanscombe and Fontéchevade otherwise interpreted, there
-is little left of the so-called parallel phyla theory.</p>
-
-<p>While the theory was in vogue, however, and as long as
-the European archeological evidence was looked at in one
-short-sighted way, the archeological materials <em>seemed</em> to fit
-the parallel phyla theory. It was simply necessary to believe
-that the flake tools were made only by the paleoanthropic
-Neanderthaler line, and that the more handsome core-biface
-tools were the product of the neanthropic modern-man line.</p>
-
-<p>Remember that <em>almost</em> all of the early prehistoric European
-tools came only from the redeposited gravel beds. This means
-that the tools were not normally found in the remains of camp sites
-or work shops where they had actually been dropped by
-the men who made and used them. The tools came, rather,
-from the secondary hodge-podge of the glacial gravels.
-I tried to give you a picture of the bulldozing action of glaciers
-(<a href="#Page_40">p. 40</a>) and of the erosion and weathering that were side-effects
-of a glacially conditioned climate on the earth’s surface.
-As we said above, if one simply plucks tools out of the redeposited
-gravels, his natural tendency is to “type” the tools
-by groups, and to think that the groups stand for something
-<em>on their own</em>.</p>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_51">51</a></span>
-In 1906, M. Victor Commont actually made a rare find
-of what seems to have been a kind of workshop site, on a
-terrace above the Somme river in France. Here, Commont
-realized, flake tools appeared clearly in direct association
-with core-biface tools. Few prehistorians paid attention to
-Commont or his site, however. It was easier to believe that
-flake tools represented a distinct “culture” and that this
-“culture” was that of the Neanderthaler or paleoanthropic
-line, and that the core-bifaces stood for another “culture”
-which was that of the supposed early modern or neanthropic
-line. Of course, I am obviously skipping many details here.
-Some later sites with Neanderthal fossils do seem to have only
-flake tools, but other such sites have both types of tools. The
-flake tools which appeared <em>with</em> the core-bifaces in the Swanscombe
-gravels were never made much of, although it was
-embarrassing for the parallel phyla people that Fontéchevade
-ran heavily to flake tools. All in all, the parallel phyla theory
-flourished because it seemed so neat and easy to understand.</p>
-
-<h3>TRADITIONS ARE TOOL-MAKING HABITS, NOT CULTURES</h3>
-
-<p>In case you think I simply enjoy beating a dead horse, look
-in any standard book on prehistory written twenty (or even
-ten) years ago, or in most encyclopedias. You’ll find that
-each of the individual tool types, of the West, at least, was
-supposed to represent a “culture.” The “cultures” were
-believed to correspond to parallel lines of human evolution.</p>
-
-<p>In 1937, Mr. Harper Kelley strongly re-emphasized the
-importance of Commont’s workshop site and the presence of
-flake tools with core-bifaces. Next followed Dr. Movius’ clear
-delineation of the chopper-chopping tool tradition of the
-Far East. This spoiled the nice symmetry of the flake-tool =
-paleoanthropic, core-biface = neanthropic equations. Then
-came increasing understanding of the importance of the pebble
-tools in Africa, and the location of several more workshop
-sites there, especially at Olorgesailie in Kenya. Finally came
-the liquidation of Piltdown and the deflation of Galley Hill’s
-date. So it is at last possible to picture an individual prehistoric<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_52">52</a></span>
-man making a flake tool to do one job and a core-biface
-tool to do another. Commont showed us this picture
-in 1906, but few believed him.</p>
-
-<div id="if_i_012" class="figcenter" style="width: 600px;">
-  <img src="images/i_012.jpg" width="600" height="514" alt="" />
-  <div class="caption"><p>DISTRIBUTION OF TOOL-PREPARATION TRADITIONS</p>
-
-<p class="smaller">Time approximately 100,000 years ago</p></div></div>
-
-<p>There are certainly a few cases in which flake tools did
-appear with few or no core-bifaces. The flake-tool group
-called Clactonian in England is such a case. Another good,
-but certainly later case is that of the cave on Mount Carmel in
-Palestine, where the blended pre-neanderthaloid, 70 per cent
-modern-type skulls were found. Here, in the same level with
-the skulls, were 9,784 flint tools. Of these, only three&mdash;doubtless
-strays&mdash;were core-bifaces; all the rest were flake
-tools or flake chips. We noted above how the Fontéchevade
-cave ran to flake tools. The only conclusion I would draw
-from this is that times and circumstances did exist in which
-prehistoric men needed only flake tools. So they only made
-flake tools for those particular times and circumstances.</p>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_53">53</a></span></p>
-
-<h3>LIFE IN EARLIEST TIMES</h3>
-
-<p>What do we actually know of life in these earliest times? In
-the glacial gravels, or in the terrace gravels of rivers once
-swollen by floods of melt water or heavy rains, or on the
-windswept deserts, we find stone tools. The earliest and
-coarsest of these are the pebble tools. We do not yet know
-what the men who made them looked like, although the Sterkfontein
-australopithecines probably give us a good hint. Then
-begin the more formal tool preparation traditions of the
-west&mdash;the core-bifaces and the flake tools&mdash;and the chopper-chopping
-tool series of the farther east. There is an occasional
-roughly worked piece of bone. From the gravels which
-yield the Clactonian flakes of England comes the fire-hardened
-point of a wooden spear. There are also the chance finds of
-the fossil human bones themselves, of which we spoke in the
-last chapter. Aside from the cave of Peking man, none of the
-earliest tools have been found in caves. Open air or “workshop”
-sites which do not seem to have been disturbed later
-by some geological agency are very rare.</p>
-
-<p>The chart on <a href="#if_i_016a">page 65</a> shows graphically what the situation
-in west-central Europe seems to have been. It is not yet
-certain whether there were pebble tools there or not. The
-Fontéchevade cave comes into the picture about 100,000 years
-ago or more. But for the earlier hundreds of thousands of
-years&mdash;below the red-dotted line on the chart&mdash;the tools we
-find come almost entirely from the haphazard mixture within
-the geological contexts.</p>
-
-<p>The stone tools of each of the earlier traditions are the
-simplest kinds of all-purpose tools. Almost any one of them
-could be used for hacking, chopping, cutting, and scraping;
-so the men who used them must have been living in a rough
-and ready sort of way. They found or hunted their food
-wherever they could. In the anthropological jargon, they
-were “food-gatherers,” pure and simple.</p>
-
-<p>Because of the mixture in the gravels and in the materials
-they carried, we can’t be sure which animals these men hunted.
-Bones of the larger animals turn up in the gravels, but they
-could just as well belong to the animals who hunted the men,<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_54">54</a></span>
-rather than the other way about. We don’t know. This is
-why camp sites like Commont’s and Olorgesailie in Kenya
-are so important when we do find them. The animal bones
-at Olorgesailie belonged to various mammals of extremely
-large size. Probably they were taken in pit-traps, but there
-are a number of groups of three round stones on the site which
-suggest that the people used bolas. The South American
-Indians used three-ball bolas, with the stones in separate
-leather bags connected by thongs. These were whirled and
-then thrown through the air so as to entangle the feet of
-a fleeing animal.</p>
-
-<p>Professor F. Clark Howell recently returned from excavating
-another important open air site at Isimila in Tanganyika.
-The site yielded the bones of many fossil animals and also
-thousands of core-bifaces, flakes, and choppers. But Howell’s
-reconstruction of the food-getting habits of the Isimila people
-certainly suggests that the word “hunting” is too dignified for
-what they did; “scavenging” would be much nearer the mark.</p>
-
-<p>During a great part of this time the climate was warm and
-pleasant. The second interglacial period (the time between
-the second and third great alpine glaciations) lasted a long
-time, and during much of this time the climate may have been
-even better than ours is now. We don’t know that earlier
-prehistoric men in Europe or Africa lived in caves. They may
-not have needed to; much of the weather may have been so
-nice that they lived in the open. Perhaps they didn’t wear
-clothes, either.</p>
-
-<h3>WHAT THE PEKING CAVE-FINDS TELL US</h3>
-
-<p>The one early cave-dwelling we have found is that of Peking
-man, in China. Peking man had fire. He probably cooked
-his meat, or used the fire to keep dangerous animals away
-from his den. In the cave were bones of dangerous animals,
-members of the wolf, bear, and cat families. Some of the cat
-bones belonged to beasts larger than tigers. There were also
-bones of other wild animals: buffalo, camel, deer, elephants,
-horses, sheep, and even ostriches. Seventy per cent of the
-animals Peking man killed were fallow deer. It’s much too<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_55">55</a></span>
-cold and dry in north China for all these animals to live there
-today. So this list helps us know that the weather was reasonably
-warm, and that there was enough rain to grow grass for
-the grazing animals. The list also helps the paleontologists
-to date the find.</p>
-
-<p>Peking man also seems to have eaten plant food, for there
-are hackberry seeds in the debris of the cave. His tools were
-made of sandstone and quartz and sometimes of a rather bad
-flint. As we’ve already seen, they belong in the chopper-tool
-tradition. It seems fairly clear that some of the edges were
-chipped by right-handed people. There are also many split
-pieces of heavy bone. Peking man probably split them so he
-could eat the bone marrow, but he may have used some of
-them as tools.</p>
-
-<p>Many of these split bones were the bones of Peking men.
-Each one of the skulls had already had the base broken out of
-it. In no case were any of the bones resting together in their
-natural relation to one another. There is nothing like a
-burial; all of the bones are scattered. Now it’s true that
-animals could have scattered bodies that were not cared for
-or buried. But splitting bones lengthwise and carefully removing
-the base of a skull call for both the tools and the
-people to use them. It’s pretty clear who the people were.
-Peking man was a cannibal.</p>
-
-<div class="tb">* <span class="in2">* </span><span class="in2">* </span><span class="in2">* </span><span class="in2">*</span></div>
-
-<p>This rounds out about all we can say of the life and times of
-early prehistoric men. In those days life was rough. You
-evidently had to watch out not only for dangerous animals but
-also for your fellow men. You ate whatever you could catch
-or find growing. But you had sense enough to build fires,
-and you had already formed certain habits for making the
-kinds of stone tools you needed. That’s about all we know.
-But I think we’ll have to admit that cultural beginnings had
-been made, and that these early people were really <em>men</em>.</p>
-
-<hr />
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_56">56</a></span></p>
-
-<div class="chapter">
-<h2 id="hdr_5"><span class="smcap smaller">MORE EVIDENCE</span> of Culture</h2>
-
-<div id="if_i_013" class="figcenter" style="width: 210px;">
-  <img src="images/i_013.jpg" width="210" height="212" alt="" /></div>
-</div>
-
-<p>While the dating is not yet sure, the material that we get from
-caves in Europe must go back to about 100,000 years ago;
-the time of the classic Neanderthal group followed soon afterwards.
-We don’t know why there is no earlier material in the
-caves; apparently they were not used before the last interglacial
-phase (the period just before the last great glaciation).
-We know that men of the classic Neanderthal group were
-living in caves from about 75,000 to 45,000 years ago. New
-radioactive carbon dates even suggest that some of the traces of
-culture we’ll describe in this chapter may have lasted to about
-35,000 years ago. Probably some of the pre-neanderthaloid
-types of men had also lived in caves. But we have so far found
-their bones in caves only in Palestine and at Fontéchevade.</p>
-
-<h3>THE CAVE LAYERS</h3>
-
-<p>In parts of France, some peasants still live in caves. In prehistoric
-time, many generations of people lived in them. As
-a result, many caves have deep layers of debris. The first
-people moved in and lived on the rock floor. They threw
-on the floor whatever they didn’t want, and they tracked in
-mud; nobody bothered to clean house in those days. Their
-debris&mdash;junk and mud and garbage and what not&mdash;became
-packed into a layer. As time went on, and generations passed,<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_57">57</a></span>
-the layer grew thicker. Then there might have been a break
-in the occupation of the cave for a while. Perhaps the game
-animals got scarce and the people moved away; or maybe the
-cave became flooded. Later on, other people moved in and
-began making a new layer of their own on top of the first layer.
-Perhaps this process of layering went on in the same cave for
-a hundred thousand years; you can see what happened. The
-drawing on this page shows a section through such a cave.
-The earliest layer is on the bottom, the latest one on top. They
-go in order from bottom to top, earliest to latest. This is the
-<em>stratification</em> we talked about (<a href="#Page_12">p. 12</a>).</p>
-
-<div id="if_i_013a" class="figcenter" style="width: 499px;">
-  <img src="images/i_013a.jpg" width="499" height="512" alt="" />
-  <div class="caption">SECTION OF SHELTER ON LOWER TERRACE, LE MOUSTIER</div></div>
-
-<p>While we may find a mix-up in caves, it’s not nearly as
-bad as the mixing up that was done by glaciers. The animal<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_58">58</a></span>
-bones and shells, the fireplaces, the bones of men, and the tools
-the men made all belong together, if they come from one layer.
-That’s the reason why the cave of Peking man is so important.
-It is also the reason why the caves in Europe and the Near
-East are so important. We can get an idea of which things
-belong together and which lot came earliest and which latest.</p>
-
-<p>In most cases, prehistoric men lived only in the mouths
-of caves. They didn’t like the dark inner chambers as places
-to live in. They preferred rock-shelters, at the bases of overhanging
-cliffs, if there was enough overhang to give shelter.
-When the weather was good, they no doubt lived in the open
-air as well. I’ll go on using the term “cave” since it’s more
-familiar, but remember that I really mean rock-shelter, as
-a place in which people actually lived.</p>
-
-<p>The most important European cave sites are in Spain,
-France, and central Europe; there are also sites in England
-and Italy. A few caves are known in the Near East and
-Africa, and no doubt more sites will be found when the
-out-of-the-way parts of Europe, Africa, and Asia are studied.</p>
-
-<h3>AN “INDUSTRY” DEFINED</h3>
-
-<p>We have already seen that the earliest European cave materials
-are those from the cave of Fontéchevade. Movius feels certain
-that the lowest materials here date back well into the third
-interglacial stage, that which lay between the Riss (next to the
-last) and the Würm I (first stage of the last) alpine glaciations.
-This material consists of an <em>industry</em> of stone tools, apparently
-all made in the flake tradition. This is the first time we have
-used the word “industry.” It is useful to call all of the
-different tools found together in one layer and made of <em>one
-kind of material</em> an industry; that is, the tools must be found
-together as men left them. Tools taken from the glacial
-gravels (or from windswept desert surfaces or river gravels
-or any geological deposit) are not “together” in this sense.
-We might say the latter have only “geological,” not “archeological”
-context. Archeological context means finding
-things just as men left them. We can tell what tools go together
-in an “industrial” sense only if we have archeological
-context.</p>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_59">59</a></span>
-Up to now, the only things we could have called “industries”
-were the worked stone industry and perhaps the worked
-(?) bone industry of the Peking cave. We could add some of
-the very clear cases of open air sites, like Olorgesailie. We
-couldn’t use the term for the stone tools from the glacial
-gravels, because we do not know which tools belonged
-together. But when the cave materials begin to appear in
-Europe, we can begin to speak of industries. Most of the
-European caves of this time contain industries of flint tools
-alone.</p>
-
-<h3>THE EARLIEST EUROPEAN CAVE LAYERS</h3>
-
-<p>We’ve just mentioned the industry from what is said to be the
-oldest inhabited cave in Europe; that is, the industry from
-the deepest layer of the site at Fontéchevade. Apparently it
-doesn’t amount to much. The tools are made of stone, in the
-flake tradition, and are very poorly worked. This industry is
-called <em>Tayacian</em>. Its type tool seems to be a smallish flake tool,
-but there are also larger flakes which seem to have been
-fashioned for hacking. In fact, the type tool seems to be
-simply a smaller edition of the Clactonian tool (pictured on
-<a href="#if_i_010a">p. 45</a>).</p>
-
-<p>None of the Fontéchevade tools are really good. There are
-scrapers, and more or less pointed tools, and tools that may
-have been used for hacking and chopping. Many of the tools
-from the earlier glacial gravels are better made than those of
-this first industry we see in a European cave. There is so little
-of this material available that we do not know which is really
-typical and which is not. You would probably find it hard to
-see much difference between this industry and a collection of
-tools of the type called Clactonian, taken from the glacial
-gravels, especially if the Clactonian tools were small-sized.</p>
-
-<p>The stone industry of the bottommost layer of the Mount
-Carmel cave, in Palestine, where somewhat similar tools were
-found, has also been called Tayacian.</p>
-
-<p>I shall have to bring in many unfamiliar words for the
-names of the industries. The industries are usually named
-after the places where they were first found, and since these
-were in most cases in France, most of the names which follow<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_60">60</a></span>
-will be of French origin. However, the names have simply
-become handles and are in use far beyond the boundaries of
-France. It would be better if we had a non-place-name
-terminology, but archeologists have not yet been able to
-agree on such a terminology.</p>
-
-<h3>THE ACHEULEAN INDUSTRY</h3>
-
-<p>Both in France and in Palestine, as well as in some African
-cave sites, the next layers in the deep caves have an industry
-in both the core-biface and the flake traditions. The core-biface
-tools usually make up less than half of all the tools in the
-industry. However, the name of the biface type of tool is
-generally given to the whole industry. It is called the <em>Acheulean</em>,
-actually a late form of it, as “Acheulean” is also used for
-earlier core-biface tools taken from the glacial gravels. In
-western Europe, the name used is <em>Upper Acheulean</em> or <em>Micoquian</em>.
-The same terms have been borrowed to name layers
-E and F in the Tabun cave, on Mount Carmel in Palestine.</p>
-
-<p>The Acheulean core-biface type of tool is worked on two
-faces so as to give a cutting edge all around. The outline of
-its front view may be oval, or egg-shaped, or a quite pointed
-pear shape. The large chip-scars of the Acheulean core-bifaces
-are shallow and flat. It is suspected that this resulted from the
-removal of the chips with a wooden club; the deep chip-scars
-of the earlier Abbevillian core-biface came from beating the
-tool against a stone anvil. These tools are really the best and
-also the final products of the core-biface tradition. We first
-noticed the tradition in the early glacial gravels (<a href="#Page_43">p. 43</a>); now
-we see its end, but also its finest examples, in the deeper
-cave levels.</p>
-
-<p>The flake tools, which really make up the greater bulk of
-this industry, are simple scrapers and chips with sharp cutting
-edges. The habits used to prepare them must have been
-pretty much the same as those used for at least one of the flake
-industries we shall mention presently.</p>
-
-<p>There is very little else in these early cave layers. We do
-not have a proper “industry” of bone tools. There are traces
-of fire, and of animal bones, and a few shells. In Palestine,<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_61">61</a></span>
-there are many more bones of deer than of gazelle in these
-layers; the deer lives in a wetter climate than does the gazelle.
-In the European cave layers, the animal bones are those of
-beasts that live in a warm climate. They belonged in the last
-interglacial period. We have not yet found the bones of fossil
-men definitely in place with this industry.</p>
-
-<div id="if_i_014" class="figcenter" style="width: 487px;">
-  <img src="images/i_014.jpg" width="487" height="404" alt="" />
-  <div class="caption">ACHEULEAN BIFACE</div></div>
-
-<h3>FLAKE INDUSTRIES FROM THE CAVES</h3>
-
-<p>Two more stone industries&mdash;the <em>Levalloisian</em> and the “<em>Mousterian</em>”&mdash;turn
-up at approximately the same time in the
-European cave layers. Their tools seem to be mainly in the
-flake tradition, but according to some of the authorities their
-preparation also shows some combination with the habits by
-which the core-biface tools were prepared.</p>
-
-<p>Now notice that I don’t tell you the Levalloisian and the
-“Mousterian” layers are both above the late Acheulean layers.
-Look at the cave section (<a href="#if_i_013a">p. 57</a>) and you’ll find that some<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_62">62</a></span>
-“Mousterian of Acheulean tradition” appears above some
-“typical Mousterian.” This means that there may be some
-kinds of Acheulean industries that are later than some kinds
-of “Mousterian.” The same is true of the Levalloisian.</p>
-
-<p>There were now several different kinds of habits that men
-used in making stone tools. These habits were based on either
-one or the other of the two traditions&mdash;core-biface or flake&mdash;or
-on combinations of the habits used in the preparation
-techniques of both traditions. All were popular at about the
-same time. So we find that people who made one kind of
-stone tool industry lived in a cave for a while. Then they gave
-up the cave for some reason, and people with another industry
-moved in. Then the first people came back&mdash;or at least
-somebody with the same tool-making habits as the first people.
-Or maybe a third group of tool-makers moved in. The people
-who had these different habits for making their stone tools
-seem to have moved around a good deal. They no doubt
-borrowed and exchanged tricks of the trade with each other.
-There were no patent laws in those days.</p>
-
-<p>The extremely complicated interrelationships of the
-different habits used by the tool-makers of this range of time
-are at last being systematically studied. M. François Bordes
-has developed a statistical method of great importance for
-understanding these tool preparation habits.</p>
-
-<h3>THE LEVALLOISIAN AND MOUSTERIAN</h3>
-
-<p>The easiest Levalloisian tool to spot is a big flake tool. The
-trick in making it was to fashion carefully a big chunk of stone
-(called the Levalloisian “tortoise core,” because it resembles
-the shape of a turtle-shell) and then to whack this in such
-a way that a large flake flew off. This large thin flake, with
-sharp cutting edges, is the finished Levalloisian tool. There
-were various other tools in a Levalloisian industry, but this is
-the characteristic <em>Levalloisian</em> tool.</p>
-
-<p>There are several “typical Mousterian” stone tools.
-Different from the tools of the Levalloisian type, these were
-made from “disc-like cores.” There are medium-sized flake
-“side scrapers.” There are also some small pointed tools and
-some small “hand axes.” The last of these tool types is often<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_63">63</a></span>
-a flake worked on both of the flat sides (that is, bifacially).
-There are also pieces of flint worked into the form of crude
-balls. The pointed tools may have been fixed on shafts to make
-short jabbing spears; the round flint balls may have been used
-as bolas. Actually, we don’t <em>know</em> what either tool was used
-for. The points and side scrapers are illustrated (pp. <a href="#if_i_016">64</a>
-and <a href="#if_i_017">66</a>).</p>
-
-<div id="if_i_015" class="figcenter" style="width: 488px;">
-  <img src="images/i_015.jpg" width="488" height="238" alt="" />
-  <div class="caption">LEVALLOIS FLAKE</div></div>
-
-<h3>THE MIXING OF TRADITIONS</h3>
-
-<p>Nowadays the archeologists are less and less sure of the importance
-of any one specific tool type and name. Twenty
-years ago, they used to speak simply of Acheulean or Levalloisian
-or Mousterian tools. Now, more and more, <em>all</em> of the
-tools from some one layer in a cave are called an “industry,”
-which is given a mixed name. Thus we have “Levalloiso-Mousterian,”
-and “Acheuleo-Levalloisian,” and even “Acheuleo-Mousterian”
-(or “Mousterian of Acheulean tradition”).
-Bordes’ systematic work is beginning to clear up some of our
-confusion.</p>
-
-<p>The time of these late Acheuleo-Levalloiso-Mousterioid
-industries is from perhaps as early as 100,000 years ago. It
-may have lasted until well past 50,000 years ago. This was the
-time of the first phase of the last great glaciation. It was also
-the time that the classic group of Neanderthal men was living
-in Europe. A number of the Neanderthal fossil finds come<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_64">64</a></span>
-from these cave layers. Before the different habits of tool
-preparation were understood it used to be popular to say
-Neanderthal man was “Mousterian man.” I think this is
-wrong. What used to be called “Mousterian” is now known
-to be a variety of industries with tools of both core-biface and
-flake habits, and so mixed that the word “Mousterian” used
-alone really doesn’t mean anything. The Neanderthalers
-doubtless understood the tool preparation habits by means of
-which Acheulean, Levalloisian and Mousterian type tools
-were produced. We also have the more modern-like Mount
-Carmel people, found in a cave layer of Palestine with tools
-almost entirely in the flake tradition, called “Levalloiso-Mousterian,”
-and the Fontéchevade-Tayacian (<a href="#Page_59">p. 59</a>).</p>
-
-<div id="if_i_016" class="figcenter" style="width: 270px;">
-  <img src="images/i_016.jpg" width="270" height="177" alt="" />
-  <div class="caption">MOUSTERIAN POINT</div></div>
-
-<h3>OTHER SUGGESTIONS OF LIFE IN THE EARLY CAVE LAYERS</h3>
-
-<p>Except for the stone tools, what do we know of the way men
-lived in the time range after 100,000 to perhaps 40,000 years
-ago or even later? We know that in the area from Europe
-to Palestine, at least some of the people (some of the time)
-lived in the fronts of caves and warmed themselves over fires.
-In Europe, in the cave layers of these times, we find the bones
-of different animals; the bones in the lowest layers belong to
-animals that lived in a warm climate; above them are the
-bones of those who could stand the cold, like the reindeer and
-mammoth. Thus, the meat diet must have been changing,
-as the glacier crept farther south. Shells and possibly fish<span class="pagenum"><a class="hidev" id="Page_65">65</a><a  id="Page_66">66</a></span>
-bones have lasted in these cave layers, but there is not a trace
-of the vegetable foods and the nuts and berries and other wild
-fruits that must have been eaten when they could be found.</p>
-
-<div id="if_i_016a" class="figcenter" style="width: 643px;">
-  <img src="images/i_016a.jpg" width="643" height="476" alt="" />
-  <div class="caption"><p>CHART SHOWING PRESENT UNDERSTANDING OF RELATIONSHIPS AND SUCCESSION OF TOOL-PREPARATION
-TRADITIONS, INDUSTRIES, AND ASSEMBLAGES OF WEST-CENTRAL EUROPE</p>
-
-<p class="smaller">Wavy lines indicate transitions in industrial habits. These transitions are not yet understood in detail. The glacial
-and climatic scheme shown is the alpine one.</p></div></div>
-
-<p>Bone tools have also been found from this period. Some
-are called scrapers, and there are also long chisel-like leg-bone
-fragments believed to have been used for skinning animals.
-Larger hunks of bone, which seem to have served as anvils or
-chopping blocks, are fairly common.</p>
-
-<p>Bits of mineral, used as coloring matter, have also been
-found. We don’t know what the color was used for.</p>
-
-<div id="if_i_017" class="figcenter" style="width: 369px;">
-  <img src="images/i_017.jpg" width="369" height="224" alt="" />
-  <div class="caption">MOUSTERIAN SIDE SCRAPER</div></div>
-
-<p>There is a small but certain number of cases of intentional
-burials. These burials have been found on the floors of the
-caves; in other words, the people dug graves in the places
-where they lived. The holes made for the graves were small.
-For this reason (or perhaps for some other?) the bodies were
-in a curled-up or contracted position. Flint or bone tools
-or pieces of meat seem to have been put in with some of the
-bodies. In several cases, flat stones had been laid over the
-graves.</p>
-
-<h3>TOOLS FROM AFRICA AND ASIA ABOUT 100,000 YEARS AGO</h3>
-
-<p>Professor Movius characterizes early prehistoric Africa as
-a continent showing a variety of stone industries. Some of<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_67">67</a></span>
-these industries were purely local developments and some were
-practically identical with industries found in Europe at the
-same time. From northwest Africa to Capetown&mdash;excepting
-the tropical rain forest region of the west center&mdash;tools of
-developed Acheulean, Levalloisian, and Mousterian types
-have been recognized. Often they are named after African
-place names.</p>
-
-<p>In east and south Africa lived people whose industries
-show a development of the Levalloisian technique. Such
-industries are called Stillbay. Another industry, developed
-on the basis of the Acheulean technique, is called Fauresmith.
-From the northwest comes an industry with tanged points and
-flake-blades; this is called the Aterian. The tropical rain
-forest region contained people whose stone tools apparently
-show adjustment to this peculiar environment; the so-called
-Sangoan industry includes stone picks, adzes, core-bifaces of
-specialized Acheulean type, and bifacial points which were
-probably spearheads.</p>
-
-<p>In western Asia, even as far as the east coast of India, the
-tools of the Eurafrican core-biface and flake tool traditions
-continued to be used. But in the Far East, as we noted in the
-last chapter, men had developed characteristic stone chopper
-and chopping tools. This tool preparation tradition&mdash;basically
-a pebble tool tradition&mdash;lasted to the very end of the Ice Age.</p>
-
-<p>When more intact open air sites such as that of an earlier
-time at Olorgesailie, and more stratified cave sites are found
-and excavated in Asia and Africa, we shall be able to get
-a more complete picture. So far, our picture of the general
-cultural level of the Old World at about 100,000 years ago&mdash;and
-soon afterwards&mdash;is best from Europe, but it is still far
-from complete there, too.</p>
-
-<h3>CULTURE AT THE BEGINNING OF THE LAST GREAT GLACIAL PERIOD</h3>
-
-<p>The few things we have found must indicate only a very small
-part of the total activities of the people who lived at the time.
-All of the things they made of wood and bark, of skins, of
-anything soft, are gone. The fact that burials were made, at<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_68">68</a></span>
-least in Europe and Palestine, is pretty clear proof that the
-people had some notion of a life after death. But what this
-notion really was, or what gods (if any) men believed in, we
-cannot know. Dr. Movius has also reminded me of the so-called
-bear cults&mdash;cases in which caves have been found which
-contain the skulls of bears in apparently purposeful arrangement.
-This might suggest some notion of hoarding up the
-spirits or the strength of bears killed in the hunt. Probably
-the people lived in small groups, as hunting and food-gathering
-seldom provide enough food for large groups of people.
-These groups probably had some kind of leader or “chief.”
-Very likely the rude beginnings of rules for community life and
-politics, and even law, were being made. But what these were,
-we do not know. We can only guess about such things, as we
-can only guess about many others; for example, how the idea
-of a family must have been growing, and how there may have
-been witch doctors who made beginnings in medicine or in
-art, in the materials they gathered for their trade.</p>
-
-<p>The stone tools help us most. They have lasted, and we
-can find them. As they come to us, from this cave or that,
-and from this layer or that, the tool industries show a variety
-of combinations of the different basic habits or traditions of
-tool preparation. This seems only natural, as the groups of
-people must have been very small. The mixtures and blendings
-of the habits used in making stone tools must mean that
-there were also mixtures and blends in many of the other ideas
-and beliefs of these small groups. And what this probably
-means is that there was no one <em>culture</em> of the time. It is
-certainly unlikely that there were simply three cultures,
-“Acheulean,” “Levalloisian,” and “Mousterian,” as has been
-thought in the past. Rather there must have been a great
-variety of loosely related cultures at about the same stage of
-advancement. We could say, too, that here we really begin to
-see, for the first time, that remarkable ability of men to adapt
-themselves to a variety of conditions. We shall see this
-adaptive ability even more clearly as time goes on and the
-record becomes more complete.</p>
-
-<p>Over how great an area did these loosely related cultures
-reach in the time 75,000 to 45,000 or even as late as 35,000<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_69">69</a></span>
-years ago? We have described stone tools made in one or
-another of the flake and core-biface habits, for an enormous
-area. It covers all of Europe, all of Africa, the Near East, and
-parts of India. It is perfectly possible that the flake and core-biface
-habits lasted on after 35,000 years ago, in some places
-outside of Europe. In northern Africa, for example, we are
-certain that they did (see chart, <a href="#if_i_019">p. 72</a>).</p>
-
-<p>On the other hand, in the Far East (China, Burma, Java)
-and in northern India, the tools of the old chopper-tool tradition
-were still being made. Out there, we must assume,
-there was a different set of loosely related cultures. At least,
-there was a different set of loosely related habits for the making
-of tools. But the men who made them must have looked much
-like the men of the West. Their tools were different, but just
-as useful.</p>
-
-<p>As to what the men of the West looked like, I’ve already
-hinted at all we know so far (<a href="#Page_29">pp. 29</a> ff.). The Neanderthalers
-were present at the time. Some more modern-like men must
-have been about, too, since fossils of them have turned up at
-Mount Carmel in Palestine, and at Teshik Tash, in Trans-caspian
-Russia. It is still too soon to know whether certain
-combinations of tools within industries were made only by
-certain physical types of men. But since tools of both the
-core-biface and the flake traditions, and their blends, turn up
-from South Africa to England to India, it is most unlikely that
-only one type of man used only one particular habit in the
-preparation of tools. What seems perfectly clear is that men
-in Africa and men in India were making just as good tools as
-the men who lived in western Europe.</p>
-
-<hr />
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_70">70</a></span></p>
-
-<div class="chapter">
-<h2 id="hdr_6"><span class="smcap smaller">EARLY</span> MODERNS</h2>
-
-<div id="if_i_018" class="figcenter" style="width: 287px;">
-  <img src="images/i_018.jpg" width="287" height="210" alt="" /></div>
-</div>
-
-<p>From some time during the first inter-stadial of the last great
-glaciation (say some time after about 40,000 years ago), we
-have more accurate dates for the European-Mediterranean
-area and less accurate ones for the rest of the Old World.
-This is probably because the effects of the last glaciation have
-been studied in the European-Mediterranean area more than
-they have been elsewhere.</p>
-
-<h3>A NEW TRADITION APPEARS</h3>
-
-<p>Something new was probably beginning to happen in the
-European-Mediterranean area about 40,000 years ago, though
-all the rest of the Old World seems to have been going on as
-it had been. I can’t be sure of this because the information
-we are using as a basis for dates is very inaccurate for the
-areas outside of Europe and the Mediterranean.</p>
-
-<p>We can at least make a guess. In Egypt and north Africa,
-men were still using the old methods of making stone tools.
-This was especially true of flake tools of the Levalloisian type,
-save that they were growing smaller and smaller as time went
-on. But at the same time, a new tradition was becoming
-popular in westernmost Asia and in Europe. This was the
-blade-tool tradition.</p>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_71">71</a></span></p>
-
-<h3>BLADE TOOLS</h3>
-
-<p>A stone blade is really just a long parallel-sided flake, as the
-drawing shows. It has sharp cutting edges, and makes a very
-useful knife. The real trick is to be able to make one. It is
-almost impossible to make a blade out of any stone but flint
-or a natural volcanic glass called obsidian. And even if you
-have flint or obsidian, you first have to work up a special
-cone-shaped “blade-core,” from which to whack off blades.</p>
-
-<div id="if_i_018a" class="figcenter" style="width: 416px;">
-  <img src="images/i_018a.jpg" width="416" height="83" alt="" />
-  <div class="caption">PLAIN BLADE</div></div>
-
-<p>You whack with a hammer stone against a bone or antler
-punch which is directed at the proper place on the blade-core.
-The blade-core has to be well supported or gripped while this is
-going on. To get a good flint blade tool takes a great deal
-of know-how.</p>
-
-<p>Remember that a tradition in stone tools means no more
-than that some particular way of making the tools got started
-and lasted a long time. Men who made some tools in one
-tradition or set of habits would also make other tools for
-different purposes by means of another tradition or set of
-habits. It was even possible for the two sets of habits to
-become combined.</p>
-
-<h3>THE EARLIEST BLADE TOOLS</h3>
-
-<p>The oldest blade tools we have found were deep down in the
-layers of the Mount Carmel caves, in Tabun Eb and Ea.
-Similar tools have been found in equally early cave levels in
-Syria; their popularity there seems to fluctuate a bit. Some
-more or less parallel-sided flakes are known in the Levalloisian
-industry in France, but they are probably no earlier than
-Tabun E. The Tabun blades are part of a local late “Acheulean”
-industry, which is characterized by core-biface “hand
-axes,” but which has many flake tools as well. Professor <span class="pagenum"><a class="hidev" id="Page_72">72</a><a  id="Page_73">73</a></span>F.&nbsp;E.
-Zeuner believes that this industry may be more than 120,000
-years old; actually its date has not yet been fixed, but it is very
-old&mdash;older than the fossil finds of modern-like men in the
-same caves.</p>
-
-<div id="if_i_019" class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;">
-  <img src="images/i_019.jpg" width="700" height="419" alt="" />
-  <div class="caption">SUCCESSION OF ICE AGE FLINT TYPES, INDUSTRIES, AND ASSEMBLAGES, AND OF FOSSIL MEN,
-IN NORTHWESTERN EURAFRASIA</div></div>
-
-<p>For some reason, the habit of making blades in Palestine
-and Syria was interrupted. Blades only reappeared there at
-about the same time they were first made in Europe, some
-time after 45,000 years ago; that is, after the first phase of the
-last glaciation was ended.</p>
-
-<div id="if_i_019a" class="figcenter" style="width: 263px;">
-  <img src="images/i_019a.jpg" width="263" height="227" alt="" />
-  <div class="caption">BACKED BLADE</div></div>
-
-<p>We are not sure just where the earliest <em>persisting</em> habits
-for the production of blade tools developed. Impressed by the
-very early momentary appearance of blades at Tabun on
-Mount Carmel, Professor Dorothy A. Garrod first favored the
-Near East as a center of origin. She spoke of “some as yet
-unidentified Asiatic centre,” which she thought might be in
-the highlands of Iran or just beyond. But more recent work
-has been done in this area, especially by Professor Coon, and
-the blade tools do not seem to have an early appearance there.
-When the blade tools reappear in the Syro-Palestinian area,
-they do so in industries which also include Levalloiso-Mousterian
-flake tools. From the point of view of form and workmanship,
-the blade tools themselves are not so fine as those
-which seem to be making their appearance in western Europe
-about the same time. There is a characteristic Syro-Palestinian
-flake point, possibly a projectile tip, called the Emiran,
-which is not known from Europe. The appearance of blade<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_74">74</a></span>
-tools, together with Levalloiso-Mousterian flakes, continues
-even after the Emiran point has gone out of use.</p>
-
-<p>It seems clear that the production of blade tools did not
-immediately swamp the set of older habits in Europe, too; the
-use of flake tools also continued there. This was not so
-apparent to the older archeologists, whose attention was
-focused on individual tool types. It is not, in fact, impossible&mdash;although
-it is certainly not proved&mdash;that the technique developed
-in the preparation of the Levalloisian tortoise core
-(and the striking of the Levalloisian flake from it) might have
-followed through to the conical core and punch technique for
-the production of blades. Professor Garrod is much impressed
-with the speed of change during the later phases of the last
-glaciation, and its probable consequences. She speaks of
-“the greater number of industries having enough individual
-character to be classified as distinct ... since evolution now
-starts to outstrip diffusion.” Her “evolution” here is of course
-an industrial evolution rather than a biological one. Certainly
-the people of Europe had begun to make blade tools during the
-warm spell after the first phase of the last glaciation. By
-about 40,000 years ago blades were well established. The
-bones of the blade tool makers we’ve found so far indicate that
-anatomically modern men had now certainly appeared. Unfortunately,
-only a few fossil men have so far been found from
-the very beginning of the blade tool range in Europe (or elsewhere).
-What I certainly shall <em>not</em> tell you is that conquering
-bands of fine, strong, anatomically modern men, armed with
-superior blade tools, came sweeping out of the East to exterminate
-the lowly Neanderthalers. Even if we don’t know
-exactly what happened, I’d lay a good bet it wasn’t that simple.</p>
-
-<p>We do know a good deal about different blade industries in
-Europe. Almost all of them come from cave layers. There is
-a great deal of complication in what we find. The chart
-(<a href="#if_i_019">p. 72</a>) tries to simplify this complication; in fact, it doubtless
-simplifies it too much. But it may suggest all the complication
-of industries which is going on at this time. You will note that
-the upper portion of my much simpler chart (<a href="#if_i_016a">p. 65</a>) covers the
-same material (in the section marked “Various Blade-Tool
-Industries”). That chart is certainly too simplified.</p>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_75">75</a></span>
-You will realize that all this complication comes not only
-from the fact that we are finding more material. It is due
-also to the increasing ability of men to adapt themselves to
-a great variety of situations. Their tools indicate this adaptiveness.
-We know there was a good deal of climatic change at
-this time. The plants and animals that men used for food
-were changing, too. The great variety of tools and industries
-we now find reflect these changes and the ability of men to
-keep up with the times. Now, for example, is the first time we
-are sure that there are tools to <em>make</em> other tools. They also
-show men’s increasing ability to adapt themselves.</p>
-
-<h3>SPECIAL TYPES OF BLADE TOOLS</h3>
-
-<p>The most useful tools that appear at this time were made from
-blades.</p>
-
-<blockquote>
-
-<p>1. The “backed” blade. This is a knife made of a flint
-blade, with one edge purposely blunted, probably to
-save the user’s fingers from being cut. There are
-several shapes of backed blades (<a href="#if_i_019a">p. 73</a>).</p>
-
-<div id="if_i_020" class="figcenter" style="width: 383px;">
-  <img src="images/i_020.jpg" width="383" height="273" alt="" />
-  <div class="caption">TWO BURINS</div></div>
-
-<p>2. The <em>burin</em> or “graver.” The burin was the original
-chisel. Its cutting edge is <em>transverse</em>, like a chisel’s.
-Some burins are made like a screw-driver, save that
-burins are sharp. Others have edges more like the<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_76">76</a></span>
-blade of a chisel or a push plane, with only one bevel.
-Burins were probably used to make slots in wood and
-bone; that is, to make handles or shafts for other
-tools. They must also be the tools with which much
-of the engraving on bone (see <a href="#Page_83">p. 83</a>) was done. There
-is a bewildering variety of different kinds of burins.</p></blockquote>
-
-<div id="if_i_021" class="figcenter" style="width: 435px;">
-  <img src="images/i_021.jpg" width="435" height="200" alt="" />
-  <div class="caption">TANGED POINT</div></div>
-
-<blockquote>
-
-<p>3. The “tanged” point. These stone points were used to
-tip arrows or light spears. They were made from
-blades, and they had a long tang at the bottom where
-they were fixed to the shaft. At the place where the
-tang met the main body of the stone point, there was
-a marked “shoulder,” the beginnings of a barb. Such
-points had either one or two shoulders.</p></blockquote>
-
-<div id="if_i_021a" class="figcenter" style="width: 430px;">
-  <img src="images/i_021a.jpg" width="430" height="158" alt="" />
-  <div class="caption">NOTCHED BLADE</div></div>
-
-<blockquote>
-
-<p>4. The “notched” or “strangulated” blade. Along with
-the points for arrows or light spears must go a tool to
-prepare the arrow or spear shaft. Today, such a tool<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_77">77</a></span>
-would be called a “draw-knife” or a “spoke-shave,”
-and this is what the notched blades probably are. Our
-spoke-shaves have sharp straight cutting blades and
-really “shave.” Notched blades of flint probably
-scraped rather than cut.</p>
-
-<p>5. The “awl,” “drill,” or “borer.” These blade tools are
-worked out to a spike-like point. They must have been
-used for making holes in wood, bone, shell, skin, or
-other things.</p></blockquote>
-
-<div id="if_i_021b" class="figcenter" style="width: 183px;">
-  <img src="images/i_021b.jpg" width="183" height="395" alt="" />
-  <div class="caption">DRILL <span class="smcap smaller">OR</span> AWL</div></div>
-
-<blockquote>
-
-<p>6. The “end-scraper on a blade” is a tool with one or both
-ends worked so as to give a good scraping edge. It
-could have been used to hollow out wood or bone,
-scrape hides, remove bark from trees, and a number
-of other things (<a href="#if_i_022">p. 78</a>).</p></blockquote>
-
-<p>There is one very special type of flint tool, which is best
-known from western Europe in an industry called the Solutrean.
-These tools were usually made of blades, but the best<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_78">78</a></span>
-examples are so carefully worked on both sides (bifacially)
-that it is impossible to see the original blade. This tool is</p>
-
-<blockquote>
-
-<p>7. The “laurel leaf” point. Some of these tools were long
-and dagger-like, and must have been used as knives
-or daggers. Others were small, called “willow leaf,”
-and must have been mounted on spear or arrow shafts.
-Another typical Solutrean tool is the “shouldered”
-point. Both the “laurel leaf” and “shouldered” point
-types are illustrated (see <a href="#if_i_022b">above</a> and <a href="#if_i_022c">p. 79</a>).</p></blockquote>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_79">79</a></span></p>
-
-<div id="if_i_022" class="figcenter" style="width: 271px;">
-  <img src="images/i_022.jpg" width="271" height="315" alt="" />
-  <div class="caption">END-SCRAPER <span class="smcap smaller">ON A</span> BLADE</div></div>
-
-<div id="if_i_022b" class="figcenter" style="width: 481px;">
-  <img src="images/i_022b.jpg" width="481" height="175" alt="" />
-  <div class="caption">LAUREL LEAF POINT</div></div>
-
-<p>The industries characterized by tools in the blade tradition
-also yield some flake and core tools. We will end this list with
-two types of tools that appear at this time. The first is made
-of a flake; the second is a core tool.</p>
-
-<div id="if_i_022c" class="figcenter" style="width: 321px;">
-  <img src="images/i_022c.jpg" width="321" height="512" alt="" />
-  <div class="caption">SHOULDERED POINT</div></div>
-
-<blockquote>
-
-<p>8. The “keel-shaped round scraper” is usually small and
-quite round, and has had chips removed up to a peak
-in the center. It is called “keel-shaped” because it is
-supposed to look (when upside down) like a section
-through a boat. Actually, it looks more like a tent
-or an umbrella. Its outer edges are sharp all the way
-around, and it was probably a general purpose
-scraping tool (see illustration, <a href="#if_i_023">p. 81</a>).</p>
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_80">80</a></span>
-9. The “keel-shaped nosed scraper” is a much larger and
-heavier tool than the round scraper. It was made on
-a core with a flat bottom, and has one nicely worked
-end or “nose.” Such tools are usually large enough
-to be easily grasped, and probably were used like
-push planes (see illustration, <a href="#if_i_023a">p. 81</a>).</p></blockquote>
-
-<div id="if_i_023" class="figcenter" style="width: 325px;">
-  <img src="images/i_023.jpg" width="325" height="291" alt="" />
-  <div class="caption">KEEL-SHAPED ROUND SCRAPER</div></div>
-
-<div id="if_i_023a" class="figcenter" style="width: 410px;">
-  <img src="images/i_023a.jpg" width="410" height="521" alt="" />
-  <div class="caption">KEEL-SHAPED NOSED SCRAPER</div></div>
-
-<p>The stone tools (usually made of flint) we have just listed
-are among the most easily recognized blade tools, although
-they show differences in detail at different times. There are
-also many other kinds. Not all of these tools appear in any
-one industry at one time. Thus the different industries shown
-in the chart (<a href="#if_i_019">p. 72</a>) each have only some of the blade tools
-we’ve just listed, and also a few flake tools. Some industries
-even have a few core tools. The particular types of blade tools
-appearing in one cave layer or another, and the frequency of
-appearance of the different types, tell which industry we have
-in each layer.</p>
-
-<h3>OTHER KINDS OF TOOLS</h3>
-
-<p>By this time in Europe&mdash;say from about 40,000 to about 10,000
-years ago&mdash;we begin to find other kinds of material too. Bone
-tools begin to appear. There are knives, pins, needles with
-eyes, and little double-pointed straight bars of bone that were
-probably fish-hooks. The fish-line would have been fastened
-in the center of the bar; when the fish swallowed the bait, the
-bar would have caught cross-wise in the fish’s mouth.</p>
-
-<p>One quite special kind of bone tool is a long flat point for
-a light spear. It has a deep notch cut up into the breadth of
-its base, and is called a “split-based bone point” (<a href="#if_i_024">p. 82</a>). We
-know examples of bone beads from these times, and of bone
-handles for flint tools. Pierced teeth of some animals were
-worn as beads or pendants, but I am not sure that elks’ teeth
-were worn this early. There are even spool-shaped “buttons”
-or toggles.</p>
-
-<div id="if_i_024" class="figcenter" style="width: 501px;">
-  <img src="images/i_024.jpg" width="501" height="250" alt="" />
-  <div class="caption">SPLIT-BASED BONE POINT</div></div>
-
-<div id="if_i_024a" class="figcenter" style="width: 497px;">
-  <img src="images/i_024a.jpg" width="497" height="140" alt="" />
-  <div class="caption">SPEAR-THROWER</div></div>
-
-<div id="if_i_024b" class="figcenter" style="width: 537px;">
-  <img src="images/i_024b.jpg" width="537" height="314" alt="" />
-  <div class="caption">BONE HARPOON</div></div>
-
-<p>Antler came into use for tools, especially in central and
-western Europe. We do not know the use of one particular
-antler tool that has a large hole bored in one end. One
-suggestion is that it was a thong-stropper used to strop or work<span class="pagenum"><a class="hidev" id="Page_81">81</a><a  id="Page_82">82</a><br /><a id="Page_83">83</a></span>
-up hide thongs (see illustration, below); another suggestion is
-that it was an arrow-shaft straightener.</p>
-
-<p>Another interesting tool, usually of antler, is the spear-thrower,
-which is little more than a stick with a notch or hook
-on one end. The hook fits into the butt end of the spear, and
-the length of the spear-thrower allows you to put much more
-power into the throw (<a href="#if_i_024a">p. 82</a>). It works on pretty much the
-same principle as the sling.</p>
-
-<p>Very fancy harpoons of antler were also made in the latter
-half of the period in western Europe. These harpoons had
-barbs on one or both sides and a base which would slip out of
-the shaft (<a href="#if_i_024b">p. 82</a>). Some have engraved decoration.</p>
-
-<h3>THE BEGINNING OF ART</h3>
-
-<div id="if_i_024c" class="figcenter" style="width: 485px;">
-  <img src="images/i_024c.jpg" width="485" height="242" alt="" />
-  <div class="caption">THONG-STROPPER</div></div>
-
-<p>In western Europe, at least, the period saw the beginning of
-several kinds of art work. It is handy to break the art down
-into two great groups: the movable art, and the cave paintings
-and sculpture. The movable art group includes the scratchings,
-engravings, and modeling which decorate tools and
-weapons. Knives, stroppers, spear-throwers, harpoons, and
-sometimes just plain fragments of bone or antler are often
-carved. There is also a group of large flat pebbles which seem
-almost to have served as sketch blocks. The surfaces of these<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_84">84</a></span>
-various objects may show animals, or rather abstract floral
-designs, or geometric designs.</p>
-
-<div id="if_i_025" class="figcenter" style="width: 341px;">
-  <img src="images/i_025.jpg" width="341" height="308" alt="" />
-  <div class="caption">“VENUS” FIGURINE FROM WILLENDORF</div></div>
-
-<p>Some of the movable art is not done on tools. The most
-remarkable examples of this class are little figures of women.
-These women seem to be pregnant, and their most female
-characteristics are much emphasized. It is thought that these
-“Venus” or “Mother-goddess” figurines may be meant to
-show the great forces of nature&mdash;fertility and the birth of life.</p>
-
-<h3>CAVE PAINTINGS</h3>
-
-<p>In the paintings on walls and ceilings of caves we have some
-examples that compare with the best art of any time. The
-subjects were usually animals, the great cold-weather beasts of
-the end of the Ice Age: the mammoth, the wooly rhinoceros,
-the bison, the reindeer, the wild horse, the bear, the wild boar,
-and wild cattle. As in the movable art, there are different
-styles in the cave art. The really great cave art is pretty well
-restricted to southern France and Cantabrian (northwestern)
-Spain.</p>
-
-<p>There are several interesting things about the “Franco-Cantabrian”
-cave art. It was done deep down in the darkest<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_85">85</a></span>
-and most dangerous parts of the caves, although the men lived
-only in the openings of caves. If you think what they must have
-had for lights&mdash;crude lamps of hollowed stone have been found,
-which must have burned some kind of oil or grease, with
-a matted hair or fiber wick&mdash;and of the animals that may have
-lurked in the caves, you’ll understand the part about danger.
-Then, too, we’re sure the pictures these people painted were
-not simply to be looked at and admired, for they painted one
-picture right over other pictures which had been done earlier.
-Clearly, it was the <em>act</em> of <em>painting</em> that counted. The painter
-had to go way down into the most mysterious depths of the
-earth and create an animal in paint. Possibly he believed that
-by doing this he gained some sort of magic power over the
-same kind of animal when he hunted it in the open air. It
-certainly doesn’t look as if he cared very much about the
-picture he painted&mdash;as a finished product to be admired&mdash;for
-he or somebody else soon went down and painted another
-animal right over the one he had done.</p>
-
-<p>The cave art of the Franco-Cantabrian style is one of the
-great artistic achievements of all time. The subjects drawn are
-almost always the larger animals of the time: the bison, wild
-cattle and horses, the wooly rhinoceros, the mammoth, the
-wild boar, and the bear. In some of the best examples, the
-beasts are drawn in full color and the paintings are remarkably
-alive and charged with energy. They come from the hands of
-men who knew the great animals well&mdash;knew the feel of their
-fur, the tremendous drive of their muscles, and the danger one
-faced when he hunted them.</p>
-
-<p>Another artistic style has been found in eastern Spain. It
-includes lively drawings, often of people hunting with bow and
-arrow. The East Spanish art is found on open rock faces and
-in rock-shelters. It is less spectacular and apparently more
-recent than the Franco-Cantabrian cave art.</p>
-
-<h3>LIFE AT THE END OF THE ICE AGE IN EUROPE</h3>
-
-<p>Life in these times was probably as good as a hunter could
-expect it to be. Game and fish seem to have been plentiful;
-berries and wild fruits probably were, too. From France to<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_86">86</a></span>
-Russia, great pits or piles of animal bones have been found.
-Some of this killing was done as our Plains Indians killed the
-buffalo&mdash;by stampeding them over steep river banks or cliffs.
-There were also good tools for hunting, however. In western
-Europe, people lived in the openings of caves and under overhanging
-rocks. On the great plains of eastern Europe, very
-crude huts were being built, half underground. The first part
-of this time must have been cold, for it was the middle and end
-phases of the last great glaciation. Northern Europe from
-Scotland to Scandinavia, northern Germany and Russia, and
-also the higher mountains to the south, were certainly covered
-with ice. But people had fire, and the needles and tools that
-were used for scraping hides must mean that they wore
-clothing.</p>
-
-<p>It is clear that men were thinking of a great variety of
-things beside the tools that helped them get food and shelter.
-Such burials as we find have more grave-gifts than before.
-Beads and ornaments and often flint, bone, or antler tools are
-included in the grave, and sometimes the body is sprinkled
-with red ochre. Red is the color of blood, which means life,
-and of fire, which means heat. Professor Childe wonders if
-the red ochre was a pathetic attempt at magic&mdash;to give back
-to the body the heat that had gone from it. But pathetic or
-not, it is sure proof that these people were already moved by
-death as men still are moved by it.</p>
-
-<p>Their art is another example of the direction the human
-mind was taking. And when I say human, I mean it in the
-fullest sense, for this is the time in which fully modern man
-has appeared. On <a href="#Page_34">page 34</a>, we spoke of the Cro-Magnon
-group and of the Combe Capelle-Brünn group of Caucasoids
-and of the Grimaldi “Negroids,” who are no longer believed
-to be Negroid. I doubt that any one of these groups
-produced most of the achievements of the times. It’s not
-yet absolutely sure which particular group produced the great
-cave art. The artists were almost certainly a blend of several
-(no doubt already mixed) groups. The pair of Grimaldians
-were buried in a grave with a sprinkling of red ochre, and were
-provided with shell beads and ornaments and with some blade
-tools of flint. Regardless of the different names once given<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_87">87</a></span>
-them by the human paleontologists, each of these groups
-seems to have shared equally in the cultural achievements of
-the times, for all that the archeologists can say.</p>
-
-<h3>MICROLITHS</h3>
-
-<p>One peculiar set of tools seems to serve as a marker for the very
-last phase of the Ice Age in southwestern Europe. This tool-making
-habit is also found about the shore of the Mediterranean
-basin, and it moved into northern Europe as the last
-glaciation pulled northward. People began making blade
-tools of very small size. They learned how to chip very
-slender and tiny blades from a prepared core. Then they
-made these little blades into tiny triangles, half-moons (“lunates”),
-trapezoids, and several other geometric forms. These
-little tools are called “microliths.” They are so small that
-most of them must have been fixed in handles or shafts.</p>
-
-<div id="if_i_026" class="figcenter" style="width: 471px;">
-  <img src="images/i_026.jpg" width="471" height="388" alt="" />
-  <div class="caption"><p>MICROLITHS</p>
-
-<p class="sans">
-BLADE FRAGMENT<br />
-BURIN<br />
-LUNATE<br />
-TRAPEZOID<br />
-SCALENE TRIANGLE<br />
-ARROWHEAD<br />
-</p></div></div>
-
-<p>We have found several examples of microliths mounted in
-shafts. In northern Europe, where their use soon spread, the
-microlithic triangles or lunates were set in rows down each side<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_88">88</a></span>
-of a bone or wood point. One corner of each little triangle
-stuck out, and the whole thing made a fine barbed harpoon.
-In historic times in Egypt, geometric trapezoidal microliths
-were still in use as arrowheads. They were fastened&mdash;broad
-end out&mdash;on the end of an arrow shaft. It seems queer to give
-an arrow a point shaped like a “T.” Actually, the little points
-were very sharp, and must have pierced the hides of animals
-very easily. We also think that the broader cutting edge of the
-point may have caused more bleeding than a pointed arrowhead
-would. In hunting fleet-footed animals like the gazelle,
-which might run for miles after being shot with an arrow, it
-was an advantage to cause as much bleeding as possible, for
-the animal would drop sooner.</p>
-
-<p>We are not really sure where the microliths were first invented.
-There is some evidence that they appear early in the
-Near East. Their use was very common in northwest Africa
-but this came later. The microlith makers who reached south
-Russia and central Europe possibly moved up out of the Near
-East. Or it may have been the other way around; we simply
-don’t yet know.</p>
-
-<p>Remember that the microliths we are talking about here
-were made from carefully prepared little blades, and are often
-geometric in outline. Each microlithic industry proper was
-made up, in good part, of such tiny blade tools. But there
-were also some normal-sized blade tools and even some flake
-scrapers, in most microlithic industries. I emphasize this
-bladelet and the geometric character of the microlithic industries
-of the western Old World, since there has sometimes
-been confusion in the matter. Sometimes small flake chips,
-utilized as minute pointed tools, have been called “microliths.”
-They may be <em>microlithic</em> in size in terms of the general
-meaning of the word, but they do not seem to belong to the
-sub-tradition of the blade tool preparation habits which we
-have been discussing here.</p>
-
-<h3>LATER BLADE-TOOL INDUSTRIES OF THE NEAR EAST AND AFRICA</h3>
-
-<p>The blade-tool industries of normal size we talked about
-earlier spread from Europe to central Siberia. We noted that<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_89">89</a></span>
-blade tools were made in western Asia too, and early, although
-Professor Garrod is no longer sure that the whole tradition
-originated in the Near East. If you look again at my chart
-(<a href="#if_i_019">p. 72</a>) you will note that in western Asia I list some of the
-names of the western European industries, but with the qualification
-“-like” (for example, “Gravettian-like”). The western
-Asiatic blade-tool industries do vaguely recall some
-aspects of those of western Europe, but we would probably
-be better off if we used completely local names for them. The
-“Emiran” of my chart is such an example; its industry includes
-a long spike-like blade point which has no western European
-counterpart.</p>
-
-<p>When we last spoke of Africa (<a href="#Page_66">p. 66</a>), I told you that stone
-tools there were continuing in the Levalloisian flake tradition,
-and were becoming smaller. At some time during this process,
-two new tool types appeared in northern Africa: one was the
-Aterian point with a tang (<a href="#Page_67">p. 67</a>), and the other was a sort of
-“laurel leaf” point, called the “Sbaikian.” These two tool
-types were both produced from flakes. The Sbaikian points,
-especially, are roughly similar to some of the Solutrean points
-of Europe. It has been suggested that both the Sbaikian and
-Aterian points may be seen on their way to France through
-their appearance in the Spanish cave deposits of Parpallo, but
-there is also a rival “pre-Solutrean” in central Europe. We
-still do not know whether there was any contact between the
-makers of these north African tools and the Solutrean tool-makers.
-What does seem clear is that the blade-tool tradition
-itself arrived late in northern Africa.</p>
-
-<h3>NETHER AFRICA</h3>
-
-<p>Blade tools and “laurel leaf” points and some other probably
-late stone tool types also appear in central and southern Africa.
-There are geometric microliths on bladelets and even some
-coarse pottery in east Africa. There is as yet no good way of
-telling just where these items belong in time; in broad geological
-terms they are “late.” Some people have guessed that
-they are as early as similar European and Near Eastern examples,
-but I doubt it. The makers of small-sized Levalloisian<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_90">90</a></span>
-flake tools occupied much of Africa until very late in
-time.</p>
-
-<h3>THE FAR EAST</h3>
-
-<p>India and the Far East still seem to be going their own way.
-In India, some blade tools have been found. These are not
-well dated, save that we believe they must be post-Pleistocene.
-In the Far East it looks as if the old chopper-tool tradition was
-still continuing. For Burma, Dr. Movius feels this is fairly
-certain; for China he feels even more certain. Actually, we
-know very little about the Far East at about the time of the
-last glaciation. This is a shame, too, as you will soon agree.</p>
-
-<h3>THE NEW WORLD BECOMES INHABITED</h3>
-
-<p>At some time toward the end of the last great glaciation&mdash;almost
-certainly after 20,000 years ago&mdash;people began to move
-over Bering Strait, from Asia into America. As you know, the
-American Indians have been assumed to be basically Mongoloids.
-New studies of blood group types make this somewhat
-uncertain, but there is no doubt that the ancestors of the
-American Indians came from Asia.</p>
-
-<p>The stone-tool traditions of Europe, Africa, the Near and
-Middle East, and central Siberia, did <em>not</em> move into the New
-World. With only a very few special or late exceptions, there
-are <em>no</em> core-bifaces, flakes, or blade tools of the Old World.
-Such things just haven’t been found here.</p>
-
-<p>This is why I say it’s a shame we don’t know more of the
-end of the chopper-tool tradition in the Far East. According
-to Weidenreich, the Mongoloids were in the Far East long
-before the end of the last glaciation. If the genetics of the
-blood group types do demand a non-Mongoloid ancestry for
-the American Indians, who else may have been in the Far
-East 25,000 years ago? We know a little about the habits
-for making stone tools which these first people brought with
-them, and these habits don’t conform with those of the western
-Old World. We’d better keep our eyes open for whatever
-happened to the end of the chopper-tool tradition in northern
-China; already there are hints that it lasted late there. Also<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_91">91</a></span>
-we should watch future excavations in eastern Siberia. Perhaps
-we shall find the chopper-tool tradition spreading up
-that far.</p>
-
-<h3>THE NEW ERA</h3>
-
-<p>Perhaps it comes in part from the way I read the evidence
-and perhaps in part it is only intuition, but I feel that the
-materials of this chapter suggest a new era in the ways of life.
-Before about 40,000 years ago, people simply “gathered” their
-food, wandering over large areas to scavenge or to hunt in a
-simple sort of way. But here we have seen them “settling-in”
-more, perhaps restricting themselves in their wanderings and
-adapting themselves to a given locality in more intensive
-ways. This intensification might be suggested by the word
-“collecting.” The ways of life we described in the earlier
-chapters were “food-gathering” ways, but now an era of “food-collecting”
-has begun. We shall see further intensifications
-of it in the next chapter.</p>
-
-<hr />
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_92">92</a></span></p>
-
-<div class="chapter">
-<h2 id="hdr_7">End and PRELUDE</h2>
-
-<div id="if_i_027" class="figcenter" style="width: 340px;">
-  <img src="images/i_027.jpg" width="340" height="347" alt="" /></div>
-</div>
-
-<p>Up to the end of the last glaciation, we prehistorians have a
-relatively comfortable time schedule. The farther back we go
-the less exact we can be about time and details. Elbow-room
-of five, ten, even fifty or more thousands of years becomes
-available for us to maneuver in as we work backward in time.
-But now our story has come forward to the point where more
-exact methods of dating are at hand. The radioactive carbon
-method reaches back into the span of the last glaciation.
-There are other methods, developed by the geologists and
-paleobotanists, which supplement and extend the usefulness
-of the radioactive carbon dates. And, happily, as our means
-of being more exact increases, our story grows more exciting.
-There are also more details of culture for us to deal with, which
-add to the interest.</p>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_93">93</a></span></p>
-
-<h3>CHANGES AT THE END OF THE ICE AGE</h3>
-
-<p>The last great glaciation of the Ice Age was a two-part affair,
-with a sub-phase at the end of the second part. In Europe the
-last sub-phase of this glaciation commenced somewhere
-around 15,000 years ago. Then the glaciers began to melt
-back, for the last time. Remember that Professor Antevs
-(<a href="#Page_19">p. 19</a>) isn’t sure the Ice Age is over yet! This melting sometimes
-went by fits and starts, and the weather wasn’t always
-changing for the better; but there was at least one time when
-European weather was even better than it is now.</p>
-
-<p>The melting back of the glaciers and the weather fluctuations
-caused other changes, too. We know a fair amount
-about these changes in Europe. In an earlier chapter, we said
-that the whole Ice Age was a matter of continual change over
-long periods of time. As the last glaciers began to melt back
-some interesting things happened to mankind.</p>
-
-<p>In Europe, along with the melting of the last glaciers,
-geography itself was changing. Britain and Ireland had
-certainly become islands by 5000 <span class="smcap smaller">B.C.</span> The Baltic was sometimes
-a salt sea, sometimes a large fresh-water lake. Forests
-began to grow where the glaciers had been, and in what had
-once been the cold tundra areas in front of the glaciers. The
-great cold-weather animals&mdash;the mammoth and the wooly
-rhinoceros&mdash;retreated northward and finally died out. It is
-probable that the efficient hunting of the earlier people of
-20,000 or 25,000 to about 12,000 years ago had helped this
-process along (see <a href="#Page_86">p. 86</a>). Europeans, especially those of the
-post-glacial period, had to keep changing to keep up with
-the times.</p>
-
-<p>The archeological materials for the time from 10,000 to
-6000 <span class="smcap smaller">B.C.</span> seem simpler than those of the previous five thousand
-years. The great cave art of France and Spain had gone; so
-had the fine carving in bone and antler. Smaller, speedier
-animals were moving into the new forests. New ways of hunting
-them, or ways of getting other food, had to be found. Hence,
-new tools and weapons were necessary. Some of the people
-who moved into northern Germany were successful reindeer<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_94">94</a></span>
-hunters. Then the reindeer moved off to the north, and again
-new sources of food had to be found.</p>
-
-<h3>THE READJUSTMENTS COMPLETED IN EUROPE</h3>
-
-<p>After a few thousand years, things began to look better. Or at
-least we can say this: By about 6000 <span class="smcap smaller">B.C.</span> we again get hotter
-archeological materials. The best of these come from the
-north European area: Britain, Belgium, Holland, Denmark,
-north Germany, southern Norway and Sweden. Much of this
-north European material comes from bogs and swamps where
-it had become water-logged and has kept very well. Thus we
-have much more complete <em>assemblages</em><a id="FNanchor_4" href="#Footnote_4" class="fnanchor">4</a> than for any time
-earlier.</p>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_4" href="#FNanchor_4" class="fnanchor">4</a> “Assemblage” is a useful word when there are different kinds of
-archeological materials belonging together, from one area and of one
-time. An assemblage is made up of a number of “industries” (that is,
-all the tools in chipped stone, all the tools in bone, all the tools in wood,
-the traces of houses, etc.) and everything else that manages to survive,
-such as the art, the burials, the bones of the animals used as food, and
-the traces of plant foods; in fact, everything that has been left to us and
-can be used to help reconstruct the lives of the people to whom it once
-belonged. Our own present-day “assemblage” would be the sum total
-of all the objects in our mail-order catalogues, department stores and
-supply houses of every sort, our churches, our art galleries and other
-buildings, together with our roads, canals, dams, irrigation ditches, and
-any other traces we might leave of ourselves, from graves to garbage
-dumps. Not everything would last, so that an archeologist digging us
-up&mdash;say 2,000 years from now&mdash;would find only the most durable items
-in our assemblage.</p></div>
-
-<p>The best known of these assemblages is the <em>Maglemosian</em>,
-named after a great Danish peat-swamp where much has been
-found.</p>
-
-<div id="if_i_028" class="figcenter" style="width: 354px;">
-  <img src="images/i_028.jpg" width="354" height="600" alt="" />
-  <div class="caption"><p>SKETCH OF MAGLEMOSIAN ASSEMBLAGE</p>
-
-<p class="sans">
-CHIPPED STONE<br />
-HEMP<br />
-GROUND STONE<br />
-BONE AND ANTLER<br />
-WOOD<br />
-</p></div></div>
-
-<p>In the Maglemosian assemblage the flint industry was still
-very important. Blade tools, tanged arrow points, and burins
-were still made, but there were also axes for cutting the trees
-in the new forests. Moreover, the tiny microlithic blades, in
-a variety of geometric forms, are also found. Thus, a specialized
-tradition that possibly began east of the Mediterranean
-had reached northern Europe. There was also a ground stone
-industry; some axes and club-heads were made by grinding
-and polishing rather than by chipping. The industries in bone
-and antler show a great variety of tools: axes, fish-hooks, fish
-spears, handles and hafts for other tools, harpoons, and clubs.<span class="pagenum"><a class="hidev" id="Page_95">95</a><a  id="Page_96">96</a></span>
-A remarkable industry in wood has been preserved. Paddles,
-sled runners, handles for tools, and bark floats for fish-nets
-have been found. There are even fish-nets made of plant
-fibers. Canoes of some kind were no doubt made. Bone and
-antler tools were decorated with simple patterns, and amber
-was collected. Wooden bows and arrows are found.</p>
-
-<p>It seems likely that the Maglemosian bog finds are remains
-of summer camps, and that in winter the people moved to
-higher and drier regions. Childe calls them the “Forest folk”;
-they probably lived much the same sort of life as did our pre-agricultural
-Indians of the north central states. They hunted
-small game or deer; they did a great deal of fishing; they
-collected what plant food they could find. In fact, their
-assemblage shows us again that remarkable ability of men to
-adapt themselves to change. They had succeeded in domesticating
-the dog; he was still a very wolf-like dog, but his long
-association with mankind had now begun. Professor Coon
-believes that these people were direct descendants of the men
-of the glacial age and that they had much the same appearance.
-He believes that most of the Ice Age survivors still
-extant are living today in the northwestern European area.</p>
-
-<h3>SOUTH AND CENTRAL EUROPE PERHAPS AS READJUSTED AS THE NORTH</h3>
-
-<p>There is always one trouble with things that come from areas
-where preservation is exceptionally good: The very quantity
-of materials in such an assemblage tends to make things from
-other areas look poor and simple, although they may not have
-been so originally at all. The assemblages of the people who
-lived to the south of the Maglemosian area may also have been
-quite large and varied; but, unfortunately, relatively little of
-the southern assemblages has lasted. The water-logged sites
-of the Maglemosian area preserved a great deal more. Hence
-the Maglemosian itself <em>looks</em> quite advanced to us, when we
-compare it with the few things that have happened to last in
-other areas. If we could go back and wander over the Europe
-of eight thousand years ago, we would probably find that the
-peoples of France, central Europe, and south central Russia<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_97">97</a></span>
-were just as advanced as those of the north European-Baltic
-belt.</p>
-
-<p>South of the north European belt the hunting-food-collecting
-peoples were living on as best they could during this time.
-One interesting group, which seems to have kept to the regions
-of sandy soil and scrub forest, made great quantities of geometric
-microliths. These are the materials called <em>Tardenoisian</em>.
-The materials of the “Forest folk” of France and
-central Europe generally are called <em>Azilian</em>; Dr. Movius believes
-the term might best be restricted to the area south of the
-Loire River.</p>
-
-<h3>HOW MUCH REAL CHANGE WAS THERE?</h3>
-
-<p>You can see that no really <em>basic</em> change in the way of life has
-yet been described. Childe sees the problem that faced the
-Europeans of 10,000 to 3000 <span class="smcap smaller">B.C.</span> as a problem in readaptation
-to the post-glacial forest environment. By 6000 <span class="smcap smaller">B.C.</span> some quite
-successful solutions of the problem&mdash;like the Maglemosian&mdash;had
-been made. The upsets that came with the melting of the
-last ice gradually brought about all sorts of changes in the tools
-and food-getting habits, but the people themselves were still
-just as much simple hunters, fishers, and food-collectors as they
-had been in 25,000 <span class="smcap smaller">B.C.</span> It could be said that they changed just
-enough so that they would not have to change. But there is
-a bit more to it than this.</p>
-
-<p>Professor Mathiassen of Copenhagen, who knows the
-archeological remains of this time very well, poses a question.
-He speaks of the material as being neither rich nor progressive,
-in fact “rather stagnant,” but he goes on to add that the
-people had a certain “receptiveness” and were able to adapt
-themselves quickly when the next change did come. My own
-understanding of the situation is that the “Forest folk” made
-nothing as spectacular as had the producers of the earlier
-Magdalenian assemblage and the Franco-Cantabrian art.
-On the other hand, they <em>seem</em> to have been making many more
-different kinds of tools for many more different kinds of tasks
-than had their Ice Age forerunners. I emphasize “seem”
-because the preservation in the Maglemosian bogs is very<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_98">98</a></span>
-complete; certainly we cannot list anywhere near as many
-different things for earlier times as we did for the Maglemosians
-(<a href="#Page_94">p. 94</a>). I believe this experimentation with all kinds
-of new tools and gadgets, this intensification of adaptiveness
-(<a href="#Page_91">p. 91</a>), this “receptiveness,” even if it is still only pointed
-toward hunting, fishing, and food-collecting, is an important
-thing.</p>
-
-<p>Remember that the only marker we have handy for the
-<em>beginning</em> of this tendency toward “receptiveness” and experimentation
-is the little microlithic blade tools of various geometric
-forms. These, we saw, began before the last ice had
-melted away, and they lasted on in use for a very long time.
-I wish there were a better marker than the microliths but I do
-not know of one. Remember, too, that as yet we can only use
-the microliths as a marker in Europe and about the Mediterranean.</p>
-
-<h3>CHANGES IN OTHER AREAS?</h3>
-
-<p>All this last section was about Europe. How about the rest of
-the world when the last glaciers were melting away?</p>
-
-<p>We simply don’t know much about this particular time
-in other parts of the world except in Europe, the Mediterranean
-basin and the Middle East. People were certainly
-continuing to move into the New World by way of Siberia
-and the Bering Strait about this time. But for the greater
-part of Africa and Asia, we do not know exactly what was
-happening. Some day, we shall no doubt find out; today
-we are without clear information.</p>
-
-<h3>REAL CHANGE AND PRELUDE IN THE NEAR EAST</h3>
-
-<p>The appearance of the microliths and the developments made
-by the “Forest folk” of northwestern Europe also mark an end.
-They show us the terminal phase of the old food-collecting way
-of life. It grows increasingly clear that at about the same
-time that the Maglemosian and other “Forest folk” were
-adapting themselves to hunting, fishing, and collecting in new
-ways to fit the post-glacial environment, something completely
-new was being made ready in western Asia.</p>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_99">99</a></span>
-Unfortunately, we do not have as much understanding
-of the climate and environment of the late Ice Age in western
-Asia as we have for most of Europe. Probably the weather
-was never so violent or life quite so rugged as it was in northern
-Europe. We know that the microliths made their appearance
-in western Asia at least by 10,000 <span class="smcap smaller">B.C.</span> and possibly earlier,
-marking the beginning of the terminal phase of food-collecting.
-Then, gradually, we begin to see the build-up towards the
-first <em>basic change</em> in human life.</p>
-
-<p>This change amounted to a revolution just as important as
-the Industrial Revolution. In it, men first learned to
-domesticate plants and animals. They began <em>producing</em> their
-food instead of simply gathering or collecting it. When their
-food-production became reasonably effective, people could
-and did settle down in village-farming communities. With
-the appearance of the little farming villages, a new way of life
-was actually under way. Professor Childe has good reason to
-speak of the “food-producing revolution,” for it was indeed
-a revolution.</p>
-
-<h3>QUESTIONS ABOUT CAUSE</h3>
-
-<p>We do not yet know <em>how</em> and <em>why</em> this great revolution took
-place. We are only just beginning to put the questions
-properly. I suspect the answers will concern some delicate and
-subtle interplay between man and nature. Clearly, both the
-level of culture and the natural condition of the environment
-must have been ready for the great change, before the change
-itself could come about.</p>
-
-<p>It is going to take years of co-operative field work by both
-archeologists and the natural scientists who are most helpful
-to them before the <em>how</em> and <em>why</em> answers begin to appear.
-Anthropologically trained archeologists are fascinated with
-the cultures of men in times of great change. About ten or
-twelve thousand years ago, the general level of culture in many
-parts of the world seems to have been ready for change. In
-northwestern Europe, we saw that cultures “changed just
-enough so that they would not have to change.” We linked
-this to environmental changes with the coming of post-glacial
-times.</p>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_100">100</a></span>
-In western Asia, we archeologists can prove that the food-producing
-revolution actually took place. We can see <em>the</em>
-important consequence of effective domestication of plants and
-animals in the appearance of the settled village-farming community.
-And within the village-farming community was the
-seed of civilization. The way in which effective domestication
-of plants and animals came about, however, must also be
-linked closely with the natural environment. Thus the
-archeologists will not solve the <em>how</em> and <em>why</em> questions alone&mdash;they
-will need the help of interested natural scientists in the
-field itself.</p>
-
-<h3>PRECONDITIONS FOR THE REVOLUTION</h3>
-
-<p>Especially at this point in our story, we must remember how
-culture and environment go hand in hand. Neither plants
-nor animals domesticate themselves; men domesticate them.
-Furthermore, men usually domesticate only those plants and
-animals which are useful. There is a good question here:
-What is cultural usefulness? But I shall side-step it to save
-time. Men cannot domesticate plants and animals that do
-not exist in the environment where the men live. Also, there
-are certainly some animals and probably some plants that
-resist domestication, although they might be useful.</p>
-
-<p>This brings me back again to the point that <em>both</em> the level of
-culture and the natural condition of the environment&mdash;with
-the proper plants and animals in it&mdash;must have been ready
-before domestication could have happened. But this is precondition,
-not cause. Why did effective food-production
-happen first in the Near East? Why did it happen independently
-in the New World slightly later? Why also in the Far
-East? Why did it happen at all? Why are all human beings
-not still living as the Maglemosians did? These are the
-questions we still have to face.</p>
-
-<h3>CULTURAL “RECEPTIVENESS” AND PROMISING ENVIRONMENTS</h3>
-
-<p>Until the archeologists and the natural scientists&mdash;botanists,
-geologists, zoologists, and general ecologists&mdash;have spent many<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_101">101</a></span>
-more years on the problem, we shall not have full <em>how</em> and <em>why</em>
-answers. I do think, however, that we are beginning to
-understand what to look for.</p>
-
-<p>We shall have to learn much more of what makes the
-cultures of men “receptive” and experimental. Did change
-in the environment alone force it? Was it simply a case of
-Professor Toynbee’s “challenge and response?” I cannot
-believe the answer is quite that simple. Were it so simple, we
-should want to know why the change hadn’t come earlier,
-along with earlier environmental changes. We shall not know
-the answer, however, until we have excavated the traces of
-many more cultures of the time in question. We shall doubtless
-also have to learn more about, and think imaginatively
-about, the simpler cultures still left today. The “mechanics”
-of culture in general will be bound to interest us.</p>
-
-<p>It will also be necessary to learn much more of the environments
-of 10,000 to 12,000 years ago. In which regions of the
-world were the natural conditions most promising? Did this
-promise include plants and animals which could be domesticated,
-or did it only offer new ways of food-collecting? There is
-much work to do on this problem, but we are beginning to get
-some general hints.</p>
-
-<p>Before I begin to detail the hints we now have from
-western Asia, I want to do two things. First, I shall tell you
-of an old theory as to how food-production might have
-appeared. Second, I will bother you with some definitions
-which should help us in our thinking as the story goes on.</p>
-
-<h3>AN OLD THEORY AS TO THE CAUSE OF THE REVOLUTION</h3>
-
-<p>The idea that change would result, if the balance between
-nature and culture became upset, is of course not a new one.
-For at least twenty-five years, there has been a general theory
-as to <em>how</em> the food-producing revolution happened. This
-theory depends directly on the idea of natural change in the
-environment.</p>
-
-<p>The five thousand years following about 10,000 <span class="smcap smaller">B.C.</span> must
-have been very difficult ones, the theory begins. These were<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_102">102</a></span>
-the years when the most marked melting of the last glaciers
-was going on. While the glaciers were in place, the climate
-to the south of them must have been different from the climate
-in those areas today. You have no doubt read that people
-once lived in regions now covered by the Sahara Desert. This
-is true; just when is not entirely clear. The theory is that
-during the time of the glaciers, there was a broad belt of rain
-winds south of the glaciers. These rain winds would have kept
-north Africa, the Nile Valley, and the Middle East green and
-fertile. But when the glaciers melted back to the north, the belt
-of rain winds is supposed to have moved north too. Then the
-people living south and east of the Mediterranean would have
-found that their water supply was drying up, that the animals
-they hunted were dying or moving away, and that the plant
-foods they collected were dried up and scarce.</p>
-
-<p>According to the theory, all this would have been true
-except in the valleys of rivers and in oases in the growing
-deserts. Here, in the only places where water was left, the
-men and animals and plants would have clustered. They
-would have been forced to live close to one another, in order to
-live at all. Presently the men would have seen that some
-animals were more useful or made better food than others,
-and so they would have begun to protect these animals from
-their natural enemies. The men would also have been forced
-to try new plant foods&mdash;foods which possibly had to be prepared
-before they could be eaten. Thus, with trials and
-errors, but by being forced to live close to plants and animals,
-men would have learned to domesticate them.</p>
-
-<h3>THE OLD THEORY TOO SIMPLE FOR THE FACTS</h3>
-
-<p>This theory was set up before we really knew anything in
-detail about the later prehistory of the Near and Middle East.
-We now know that the facts which have been found don’t fit
-the old theory at all well. Also, I have yet to find an American
-meteorologist who feels that we know enough about the changes
-in the weather pattern to say that it can have been so simple
-and direct. And, of course, the glacial ice which began
-melting after 12,000 years ago was merely the last sub-phase
-of the last great glaciation. There had also been three earlier<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_103">103</a></span>
-periods of great alpine glaciers, and long periods of warm
-weather in between. If the rain belt moved north as the
-glaciers melted for the last time, it must have moved in the
-same direction in earlier times. Thus, the forced neighborliness
-of men, plants, and animals in river valleys and oases
-must also have happened earlier. Why didn’t domestication
-happen earlier, then?</p>
-
-<p>Furthermore, it does not seem to be in the oases and river
-valleys that we have our first or only traces of either food-production
-or the earliest farming villages. These traces are
-also in the hill-flanks of the mountains of western Asia. Our
-earliest sites of the village-farmers do not seem to indicate a
-greatly different climate from that which the same region
-now shows. In fact, everything we now know suggests that
-the old theory was just too simple an explanation to have been
-the true one. The only reason I mention it&mdash;beyond correcting
-the ideas you may get in the general texts&mdash;is that it illustrates
-the kind of thinking we shall have to do, even if it is
-doubtless wrong in detail.</p>
-
-<p>We archeologists shall have to depend much more than we
-ever have on the natural scientists who can really help us.
-I can tell you this from experience. I had the great good
-fortune to have on my expedition staff in Iraq in 1954–55,
-a geologist, a botanist, and a zoologist. Their studies added
-whole new bands of color to my spectrum of thinking about
-<em>how</em> and <em>why</em> the revolution took place and how the village-farming
-community began. But it was only a beginning; as
-I said earlier, we are just now learning to ask the proper
-questions.</p>
-
-<h3>ABOUT STAGES AND ERAS</h3>
-
-<p>Now come some definitions, so I may describe my material
-more easily. Archeologists have always loved to make divisions
-and subdivisions within the long range of materials which
-they have found. They often disagree violently about which
-particular assemblage of material goes into which subdivision,
-about what the subdivisions should be named, about what the
-subdivisions really mean culturally. Some archeologists,<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_104">104</a></span>
-probably through habit, favor an old scheme of Grecized
-names for the subdivisions: paleolithic, mesolithic, neolithic.
-I refuse to use these words myself. They have meant too many
-different things to too many different people and have tended
-to hide some pretty fuzzy thinking. Probably you haven’t
-even noticed my own scheme of subdivision up to now, but
-I’d better tell you in general what it is.</p>
-
-<p>I think of the earliest great group of archeological
-materials, from which we can deduce only a food-gathering
-way of culture, as the <em>food-gathering stage</em>. I say “stage” rather
-than “age,” because it is not quite over yet; there are still
-a few primitive people in out-of-the-way parts of the world
-who remain in the <em>food-gathering stage</em>. In fact, Professor
-Julian Steward would probably prefer to call it a food-gathering
-<em>level</em> of existence, rather than a stage. This would be
-perfectly acceptable to me. I also tend to find myself using
-<em>collecting</em>, rather than <em>gathering</em>, for the more recent aspects or
-era of the stage, as the word “collecting” appears to have
-more sense of purposefulness and specialization than does
-“gathering” (see <a href="#Page_91">p. 91</a>).</p>
-
-<p>Now, while I think we could make several possible subdivisions
-of the food-gathering stage&mdash;I call my subdivisions
-of stages <em>eras</em><a id="FNanchor_5" href="#Footnote_5" class="fnanchor">5</a>&mdash;I believe the only one which means much to us
-here is the last or <em>terminal sub-era of food-collecting</em> of the whole
-food-gathering stage. The microliths seem to mark its approach
-in the northwestern part of the Old World. It is
-really shown best in the Old World by the materials of the
-“Forest folk,” the cultural adaptation to the post-glacial
-environment in northwestern Europe. We talked about the<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_105">105</a></span>
-“Forest folk” at the beginning of this chapter, and I used the
-Maglemosian assemblage of Denmark as an example.</p>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_5" href="#FNanchor_5" class="fnanchor">5</a> It is difficult to find words which have a sequence or gradation
-of meaning with respect to both development and a range of time in the
-past, or with a range of time from somewhere in the past which is perhaps
-not yet ended. One standard Webster definition of <em>stage</em> is: “One of the
-steps into which the material development of man ... is divided.”
-I cannot find any dictionary definition that suggests which of the words,
-<em>stage</em> or <em>era</em>, has the meaning of a longer span of time. Therefore, I have
-chosen to let my eras be shorter, and to subdivide my stages into eras.
-Webster gives <em>era</em> as: “A signal stage of history, an epoch.” When I want
-to subdivide my eras, I find myself using <em>sub-eras</em>. Thus I speak of the
-<em>eras</em> within a <em>stage</em> and of the <em>sub-eras</em> within an <em>era</em>; that is, I do so when
-I feel that I really have to, and when the evidence is clear enough to
-allow it.</p></div>
-
-<p>The food-producing revolution ushers in the <em>food-producing
-stage</em>. This stage began to be replaced by the <em>industrial stage</em>
-only about two hundred years ago. Now notice that my stage
-divisions are in terms of technology and economics. We must
-think sharply to be sure that the subdivisions of the stages,
-the eras, are in the same terms. This does not mean that
-I think technology and economics are the only important
-realms of culture. It is rather that for most of prehistoric time
-the materials left to the archeologists tend to limit our deductions
-to technology and economics.</p>
-
-<p>I’m so soon out of my competence, as conventional ancient
-history begins, that I shall only suggest the earlier eras of the
-food-producing stage to you. This book is about prehistory,
-and I’m not a universal historian.</p>
-
-<h3>THE TWO EARLIEST ERAS OF THE FOOD-PRODUCING STAGE</h3>
-
-<p>The food-producing stage seems to appear in western Asia
-with really revolutionary suddenness. It is seen by the relative
-speed with which the traces of new crafts appear in the earliest
-village-farming community sites we’ve dug. It is seen by the
-spread and multiplication of these sites themselves, and the
-remarkable growth in human population we deduce from this
-increase in sites. We’ll look at some of these sites and the
-archeological traces they yield in the next chapter. When
-such village sites begin to appear, I believe we are in the <em>era
-of the primary village-farming community</em>. I also believe this is the
-second era of the food-producing stage.</p>
-
-<p>The first era of the food-producing stage, I believe, was
-an <em>era of incipient cultivation and animal domestication</em>. I keep
-saying “I believe” because the actual evidence for this earlier
-era is so slight that one has to set it up mainly by playing
-a hunch for it. The reason for playing the hunch goes about
-as follows.</p>
-
-<p>One thing we seem to be able to see, in the food-collecting
-era in general, is a tendency for people to begin to settle
-down. This settling down seemed to become further intensified<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_106">106</a></span>
-in the terminal era. How this is connected with Professor
-Mathiassen’s “receptiveness” and the tendency to be experimental,
-we do not exactly know. The evidence from the
-New World comes into play here as well as that from the Old
-World. With this settling down in one place, the people of
-the terminal era&mdash;especially the “Forest folk” whom we
-know best&mdash;began making a great variety of new things.
-I remarked about this earlier in the chapter. Dr. Robert M.
-Adams is of the opinion that this atmosphere of experimentation
-with new tools&mdash;with new ways of collecting food&mdash;is the
-kind of atmosphere in which one might expect trials at planting
-and at animal domestication to have been made. We first
-begin to find traces of more permanent life in outdoor camp
-sites, although caves were still inhabited at the beginning of
-the terminal era. It is not surprising at all that the “Forest
-folk” had already domesticated the dog. In this sense, the
-whole era of food-collecting was becoming ready and almost
-“incipient” for cultivation and animal domestication.</p>
-
-<p>Northwestern Europe was not the place for really effective
-beginnings in agriculture and animal domestication. These
-would have had to take place in one of those natural environments
-of promise, where a variety of plants and animals, each
-possible of domestication, was available in the wild state.
-Let me spell this out. Really effective food-production must
-include a variety of items to make up a reasonably well-rounded
-diet. The food-supply so produced must be trustworthy,
-even though the food-producing peoples themselves
-might be happy to supplement it with fish and wild strawberries,
-just as we do when such things are available. So, as
-we said earlier, part of our problem is that of finding a region
-with a natural environment which includes&mdash;and did include,
-some ten thousand years ago&mdash;a variety of possibly domesticable
-wild plants and animals.</p>
-
-<h3>NUCLEAR AREAS</h3>
-
-<p>Now comes the last of my definitions. A region with a natural
-environment which included a variety of wild plants and
-animals, both possible and ready for domestication, would be
-a central or core or <em>nuclear area</em>, that is, it would be when and<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_107">107</a></span>
-<em>if</em> food-production took place within it. It is pretty hard for
-me to imagine food-production having ever made an independent
-start outside such a nuclear area, although there may
-be some possible nuclear areas in which food-production never
-took place (possibly in parts of Africa, for example).</p>
-
-<p>We know of several such nuclear areas. In the New World,
-Middle America and the Andean highlands make up one or
-two; it is my understanding that the evidence is not yet clear as
-to which. There seems to have been a nuclear area somewhere
-in southeastern Asia, in the Malay peninsula or Burma
-perhaps, connected with the early cultivation of taro, breadfruit,
-the banana and the mango. Possibly the cultivation of
-rice and the domestication of the chicken and of zebu cattle
-and the water buffalo belong to this southeast Asiatic nuclear
-area. We know relatively little about it archeologically, as
-yet. The nuclear area which was the scene of the earliest
-experiment in effective food-production was in western Asia.
-Since I know it best, I shall use it as my example.</p>
-
-<h3>THE NUCLEAR NEAR EAST</h3>
-
-<p>The nuclear area of western Asia is naturally the one of
-greatest interest to people of the western cultural tradition.
-Our cultural heritage began within it. The area itself is the
-region of the hilly flanks of rain-watered grass-land which
-build up to the high mountain ridges of Iran, Iraq, Turkey,
-Syria, and Palestine. The map on page 125 indicates the
-region. If you have a good atlas, try to locate the zone which
-surrounds the drainage basin of the Tigris and Euphrates
-Rivers at elevations of from approximately 2,000 to 5,000 feet.
-The lower alluvial land of the Tigris-Euphrates basin itself has
-very little rainfall. Some years ago Professor James Henry
-Breasted called the alluvial lands of the Tigris-Euphrates
-a part of the “fertile crescent.” These alluvial lands are very
-fertile if irrigated. Breasted was most interested in the oriental
-civilizations of conventional ancient history, and irrigation had
-been discovered before they appeared.</p>
-
-<p>The country of hilly flanks above Breasted’s crescent
-receives from 10 to 20 or more inches of winter rainfall each<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_108">108</a></span>
-year, which is about what Kansas has. Above the hilly-flanks
-zone tower the peaks and ridges of the Lebanon-Amanus chain
-bordering the coast-line from Palestine to Turkey, the Taurus
-Mountains of southern Turkey, and the Zagros range of the
-Iraq-Iran borderland. This rugged mountain frame for our
-hilly-flanks zone rises to some magnificent alpine scenery, with
-peaks of from ten to fifteen thousand feet in elevation. There
-are several gaps in the Mediterranean coastal portion of the
-frame, through which the winter’s rain-bearing winds from
-the sea may break so as to carry rain to the foothills of the
-Taurus and the Zagros.</p>
-
-<p>The picture I hope you will have from this description
-is that of an intermediate hilly-flanks zone lying between two
-regions of extremes. The lower Tigris-Euphrates basin land
-is low and far too dry and hot for agriculture based on rainfall
-alone; to the south and southwest, it merges directly into
-the great desert of Arabia. The mountains which lie above
-the hilly-flanks zone are much too high and rugged to have
-encouraged farmers.</p>
-
-<h3>THE NATURAL ENVIRONMENT OF THE NUCLEAR NEAR EAST</h3>
-
-<p>The more we learn of this hilly-flanks zone that I describe, the
-more it seems surely to have been a nuclear area. This is
-where we archeologists need, and are beginning to get, the
-help of natural scientists. They are coming to the conclusion
-that the natural environment of the hilly-flanks zone today
-is much as it was some eight to ten thousand years ago. There
-are still two kinds of wild wheat and a wild barley, and the wild
-sheep, goat, and pig. We have discovered traces of each
-of these at about nine thousand years ago, also traces of wild
-ox, horse, and dog, each of which appears to be the probable
-ancestor of the domesticated form. In fact, at about nine
-thousand years ago, the two wheats, the barley, and at least
-the goat, were already well on the road to domestication.</p>
-
-<p>The wild wheats give us an interesting clue. They are only
-available together with the wild barley within the hilly-flanks
-zone. While the wild barley grows in a variety of elevations<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_109">109</a></span>
-and beyond the zone, at least one of the wild wheats does
-not seem to grow below the hill country. As things look
-at the moment, the domestication of both the wheats together
-could <em>only</em> have taken place within the hilly-flanks zone.
-Barley seems to have first come into cultivation due to its
-presence as a weed in already cultivated wheat fields. There
-is also a suggestion&mdash;there is still much more to learn in the
-matter&mdash;that the animals which were first domesticated were
-most at home up in the hilly-flanks zone in their wild state.</p>
-
-<p>With a single exception&mdash;that of the dog&mdash;the earliest
-positive evidence of domestication includes the two forms of
-wheat, the barley, and the goat. The evidence comes from
-within the hilly-flanks zone. However, it comes from a settled
-village proper, Jarmo (which I’ll describe in the next chapter),
-and is thus from the era of the primary village-farming community.
-We are still without positive evidence of domesticated
-grain and animals in the first era of the food-producing
-stage, that of incipient cultivation and animal domestication.</p>
-
-<h3>THE ERA OF INCIPIENT CULTIVATION AND ANIMAL DOMESTICATION</h3>
-
-<p>I said above (<a href="#Page_105">p. 105</a>) that my era of incipient cultivation and
-animal domestication is mainly set up by playing a hunch.
-Although we cannot really demonstrate it&mdash;and certainly not
-in the Near East&mdash;it would be very strange for food-collectors
-not to have known a great deal about the plants and animals
-most useful to them. They do seem to have domesticated the
-dog. We can easily imagine them remembering to go back,
-season after season, to a particular patch of ground where
-seeds or acorns or berries grew particularly well. Most human
-beings, unless they are extremely hungry, are attracted to
-baby animals, and many wild pups or fawns or piglets must
-have been brought back alive by hunting parties.</p>
-
-<p>In this last sense, man has probably always been an
-incipient cultivator and domesticator. But I believe that
-Adams is right in suggesting that this would be doubly true
-with the experimenters of the terminal era of food-collecting.
-We noticed that they also seem to have had a tendency to
-settle down. Now my hunch goes that <em>when</em> this experimentation<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_110">110</a></span>
-and settling down took place within a potential nuclear
-area&mdash;where a whole constellation of plants and animals
-possible of domestication was available&mdash;the change was
-easily made. Professor Charles A. Reed, our field colleague
-in zoology, agrees that year-round settlement with plant
-domestication probably came before there were important
-animal domestications.</p>
-
-<h3>INCIPIENT ERAS AND NUCLEAR AREAS</h3>
-
-<p>I have put this scheme into a simple chart (<a href="#if_i_029">p. 111</a>) with the
-names of a few of the sites we are going to talk about. You
-will see that my hunch means that there are eras of incipient
-cultivation <em>only</em> within nuclear areas. In a nuclear area, the
-terminal era of food-collecting would probably have been
-quite short. I do not know for how long a time the era of
-incipient cultivation and domestication would have lasted,
-but perhaps for several thousand years. Then it passed on
-into the era of the primary village-farming community.</p>
-
-<p>Outside a nuclear area, the terminal era of food-collecting
-would last for a long time; in a few out-of-the-way parts of the
-world, it still hangs on. It would end in any particular place
-through contact with and the spread of ideas of people who had
-passed on into one of the more developed eras. In many cases,
-the terminal era of food-collecting was ended by the incoming
-of the food-producing peoples themselves. For example, the
-practices of food-production were carried into Europe by the
-actual movement of some numbers of peoples (we don’t know
-how many) who had reached at least the level of the primary
-village-farming community. The “Forest folk” learned food-production
-from them. There was never an era of incipient
-cultivation and domestication proper in Europe, if my hunch
-is right.</p>
-
-<h3>ARCHEOLOGICAL DIFFICULTIES IN SEEING THE INCIPIENT ERA</h3>
-
-<p>The way I see it, two things were required in order that an
-era of incipient cultivation and domestication could begin.
-First, there had to be the natural environment of a nuclear<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_111">111</a></span>
-area, with its whole group of plants and animals capable of
-domestication. This is the aspect of the matter which we’ve
-said is directly given by nature. But it is quite possible that
-such an environment with such a group of plants and animals
-in it may have existed well before ten thousand years ago
-in the Near East. It is also quite possible that the same
-promising condition may have existed in regions which never
-developed into nuclear areas proper. Here, again, we come
-back to the cultural factor. I think it was that “atmosphere of
-experimentation” we’ve talked about once or twice before.
-I can’t define it for you, other than to say that by the end of
-the Ice Age, the general level of many cultures was ready for
-change. Ask me how and why this was so, and I’ll tell you
-we don’t know yet, and that if we did understand this kind of
-question, there would be no need for me to go on being
-a prehistorian!</p>
-
-<div id="if_i_029" class="figcenter" style="width: 600px;">
-  <img src="images/i_029.jpg" width="600" height="560" alt="" />
-  <div class="caption">POSSIBLE RELATIONSHIPS OF STAGES AND ERAS IN
-WESTERN ASIA AND NORTHEASTERN AFRICA</div></div>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_112">112</a></span>
-Now since this was an era of incipience, of the birth of new
-ideas, and of experimentation, it is very difficult to see its
-traces archeologically. New tools having to do with the new
-ways of getting and, in fact, producing food would have taken
-some time to develop. It need not surprise us too much if we
-cannot find hoes for planting and sickles for reaping grain at
-the very beginning. We might expect a time of making-do
-with some of the older tools, or with make-shift tools, for some
-of the new jobs. The present-day wild cousin of the domesticated
-sheep still lives in the mountains of western Asia. It has
-no wool, only a fine down under hair like that of a deer, so it
-need not surprise us to find neither the whorls used for spinning
-nor traces of woolen cloth. It must have taken some time for
-a wool-bearing sheep to develop and also time for the invention
-of the new tools which go with weaving. It would
-have been the same with other kinds of tools for the new way
-of life.</p>
-
-<p>It is difficult even for an experienced comparative
-zoologist to tell which are the bones of domesticated animals
-and which are those of their wild cousins. This is especially
-so because the animal bones the archeologists find are usually
-fragmentary. Furthermore, we do not have a sort of library
-collection of the skeletons of the animals or an herbarium of
-the plants of those times, against which the traces which the
-archeologists find may be checked. We are only beginning
-to get such collections for the modern wild forms of animals
-and plants from some of our nuclear areas. In the nuclear
-area in the Near East, some of the wild animals, at least, have
-already become extinct. There are no longer wild cattle or
-wild horses in western Asia. We know they were there from
-the finds we’ve made in caves of late Ice Age times, and from
-some slightly later sites.</p>
-
-<h3>SITES WITH ANTIQUITIES OF THE INCIPIENT ERA</h3>
-
-<p>So far, we know only a very few sites which would suit my
-notion of the incipient era of cultivation and animal domestication.
-I am closing this chapter with descriptions of two of
-the best Near Eastern examples I know of. You may not be<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_113">113</a></span>
-satisfied that what I am able to describe makes a full-bodied
-era of development at all. Remember, however, that I’ve
-told you I’m largely playing a kind of a hunch, and also that
-the archeological materials of this era will always be extremely
-difficult to interpret. At the beginning of any new
-way of life, there will be a great tendency for people to make-do,
-at first, with tools and habits they are already used to.
-I would suspect that a great deal of this making-do went on
-almost to the end of this era.</p>
-
-<h3>THE NATUFIAN, AN ASSEMBLAGE OF THE INCIPIENT ERA</h3>
-
-<p>The assemblage called the Natufian comes from the upper
-layers of a number of caves in Palestine. Traces of its flint
-industry have also turned up in Syria and Lebanon. We
-don’t know just how old it is. I guess that it probably falls
-within five hundred years either way of about 5000 <span class="smcap smaller">B.C.</span></p>
-
-<p>Until recently, the people who produced the Natufian
-assemblage were thought to have been only cave dwellers,
-but now at least three open air Natufian sites have been briefly
-described. In their best-known dwelling place, on Mount
-Carmel, the Natufian folk lived in the open mouth of a large
-rock-shelter and on the terrace in front of it. On the terrace,
-they had set at least two short curving lines of stones; but
-these were hardly architecture; they seem more like benches
-or perhaps the low walls of open pens. There were also one
-or two small clusters of stones laid like paving, and a ring of
-stones around a hearth or fireplace. One very round and
-regular basin-shaped depression had been cut into the rocky
-floor of the terrace, and there were other less regular basin-like
-depressions. In the newly reported open air sites, there seem
-to have been huts with rounded corners.</p>
-
-<p>Most of the finds in the Natufian layer of the Mount
-Carmel cave were flints. About 80 per cent of these flint tools
-were microliths made by the regular working of tiny blades
-into various tools, some having geometric forms. The larger
-flint tools included backed blades, burins, scrapers, a few
-arrow points, some larger hacking or picking tools, and one
-special type. This last was the sickle blade.</p>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_114">114</a></span>
-We know a sickle blade of flint when we see one, because
-of a strange polish or sheen which seems to develop on the
-cutting edge when the blade has been used to cut grasses or
-grain, or&mdash;perhaps&mdash;reeds. In the Natufian, we have even
-found the straight bone handles in which a number of flint
-sickle blades were set in a line.</p>
-
-<p>There was a small industry in ground or pecked stone (that
-is, abraded not chipped) in the Natufian. This included some
-pestle and mortar fragments. The mortars are said to have
-a deep and narrow hole, and some of the pestles show traces of
-red ochre. We are not sure that these mortars and pestles
-were also used for grinding food. In addition, there were one
-or two bits of carving in stone.</p>
-
-<h3>NATUFIAN ANTIQUITIES IN OTHER MATERIALS; BURIALS AND PEOPLE</h3>
-
-<p>The Natufian industry in bone was quite rich. It included,
-beside the sickle hafts mentioned above, points and harpoons,
-straight and curved types of fish-hooks, awls, pins and needles,
-and a variety of beads and pendants. There were also beads
-and pendants of pierced teeth and shell.</p>
-
-<p>A number of Natufian burials have been found in the caves;
-some burials were grouped together in one grave. The people
-who were buried within the Mount Carmel cave were laid on
-their backs in an extended position, while those on the terrace
-seem to have been “flexed” (placed in their graves in a curled-up
-position). This may mean no more than that it was easier
-to dig a long hole in cave dirt than in the hard-packed dirt of
-the terrace. The people often had some kind of object buried
-with them, and several of the best collections of beads come
-from the burials. On two of the skulls there were traces of
-elaborate head-dresses of shell beads.</p>
-
-<div id="if_i_030" class="figcenter" style="width: 341px;">
-  <img src="images/i_030.jpg" width="341" height="600" alt="" />
-  <div class="caption"><p>SKETCH OF NATUFIAN ASSEMBLAGE</p>
-
-<p class="sans">
-MICROLITHS<br />
-ARCHITECTURE?<br />
-BURIAL<br />
-CHIPPED STONE<br />
-GROUND STONE<br />
-BONE<br />
-</p></div></div>
-
-<p>The animal bones of the Natufian layers show beasts of
-a “modern” type, but with some differences from those of
-present-day Palestine. The bones of the gazelle far outnumber
-those of the deer; since gazelles like a much drier climate than
-deer, Palestine must then have had much the same climate
-that it has today. Some of the animal bones were those of
-large or dangerous beasts: the hyena, the bear, the wild boar,<span class="pagenum"><a class="hidev" id="Page_115">115</a><a  id="Page_116">116</a></span>
-and the leopard. But the Natufian people may have had the
-help of a large domesticated dog. If our guess at a date for
-the Natufian is right (about 7750 <span class="smcap smaller">B.C.</span>), this is an earlier dog
-than was that in the Maglemosian of northern Europe. More
-recently, it has been reported that a domesticated goat is also
-part of the Natufian finds.</p>
-
-<p>The study of the human bones from the Natufian burials is
-not yet complete. Until Professor McCown’s study becomes
-available, we may note Professor Coon’s assessment that these
-people were of a “basically Mediterranean type.”</p>
-
-<h3>THE KARIM SHAHIR ASSEMBLAGE</h3>
-
-<p>Karim Shahir differs from the Natufian sites in that it shows
-traces of a temporary open site or encampment. It lies on the
-top of a bluff in the Kurdish hill-country of northeastern Iraq.
-It was dug by Dr. Bruce Howe of the expedition I directed in
-1950–51 for the Oriental Institute and the American Schools of
-Oriental Research. In 1954–55, our expedition located
-another site, M’lefaat, with general resemblance to Karim
-Shahir, but about a hundred miles north of it. In 1956,
-Dr. Ralph Solecki located still another Karim Shahir type of
-site called Zawi Chemi Shanidar. The Zawi Chemi site has
-a radiocarbon date of 8900 ± 300 <span class="smcap smaller">B.C.</span></p>
-
-<p>Karim Shahir has evidence of only one very shallow level
-of occupation. It was probably not lived on very long,
-although the people who lived on it spread out over about
-three acres of area. In spots, the single layer yielded great
-numbers of fist-sized cracked pieces of limestone, which had
-been carried up from the bed of a stream at the bottom of the
-bluff. We think these cracked stones had something to do
-with a kind of architecture, but we were unable to find positive
-traces of hut plans. At M’lefaat and Zawi Chemi, there were
-traces of rounded hut plans.</p>
-
-<p>As in the Natufian, the great bulk of small objects of the
-Karim Shahir assemblage was in chipped flint. A large proportion
-of the flint tools were microlithic bladelets and geometric
-forms. The flint sickle blade was almost non-existent,
-being far scarcer than in the Natufian. The people of Karim<span class="pagenum"><a class="hidev" id="Page_117">117</a><a  id="Page_118">118</a></span>
-Shahir did a modest amount of work in the grinding of stone;
-there were milling stone fragments of both the mortar and the
-quern type, and stone hoes or axes with polished bits. Beads,
-pendants, rings, and bracelets were made of finer quality
-stone. We found a few simple points and needles of bone,
-and even two rather formless unbaked clay figurines which
-seemed to be of animal form.</p>
-
-<div id="if_i_031" class="figcenter" style="width: 346px;">
-  <img src="images/i_031.jpg" width="346" height="600" alt="" />
-  <div class="caption"><p>SKETCH OF KARIM SHAHIR ASSEMBLAGE</p>
-
-<p class="sans">
-CHIPPED STONE<br />
-GROUND STONE<br />
-UNBAKED CLAY<br />
-SHELL<br />
-BONE<br />
-“ARCHITECTURE”<br />
-</p></div></div>
-
-<p>Karim Shahir did not yield direct evidence of the kind
-of vegetable food its people ate. The animal bones showed
-a considerable increase in the proportion of the bones of the
-species capable of domestication&mdash;sheep, goat, cattle, horse,
-dog&mdash;as compared with animal bones from the earlier cave
-sites of the area, which have a high proportion of bones of wild
-forms like deer and gazelle. But we do not know that any of
-the Karim Shahir animals were actually domesticated. Some
-of them may have been, in an “incipient” way, but we have
-no means at the moment that will tell us from the bones alone.</p>
-
-<h3>WERE THE NATUFIAN AND KARIM SHAHIR PEOPLES FOOD-PRODUCERS?</h3>
-
-<p>It is clear that a great part of the food of the Natufian
-people must have been hunted or collected. Shells of land,
-fresh-water, and sea animals occur in their cave layers. The
-same is true as regards Karim Shahir, save for sea shells. But
-on the other hand, we have the sickles, the milling stones, the
-possible Natufian dog, and the goat, and the general animal
-situation at Karim Shahir to hint at an incipient approach
-to food-production. At Karim Shahir, there was the tendency
-to settle down out in the open; this is echoed by the new
-reports of open air Natufian sites. The large number of
-cracked stones certainly indicates that it was worth the
-peoples’ while to have some kind of structure, even if the site
-as a whole was short-lived.</p>
-
-<p>It is a part of my hunch that these things all point toward
-food-production&mdash;that the hints we seek are there. But in
-the sense that the peoples of the era of the primary village-farming
-community, which we shall look at next, are fully
-food-producing, the Natufian and Karim Shahir folk had not
-yet arrived. I think they were part of a general build-up to<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_119">119</a></span>
-full scale food-production. They were possibly controlling
-a few animals of several kinds and perhaps one or two plants,
-without realizing the full possibilities of this “control” as
-a new way of life.</p>
-
-<p>This is why I think of the Karim Shahir and Natufian folk
-as being at a level, or in an era, of incipient cultivation and
-domestication. But we shall have to do a great deal more
-excavation in this range of time before we’ll get the kind of
-positive information we need.</p>
-
-<h3>SUMMARY</h3>
-
-<p>I am sorry that this chapter has had to be so much more about
-ideas than about the archeological traces of prehistoric men
-themselves. But the antiquities of the incipient era of cultivation
-and animal domestication will not be spectacular, even
-when we do have them excavated in quantity. Few museums
-will be interested in these antiquities for exhibition purposes.
-The charred bits or impressions of plants, the fragments of
-animal bone and shell, and the varied clues to climate and
-environment will be as important as the artifacts themselves.
-It will be the ideas to which these traces lead us that will be
-important. I am sure that this unspectacular material&mdash;when
-we have much more of it, and learn how to understand what
-it says&mdash;will lead us to how and why answers about the first
-great change in human history.</p>
-
-<p>We know the earliest village-farming communities appeared
-in western Asia, in a nuclear area. We do not yet
-know why the Near Eastern experiment came first, or why it
-didn’t happen earlier in some other nuclear area. Apparently,
-the level of culture and the promise of the natural environment
-were ready first in western Asia. The next sites we look at
-will show a simple but effective food-production already in
-existence. Without effective food-production and the settled
-village-farming communities, civilization never could have
-followed. How effective food-production came into being
-by the end of the incipient era, is, I believe, one of the most
-fascinating questions any archeologist could face.</p>
-
-<p>It now seems probable&mdash;from possibly two of the Palestinian
-sites with varieties of the Natufian (Jericho and Nahal<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_120">120</a></span>
-Oren)&mdash;that there were one or more local Palestinian developments
-out of the Natufian into later times. In the same way,
-what followed after the Karim Shahir type of assemblage in
-northeastern Iraq was in some ways a reflection of beginnings
-made at Karim Shahir and Zawi Chemi.</p>
-
-<hr />
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_121">121</a></span></p>
-
-<div class="chapter">
-<h2 id="hdr_8"><span class="smcap smaller">THE</span> First Revolution</h2>
-
-<div id="if_i_032" class="figcenter" style="width: 348px;">
-  <img src="images/i_032.jpg" width="348" height="229" alt="" /></div>
-</div>
-
-<p>As the incipient era of cultivation and animal domestication
-passed onward into the era of the primary village-farming
-community, the first basic change in human economy was
-fully achieved. In southwestern Asia, this seems to have taken
-place about nine thousand years ago. I am going to restrict
-my description to this earliest Near Eastern case&mdash;I do not
-know enough about the later comparable experiments in the
-Far East and in the New World. Let us first, once again,
-think of the contrast between food-collecting and food-producing
-as ways of life.</p>
-
-<h3>THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN FOOD-COLLECTORS AND FOOD-PRODUCERS</h3>
-
-<p>Childe used the word “revolution” because of the radical
-change that took place in the habits and customs of man.
-Food-collectors&mdash;that is, hunters, fishers, berry- and nut-gatherers&mdash;had
-to live in small groups or bands, for they had
-to be ready to move wherever their food supply moved. Not
-many people can be fed in this way in one area, and small
-children and old folks are a burden. There is not enough
-food to store, and it is not the kind that can be stored for long.</p>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_122">122</a></span>
-Do you see how this all fits into a picture? Small groups
-of people living now in this cave, now in that&mdash;or out in
-the open&mdash;as they moved after the animals they hunted;
-no permanent villages, a few half-buried huts at best; no
-breakable utensils; no pottery; no signs of anything for
-clothing beyond the tools that were probably used to dress
-the skins of animals; no time to think of much of anything
-but food and protection and disposal of the dead when death
-did come: an existence which takes nature as it finds it, which
-does little or nothing to modify nature&mdash;all in all, a savage’s
-existence, and a very tough one. A man who spends his
-whole life following animals just to kill them to eat, or moving
-from one berry patch to another, is really living just like an
-animal himself.</p>
-
-<h3>THE FOOD-PRODUCING ECONOMY</h3>
-
-<p>Against this picture let me try to draw another&mdash;that of man’s
-life after food-production had begun. His meat was stored
-“on the hoof,” his grain in silos or great pottery jars. He
-lived in a house: it was worth his while to build one, because
-he couldn’t move far from his fields and flocks. In his neighborhood
-enough food could be grown and enough animals bred
-so that many people were kept busy. They all lived close to
-their flocks and fields, in a village. The village was already
-of a fair size, and it was growing, too. Everybody had more
-to eat; they were presumably all stronger, and there were
-more children. Children and old men could shepherd the
-animals by day or help with the lighter work in the fields.
-After the crops had been harvested the younger men might
-go hunting and some of them would fish, but the food they
-brought in was only an addition to the food in the village;
-the villagers wouldn’t starve, even if the hunters and fishermen
-came home empty-handed.</p>
-
-<p>There was more time to do different things, too. They
-began to modify nature. They made pottery out of raw clay,
-and textiles out of hair or fiber. People who became good
-at pottery-making traded their pots for food and spent all
-of their time on pottery alone. Other people were learning<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_123">123</a></span>
-to weave cloth or to make new tools. There were already
-people in the village who were becoming full-time craftsmen.</p>
-
-<p>Other things were changing, too. The villagers must
-have had to agree on new rules for living together. The
-head man of the village had problems different from those of
-the chief of the small food-collectors’ band. If somebody’s
-flock of sheep spoiled a wheat field, the owner wanted payment
-for the grain he lost. The chief of the hunters was never
-bothered with such questions. Even the gods had changed.
-The spirits and the magic that had been used by hunters
-weren’t of any use to the villagers. They needed gods who
-would watch over the fields and the flocks, and they eventually
-began to erect buildings where their gods might dwell, and
-where the men who knew most about the gods might live.</p>
-
-<h3>WAS FOOD-PRODUCTION A “REVOLUTION”?</h3>
-
-<p>If you can see the difference between these two pictures&mdash;between
-life in the food-collecting stage and life after food-production
-had begun&mdash;you’ll see why Professor Childe
-speaks of a revolution. By revolution, he doesn’t mean that
-it happened over night or that it happened only once. We
-don’t know exactly how long it took. Some people think
-that all these changes may have occurred in less than 500
-years, but I doubt that. The incipient era was probably
-an affair of some duration. Once the level of the village-farming
-community had been established, however, things did
-begin to move very fast. By six thousand years ago, the
-descendants of the first villagers had developed irrigation
-and plow agriculture in the relatively rainless Mesopotamian
-alluvium and were living in towns with temples. Relative
-to the half million years of food-gathering which lay behind,
-this had been achieved with truly revolutionary suddenness.</p>
-
-<h3>GAPS IN OUR KNOWLEDGE OF THE NEAR EAST</h3>
-
-<p>If you’ll look again at the chart (<a href="#if_i_029">p. 111</a>) you’ll see that I have
-very few sites and assemblages to name in the incipient era of
-cultivation and domestication, and not many in the earlier<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_124">124</a></span>
-part of the primary village-farming level either. Thanks in
-no small part to the intelligent co-operation given foreign
-excavators by the Iraq Directorate General of Antiquities,
-our understanding of the sequence in Iraq is growing more
-complete. I shall use Iraq as my main yard-stick here. But
-I am far from being able to show you a series of Sears Roebuck
-catalogues, even century by century, for any part of the
-nuclear area. There is still a great deal of earth to move, and
-a great mass of material to recover and interpret before we
-even begin to understand “how” and “why.”</p>
-
-<p>Perhaps here, because this kind of archeology is really
-my specialty, you’ll excuse it if I become personal for a
-moment. I very much look forward to having further part in
-closing some of the gaps in knowledge of the Near East. This
-is not, as I’ve told you, the spectacular range of Near Eastern
-archeology. There are no royal tombs, no gold, no great
-buildings or sculpture, no writing, in fact nothing to excite
-the normal museum at all. Nevertheless it is a range which,
-idea-wise, gives the archeologist tremendous satisfaction.
-The country of the hilly flanks is an exciting combination of
-green grasslands and mountainous ridges. The Kurds, who
-inhabit the part of the area in which I’ve worked most recently,
-are an extremely interesting and hospitable people. Archeologists
-don’t become rich, but I’ll forego the Cadillac for any
-bright spring morning in the Kurdish hills, on a good site
-with a happy crew of workmen and an interested and efficient
-staff. It is probably impossible to convey the full feeling
-which life on such a dig holds&mdash;halcyon days for the body
-and acute pleasurable stimulation for the mind. Old things
-coming newly out of the good dirt, and the pieces of the
-human puzzle fitting into place! I think I am an honest
-man; I cannot tell you that I am sorry the job is not yet
-finished and that there are still gaps in this part of the Near
-Eastern archeological sequence.</p>
-
-<h3>EARLIEST SITES OF THE VILLAGE FARMERS</h3>
-
-<p>So far, the Karim Shahir type of assemblage, which we looked
-at in the last chapter, is the earliest material available in what<span class="pagenum"><a class="hidev" id="Page_125">125</a><a  id="Page_126">126</a></span>
-I take to be the nuclear area. We do not believe that Karim
-Shahir was a village site proper: it looks more like the traces
-of a temporary encampment. Two caves, called Belt and
-Hotu, which are outside the nuclear area and down on the
-foreshore of the Caspian Sea, have been excavated by Professor
-Coon. These probably belong in the later extension
-of the terminal era of food-gathering; in their upper layers
-are traits like the use of pottery borrowed from the more
-developed era of the same time in the nuclear area. The
-same general explanation doubtless holds true for certain
-materials in Egypt, along the upper Nile and in the Kharga
-oasis: these materials, called Sebilian III, the Khartoum
-“neolithic,” and the Khargan microlithic, are from surface
-sites, not from caves. The chart (<a href="#if_i_029">p. 111</a>) shows where I
-would place these materials in era and time.</p>
-
-<div id="if_i_033" class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;">
-  <img src="images/i_033.jpg" width="700" height="397" alt="" />
-  <div class="caption">THE HILLY FLANKS OF THE CRESCENT AND EARLY SITES OF THE NEAR EAST</div></div>
-
-<p>Both M’lefaat and Dr. Solecki’s Zawi Chemi Shanidar site
-appear to have been slightly more “settled in” than was
-Karim Shahir itself. But I do not think they belong to the
-era of farming-villages proper. The first site of this era, in
-the hills of Iraqi Kurdistan, is Jarmo, on which we have spent
-three seasons of work. Following Jarmo comes a variety of
-sites and assemblages which lie along the hilly flanks of the
-crescent and just below it. I am going to describe and illustrate
-some of these for you.</p>
-
-<p>Since not very much archeological excavation has yet
-been done on sites of this range of time, I shall have to mention
-the names of certain single sites which now alone stand for an
-assemblage. This does not mean that I think the individual
-sites I mention were unique. In the times when their various
-cultures flourished, there must have been many little villages
-which shared the same general assemblage. We are only now
-beginning to locate them again. Thus, if I speak of Jarmo,
-or Jericho, or Sialk as single examples of their particular kinds
-of assemblages, I don’t mean that they were unique at all.
-I think I could take you to the sites of at least three more
-Jarmos, within twenty miles of the original one. They are
-there, but they simply haven’t yet been excavated. In 1956,
-a Danish expedition discovered material of Jarmo type at<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_127">127</a></span>
-Shimshara, only two dozen miles northeast of Jarmo, and
-below an assemblage of Hassunan type (which I shall describe
-presently).</p>
-
-<h3>THE GAP BETWEEN KARIM SHAHIR AND JARMO</h3>
-
-<p>As we see the matter now, there is probably still a gap in the
-available archeological record between the Karim Shahir-M’lefaat-Zawi
-Chemi group (of the incipient era) and that
-of Jarmo (of the village-farming era). Although some items
-of the Jarmo type materials do reflect the beginnings of traditions
-set in the Karim Shahir group (see <a href="#Page_120">p. 120</a>), there is not
-a clear continuity. Moreover&mdash;to the degree that we may
-trust a few radiocarbon dates&mdash;there would appear to be
-around two thousand years of difference in time. The single
-available Zawi Chemi “date” is 8900 ± 300 <span class="smcap smaller">B.C.</span>; the most
-reasonable group of “dates” from Jarmo average to about
-6750 ± 200 <span class="smcap smaller">B.C.</span> I am uncertain about this two thousand
-years&mdash;I do not think it can have been so long.</p>
-
-<p>This suggests that we still have much work to do in Iraq.
-You can imagine how earnestly we await the return of political
-stability in the Republic of Iraq.</p>
-
-<h3>JARMO, IN THE KURDISH HILLS, IRAQ</h3>
-
-<p>The site of Jarmo has a depth of deposit of about twenty-seven
-feet, and approximately a dozen layers of architectural
-renovation and change. Nevertheless it is a “one period” site:
-its assemblage remains essentially the same throughout,
-although one or two new items are added in later levels. It
-covers about four acres of the top of a bluff, below which runs
-a small stream. Jarmo lies in the hill country east of the
-modern oil town of Kirkuk. The Iraq Directorate General of
-Antiquities suggested that we look at it in 1948, and we have
-had three seasons of digging on it since.</p>
-
-<p>The people of Jarmo grew the barley plant and two
-different kinds of wheat. They made flint sickles with which
-to reap their grain, mortars or querns on which to crack it,
-ovens in which it might be parched, and stone bowls out of
-which they might eat their porridge. We are sure that they<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_128">128</a></span>
-had the domesticated goat, but Professor Reed (the staff
-zoologist) is not convinced that the bones of the other potentially
-domesticable animals of Jarmo&mdash;sheep, cattle, pig,
-horse, dog&mdash;show sure signs of domestication. We had first
-thought that all of these animals were domesticated ones, but
-Reed feels he must find out much more before he can be sure.
-As well as their grain and the meat from their animals, the
-people of Jarmo consumed great quantities of land snails.
-Botanically, the Jarmo wheat stands about half way between
-fully bred wheat and the wild forms.</p>
-
-<h3>ARCHITECTURE: HALL-MARK OF THE VILLAGE</h3>
-
-<p>The sure sign of the village proper is in its traces of architectural
-permanence. The houses of Jarmo were only the
-size of a small cottage by our standards, but each was provided
-with several rectangular rooms. The walls of the houses were
-made of puddled mud, often set on crude foundations of stone.
-(The puddled mud wall, which the Arabs call <i xml:lang="ar" lang="ar">touf</i>, is built by
-laying a three to six inch course of soft mud, letting this
-sun-dry for a day or two, then adding the next course, etc.)
-The village probably looked much like the simple Kurdish
-farming village of today, with its mud-walled houses and low
-mud-on-brush roofs. I doubt that the Jarmo village had more
-than twenty houses at any one moment of its existence. Today,
-an average of about seven people live in a comparable Kurdish
-house; probably the population of Jarmo was about 150
-people.</p>
-
-<div id="if_i_034" class="figcenter" style="width: 340px;">
-  <img src="images/i_034.jpg" width="340" height="600" alt="" />
-  <div class="caption"><p>SKETCH OF JARMO ASSEMBLAGE</p>
-
-<p class="sans">
-CHIPPED STONE<br />
-UNBAKED CLAY<br />
-GROUND STONE<br />
-POTTERY <i class="smaller">UPPER THIRD OF SITE ONLY.</i><br />
-REED MATTING<br />
-BONE<br />
-ARCHITECTURE<br />
-</p></div></div>
-
-<p>It is interesting that portable pottery does not appear until
-the last third of the life of the Jarmo village. Throughout the
-duration of the village, however, its people had experimented
-with the plastic qualities of clay. They modeled little figurines
-of animals and of human beings in clay; one type of human
-figurine they favored was that of a markedly pregnant woman,
-probably the expression of some sort of fertility spirit. They
-provided their house floors with baked-in-place depressions,
-either as basins or hearths, and later with domed ovens of
-clay. As we’ve noted, the houses themselves were of clay or
-mud; one could almost say they were built up like a house-<span class="pagenum"><a class="hidev" id="Page_129">129</a><a  id="Page_130">130</a></span>sized
-pot. Then, finally, the idea of making portable pottery
-itself appeared, although I very much doubt that the people
-of the Jarmo village discovered the art.</p>
-
-<p>On the other hand, the old tradition of making flint blades
-and microlithic tools was still very strong at Jarmo. The
-sickle-blade was made in quantities, but so also were many
-of the much older tool types. Strangely enough, it is within
-this age-old category of chipped stone tools that we see
-one of the clearest pointers to a newer age. Many of the
-Jarmo chipped stone tools&mdash;microliths&mdash;were made of
-obsidian, a black volcanic natural glass. The obsidian beds
-nearest to Jarmo are over three hundred miles to the north.
-Already a bulk carrying trade had been established&mdash;the
-forerunner of commerce&mdash;and the routes were set by which,
-in later times, the metal trade was to move.</p>
-
-<p>There are now twelve radioactive carbon “dates” from
-Jarmo. The most reasonable cluster of determinations averages
-to about 6750 ± 200 <span class="smcap smaller">B.C.</span>, although there is a completely
-unreasonable range of “dates” running from 3250 to 9250
-<span class="smcap smaller">B.C.</span>! <em>If</em> I am right in what I take to be “reasonable,” the
-first flush of the food-producing revolution had been achieved
-almost nine thousand years ago.</p>
-
-<h3>HASSUNA, IN UPPER MESOPOTAMIAN IRAQ</h3>
-
-<p>We are not sure just how soon after Jarmo the next assemblage
-of Iraqi material is to be placed. I do not think the time was
-long, and there are a few hints that detailed habits in the
-making of pottery and ground stone tools were actually continued
-from Jarmo times into the time of the next full assemblage.
-This is called after a site named Hassuna, a few miles
-to the south and west of modern Mosul. We also have
-Hassunan type materials from several other sites in the same
-general region. It is probably too soon to make generalizations
-about it, but the Hassunan sites seem to cluster at slightly
-lower elevations than those we have been talking about so far.</p>
-
-<p>The catalogue of the Hassuna assemblage is of course
-more full and elaborate than that of Jarmo. The Iraqi
-government’s archeologists who dug Hassuna itself, exposed<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_131">131</a></span>
-evidence of increasing architectural know-how. The walls of
-houses were still formed of puddled mud; sun-dried bricks
-appear only in later periods. There were now several different
-ways of making and decorating pottery vessels. One style
-of pottery painting, called the Samarran style, is an extremely
-handsome one and must have required a great deal of concentration
-and excellence of draftsmanship. On the other
-hand, the old habits for the preparation of good chipped stone
-tools&mdash;still apparent at Jarmo&mdash;seem to have largely disappeared
-by Hassunan times. The flint work of the Hassunan
-catalogue is, by and large, a wretched affair. We might guess
-that the kinaesthetic concentration of the Hassuna craftsmen
-now went into other categories; that is, they suddenly discovered
-they might have more fun working with the newer
-materials. It’s a shame, for example, that none of their
-weaving is preserved for us.</p>
-
-<p>The two available radiocarbon determinations from
-Hassunan contexts stand at about 5100 and 5600 <span class="smcap smaller">B.C.</span> ± 250
-years.</p>
-
-<h3>OTHER EARLY VILLAGE SITES IN THE NUCLEAR AREA</h3>
-
-<p>I’ll now name and very briefly describe a few of the other early
-village assemblages either in or adjacent to the hilly flanks
-of the crescent. Unfortunately, we do not have radioactive
-carbon dates for many of these materials. We may guess that
-some particular assemblage, roughly comparable to that of
-Hassuna, for example, must reflect a culture which lived at
-just about the same time as that of Hassuna. We do this
-guessing on the basis of the general similarity and degree of
-complexity of the Sears Roebuck catalogues of the particular
-assemblage and that of Hassuna. We suppose that for sites
-near at hand and of a comparable cultural level, as indicated
-by their generally similar assemblages, the dating must be
-about the same. We may also know that in a general stratigraphic
-sense, the sites in question may both appear at the
-bottom of the ascending village sequence in their respective
-areas. Without a number of consistent radioactive carbon
-dates, we cannot be precise about priorities.</p>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_132">132</a></span></p>
-
-<div id="if_i_035" class="figcenter" style="width: 410px;">
-  <img src="images/i_035.jpg" width="410" height="600" alt="" />
-  <div class="caption"><p>SKETCH OF HASSUNA ASSEMBLAGE</p>
-
-<p class="sans">
-POTTERY<br />
-POTTERY OBJECTS<br />
-CHIPPED STONE<br />
-BONE<br />
-GROUND STONE<br />
-ARCHITECTURE<br />
-REED MATTING<br />
-BURIAL<br />
-</p></div></div>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_133">133</a></span>
-The ancient mound at Jericho, in the Dead Sea valley in
-Palestine, yields some very interesting material. Its catalogue
-somewhat resembles that of Jarmo, especially in the sense that
-there is a fair depth of deposit without portable pottery
-vessels. On the other hand, the architecture of Jericho is
-surprisingly complex, with traces of massive stone fortification
-walls and the general use of formed sun-dried mud brick.
-Jericho lies in a somewhat strange and tropically lush ecological
-niche, some seven hundred feet below sea level; it is
-geographically within the hilly-flanks zone but environmentally
-not part of it.</p>
-
-<p>Several radiocarbon “dates” for Jericho fall within the
-range of those I find reasonable for Jarmo, and their internal
-statistical consistency is far better than that for the Jarmo
-determinations. It is not yet clear exactly what this means.</p>
-
-<p>The mound at Jericho (Tell es-Sultan) contains a remarkably
-fine sequence, which perhaps does not have the gap we
-noted in Iraqi-Kurdistan between the Karim Shahir group
-and Jarmo. While I am not sure that the Jericho sequence
-will prove valid for those parts of Palestine outside the special
-Dead Sea environmental niche, the sequence does appear to
-proceed from the local variety of Natufian into that of a very
-well settled community. So far, we have little direct evidence
-for the food-production basis upon which the Jericho people
-subsisted.</p>
-
-<p>There is an early village assemblage with strong characteristics
-of its own in the land bordering the northeast corner
-of the Mediterranean Sea, where Syria and the Cilician
-province of Turkey join. This early Syro-Cilician assemblage
-must represent a general cultural pattern which was at least
-in part contemporary with that of the Hassuna assemblage.
-These materials from the bases of the mounds at Mersin, and
-from Judaidah in the Amouq plain, as well as from a few other
-sites, represent the remains of true villages. The walls of
-their houses were built of puddled mud, but some of the house
-foundations were of stone. Several different kinds of pottery
-were made by the people of these villages. None of it resembles
-the pottery from Hassuna or from the upper levels of Jarmo or<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_134">134</a></span>
-Jericho. The Syro-Cilician people had not lost their touch at
-working flint. An important southern variation of the Syro-Cilician
-assemblage has been cleared recently at Byblos,
-a port town famous in later Phoenician times. There are
-three radiocarbon determinations which suggest that the time
-range for these developments was in the sixth or early fifth
-millennium <span class="smcap smaller">B.C.</span></p>
-
-<p>It would be fascinating to search for traces of even earlier
-village-farming communities and for the remains of the incipient
-cultivation era, in the Syro-Cilician region.</p>
-
-<h3>THE IRANIAN PLATEAU AND THE NILE VALLEY</h3>
-
-<p>The map on <a href="#if_i_033">page 125</a> shows some sites which lie either outside
-or in an extension of the hilly-flanks zone proper. From the
-base of the great mound at Sialk on the Iranian plateau came
-an assemblage of early village material, generally similar,
-in the kinds of things it contained, to the catalogues of Hassuna
-and Judaidah. The details of how things were made are
-different; the Sialk assemblage represents still another cultural
-pattern. I suspect it appeared a bit later in time than
-did that of Hassuna. There is an important new item in
-the Sialk catalogue. The Sialk people made small drills or
-pins of hammered copper. Thus the metallurgist’s specialized
-craft had made its appearance.</p>
-
-<p>There is at least one very early Iranian site on the inward
-slopes of the hilly-flanks zone. It is the earlier of two mounds
-at a place called Bakun, in southwestern Iran; the results of
-the excavations there are not yet published and we only know
-of its coarse and primitive pottery. I only mention Bakun
-because it helps us to plot the extent of the hilly-flanks zone
-villages on the map.</p>
-
-<p>The Nile Valley lies beyond the peculiar environmental
-zone of the hilly flanks of the crescent, and it is probable
-that the earliest village-farming communities in Egypt were
-established by a few people who wandered into the Nile delta
-area from the nuclear area. The assemblage which is most
-closely comparable to the catalogue of Hassuna or Judaidah,
-for example, is that from little settlements along the shore<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_135">135</a></span>
-of the Fayum lake. The Fayum materials come mainly from
-grain bins or silos. Another site, Merimde, in the western
-part of the Nile delta, shows the remains of a true village,
-but it may be slightly later than the settlement of the Fayum.
-There are radioactive carbon “dates” for the Fayum materials
-at about 4275 <span class="smcap smaller">B.C.</span> ± 320 years, which is almost fifteen
-hundred years later than the determinations suggested for
-the Hassunan or Syro-Cilician assemblages. I suspect that
-this is a somewhat over-extended indication of the time it took
-for the generalized cultural pattern of village-farming community
-life to spread from the nuclear area down into Egypt,
-but as yet we have no way of testing these matters.</p>
-
-<p>In this same vein, we have two radioactive carbon dates
-for an assemblage from sites near Khartoum in the Sudan, best
-represented by the mound called Shaheinab. The Shaheinab
-catalogue roughly corresponds to that of the Fayum; the
-distance between the two places, as the Nile flows, is roughly
-1,500 miles. Thus it took almost a thousand years for the
-new way of life to be carried as far south into Africa as Khartoum;
-the two Shaheinab “dates” average about 3300 <span class="smcap smaller">B.C.</span>
-± 400 years.</p>
-
-<p>If the movement was up the Nile (southward), as these
-dates suggest, then I suspect that the earliest available village
-material of middle Egypt, the so-called Tasian, is also later
-than that of the Fayum. The Tasian materials come from
-a few graves near a village called Deir Tasa, and I have
-an uncomfortable feeling that the Tasian “assemblage” may
-be mainly an artificial selection of poor examples of objects
-which belong in the following range of time.</p>
-
-<h3>SPREAD IN TIME AND SPACE</h3>
-
-<p>There are now two things we can do; in fact, we have already
-begun to do them. We can watch the spread of the new way
-of life upward through time in the nuclear area. We can also
-see how the new way of life spread outward in space from the
-nuclear area, as time went on. There is good archeological
-evidence that both these processes took place. For the hill<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_136">136</a></span>
-country of northeastern Iraq, in the nuclear area, we have
-already noticed how the succession (still with gaps) from
-Karim Shahir, through M’lefaat and Jarmo, to Hassuna can
-be charted (see chart, <a href="#if_i_029">p. 111</a>). In the next chapter, we shall
-continue this charting and description of what happened in
-Iraq upward through time. We also watched traces of the
-new way of life move through space up the Nile into Africa,
-to reach Khartoum in the Sudan some thirty-five hundred
-years later than we had seen it at Jarmo or Jericho. We
-caught glimpses of it in the Fayum and perhaps at Tasa along
-the way.</p>
-
-<p>For the remainder of this chapter, I shall try to suggest
-briefly for you the directions taken by the spread of the new
-way of life from the nuclear area in the Near East. First, let
-me make clear again that I <em>do not</em> believe that the village-farming
-community way of life was invented only once and
-in the Near East. It seems to me that the evidence is very
-clear that a separate experiment arose in the New World. For
-China, the question of independence or borrowing&mdash;in the
-appearance of the village-farming community there&mdash;is still
-an open one. In the last chapter, we noted the probability
-of an independent nuclear area in southeastern Asia. Professor
-Carl Sauer strongly champions the great importance of
-this area as <em>the</em> original center of agricultural pursuits, as
-a kind of “cradle” of all incipient eras of the Old World at
-least. While there is certainly not the slightest archeological
-evidence to allow us to go that far, we may easily expect that
-an early southeast Asian development would have been felt in
-China. However, the appearance of the village-farming
-community in the northwest of India, at least, seems to have
-depended on the earlier development in the Near East. It is
-also probable that ideas of the new way of life moved well
-beyond Khartoum in Africa.</p>
-
-<h3>THE SPREAD OF THE VILLAGE-FARMING COMMUNITY WAY OF LIFE INTO EUROPE</h3>
-
-<p>How about Europe? I won’t give you many details. You can
-easily imagine that the late prehistoric prelude to European
-history is a complicated affair. We all know very well how<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_137">137</a></span>
-complicated an area Europe is now, with its welter of different
-languages and cultures. Remember, however, that a great
-deal of archeology has been done on the late prehistory of
-Europe, and very little on that of further Asia and Africa.
-If we knew as much about these areas as we do of Europe,
-I expect we’d find them just as complicated.</p>
-
-<p>This much is clear for Europe, as far as the spread of the
-village-community way of life is concerned. The general
-idea and much of the know-how and the basic tools of food-production
-moved from the Near East to Europe. So did the
-plants and animals which had been domesticated; they were
-not naturally at home in Europe, as they were in western Asia.
-I do not, of course, mean that there were traveling salesmen
-who carried these ideas and things to Europe with a commercial
-gleam in their eyes. The process took time, and the
-ideas and things must have been passed on from one group of
-people to the next. There was also some actual movement
-of peoples, but we don’t know the size of the groups that
-moved.</p>
-
-<p>The story of the “colonization” of Europe by the first
-farmers is thus one of (1) the movement from the eastern Mediterranean
-lands of some people who were farmers; (2) the
-spread of ideas and things beyond the Near East itself and
-beyond the paths along which the “colonists” moved; and
-(3) the adaptations of the ideas and things by the indigenous
-“Forest folk”, about whose “receptiveness” Professor Mathiassen
-speaks (<a href="#Page_97">p. 97</a>). It is important to note that the resulting
-cultures in the new European environment were European,
-not Near Eastern. The late Professor Childe remarked that
-“the peoples of the West were not slavish imitators; they
-adapted the gifts from the East ... into a new and organic
-whole capable of developing on its own original lines.”</p>
-
-<h3>THE WAYS TO EUROPE</h3>
-
-<p>Suppose we want to follow the traces of those earliest village-farmers
-who did travel from western Asia into Europe. Let
-us start from Syro-Cilicia, that part of the hilly-flanks zone
-proper which lies in the very northeastern corner of the<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_138">138</a></span>
-Mediterranean. Three ways would be open to us (of course
-we could not be worried about permission from the
-Soviet authorities!). We would go north, or north and slightly
-east, across Anatolian Turkey, and skirt along either shore of
-the Black Sea or even to the east of the Caucasus Mountains
-along the Caspian Sea, to reach the plains of Ukrainian
-Russia. From here, we could march across eastern Europe
-to the Baltic and Scandinavia, or even hook back southwestward
-to Atlantic Europe.</p>
-
-<p>Our second way from Syro-Cilicia would also lie over
-Anatolia, to the northwest, where we would have to swim or
-raft ourselves over the Dardanelles or the Bosphorus to the
-European shore. Then we would bear left toward Greece,
-but some of us might turn right again in Macedonia, going up
-the valley of the Vardar River to its divide and on down the
-valley of the Morava beyond, to reach the Danube near
-Belgrade in Jugoslavia. Here we would turn left, following
-the great river valley of the Danube up into central Europe.
-We would have a number of tributary valleys to explore, or
-we could cross the divide and go down the valley of the Rhine
-to the North Sea.</p>
-
-<p>Our third way from Syro-Cilicia would be by sea. We
-would coast along southern Anatolia and visit Cyprus, Crete,
-and the Aegean islands on our way to Greece, where, in the
-north, we might meet some of those who had taken the second
-route. From Greece, we would sail on to Italy and the
-western isles, to reach southern France and the coasts of Spain.
-Eventually a few of us would sail up the Atlantic coast of
-Europe, to reach western Britain and even Ireland.</p>
-
-<div id="if_i_036" class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;">
-  <img src="images/i_036.jpg" width="700" height="445" alt="" />
-  <div class="caption">PROBABLE ROUTES AND TIMING IN THE SPREAD OF THE VILLAGE-FARMING COMMUNITY
-WAY OF LIFE FROM THE NEAR EAST TO EUROPE</div></div>
-
-<p>Of course none of us could ever take these journeys as the
-first farmers took them, since the whole course of each journey
-must have lasted many lifetimes. The date given to the
-assemblage called Windmill Hill, the earliest known trace of
-village-farming communities in England, is about 2500 <span class="smcap smaller">B.C.</span>
-I would expect about 5500 <span class="smcap smaller">B.C.</span> to be a safe date to give for the
-well-developed early village communities of Syro-Cilicia. We
-suspect that the spread throughout Europe did not proceed
-at an even rate. Professor Piggott writes that “at a date
-probably about 2600 <span class="smcap smaller">B.C.</span>, simple agricultural communities<span class="pagenum"><a class="hidev" id="Page_139">139</a><a  id="Page_140">140</a></span>
-were being established in Spain and southern France, and
-from the latter region a spread northwards can be traced ...
-from points on the French seaboard of the [English] Channel
-... there were emigrations of a certain number of these tribes
-by boat, across to the chalk lands of Wessex and Sussex
-[in England], probably not more than three or four generations
-later than the formation of the south French colonies.”</p>
-
-<p>New radiocarbon determinations are becoming available
-all the time&mdash;already several suggest that the food-producing
-way of life had reached the lower Rhine and Holland by
-4000 <span class="smcap smaller">B.C.</span> But not all prehistorians accept these “dates,” so
-I do not show them on my map (<a href="#if_i_036">p. 139</a>).</p>
-
-<h3>THE EARLIEST FARMERS OF ENGLAND</h3>
-
-<p>To describe the later prehistory of all Europe for you would
-take another book and a much larger one than this is. Therefore,
-I have decided to give you only a few impressions of the
-later prehistory of Britain. Of course the British Isles lie
-at the other end of Europe from our base-line in western Asia.
-Also, they received influences along at least two of the three
-ways in which the new way of life moved into Europe. We
-will look at more of their late prehistory in a following chapter:
-here, I shall speak only of the first farmers.</p>
-
-<p>The assemblage called Windmill Hill, which appears in the
-south of England, exhibits three different kinds of structures,
-evidence of grain-growing and of stock-breeding, and some
-distinctive types of pottery and stone implements. The most
-remarkable type of structure is the earthwork enclosures which
-seem to have served as seasonal cattle corrals. These enclosures
-were roughly circular, reached over a thousand feet
-in diameter, and sometimes included two or three concentric
-sets of banks and ditches. Traces of oblong timber houses
-have been found, but not within the enclosures. The second
-type of structure is mine-shafts, dug down into the chalk beds
-where good flint for the making of axes or hoes could be found.
-The third type of structure is long simple mounds or “unchambered
-barrows,” in one end of which burials were made.
-It has been commonly believed that the Windmill Hill assemblage<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_141">141</a></span>
-belonged entirely to the cultural tradition which
-moved up through France to the Channel. Professor Piggott
-is now convinced, however, that important elements of Windmill
-Hill stem from northern Germany and Denmark&mdash;products
-of the first way into Europe from the east.</p>
-
-<p>The archeological traces of a second early culture are to
-be found in the west of England, western and northern Scotland,
-and most of Ireland. The bearers of this culture had
-come up the Atlantic coast by sea from southern France and
-Spain. The evidence they have left us consists mainly of
-tombs and the contents of tombs, with only very rare settlement
-sites. The tombs were of some size and received the
-bodies of many people. The tombs themselves were built of
-stone, heaped over with earth; the stones enclosed a passage
-to a central chamber (“passage graves”), or to a simple long
-gallery, along the sides of which the bodies were laid (“gallery
-graves”). The general type of construction is called “megalithic”
-(= great stone), and the whole earth-mounded
-structure is often called a <em>barrow</em>. Since many have proper
-chambers, in one sense or another, we used the term “unchambered
-barrow” above to distinguish those of the Windmill
-Hill type from these megalithic structures. There is
-some evidence for sacrifice, libations, and ceremonial fires,
-and it is clear that some form of community ritual was focused
-on the megalithic tombs.</p>
-
-<p>The cultures of the people who produced the Windmill Hill
-assemblage and of those who made the megalithic tombs
-flourished, at least in part, at the same time. Although the
-distributions of the two different types of archeological traces
-are in quite different parts of the country, there is Windmill
-Hill pottery in some of the megalithic tombs. But the tombs
-also contain pottery which seems to have arrived with the
-tomb builders themselves.</p>
-
-<p>The third early British group of antiquities of this general
-time (following 2500 <span class="smcap smaller">B.C.</span>) comes from sites in southern and
-eastern England. It is not so certain that the people who
-made this assemblage, called Peterborough, were actually
-farmers. While they may on occasion have practiced a simple
-agriculture, many items of their assemblage link them closely<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_142">142</a></span>
-with that of the “Forest folk” of earlier times in England and
-in the Baltic countries. Their pottery is decorated with
-impressions of cords and is quite different from that of Windmill
-Hill and the megalithic builders. In addition, the distribution
-of their finds extends into eastern Britain, where the
-other cultures have left no trace. The Peterborough people
-had villages with semi-subterranean huts, and the bones of
-oxen, pigs, and sheep have been found in a few of these. On
-the whole, however, hunting and fishing seem to have been
-their vital occupations. They also established trade routes
-especially to acquire the raw material for stone axes.</p>
-
-<p>A probably slightly later culture, whose traces are best
-known from Skara Brae on Orkney, also had its roots in those
-cultures of the Baltic area which fused out of the meeting of
-the “Forest folk” and the peoples who took the eastern way into
-Europe. Skara Brae is very well preserved, having been built
-of thin stone slabs about which dune-sand drifted after the
-village died. The individual houses, the bedsteads, the
-shelves, the chests for clothes and oddments&mdash;all built of
-thin stone-slabs&mdash;may still be seen in place. But the Skara
-Brae people lived entirely by sheep- and cattle-breeding, and
-by catching shellfish. Neither grain nor the instruments of
-agriculture appeared at Skara Brae.</p>
-
-<h3>THE EUROPEAN ACHIEVEMENT</h3>
-
-<p>The above is only a very brief description of what went on in
-Britain with the arrival of the first farmers. There are many
-interesting details which I have omitted in order to shorten
-the story.</p>
-
-<p>I believe some of the difficulty we have in understanding
-the establishment of the first farming communities in Europe
-is with the word “colonization.” We have a natural tendency
-to think of “colonization” as it has happened within the last
-few centuries. In the case of the colonization of the Americas,
-for example, the colonists came relatively quickly, and in
-increasingly vast numbers. They had vastly superior technical,
-political, and war-making skills, compared with those
-of the Indians. There was not much mixing with the Indians.<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_143">143</a></span>
-The case in Europe five or six thousand years ago must have
-been very different. I wonder if it is even proper to call
-people “colonists” who move some miles to a new region,
-settle down and farm it for some years, then move on again,
-generation after generation? The ideas and the things which
-these new people carried were only <em>potentially</em> superior. The
-ideas and things and the people had to prove themselves in
-their adaptation to each new environment. Once this was
-done another link to the chain would be added, and then the
-forest-dwellers and other indigenous folk of Europe along the
-way might accept the new ideas and things. It is quite
-reasonable to expect that there must have been much mixture
-of the migrants and the indigenes along the way; the Peterborough
-and Skara Brae assemblages we mentioned above
-would seem to be clear traces of such fused cultures. Sometimes,
-especially if the migrants were moving by boat, long
-distances may have been covered in a short time. Remember,
-however, we seem to have about three thousand years between
-the early Syro-Cilician villages and Windmill Hill.</p>
-
-<p>Let me repeat Professor Childe again. “The peoples of the
-West were not slavish imitators: they adapted the gifts from
-the East ... into a new and organic whole capable of developing
-on its own original lines.” Childe is of course completely
-conscious of the fact that his “peoples of the West” were in part
-the descendants of migrants who came originally from the
-“East,” bringing their “gifts” with them. This was the late
-prehistoric achievement of Europe&mdash;to take new ideas and
-things and some migrant peoples and, by mixing them with
-the old in its own environments, to forge a new and unique
-series of cultures.</p>
-
-<p>What we know of the ways of men suggests to us that when
-the details of the later prehistory of further Asia and Africa
-are learned, their stories will be just as exciting.</p>
-
-<hr />
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_144">144</a></span></p>
-
-<div class="chapter">
-<h2 id="hdr_9"><span class="smcap smaller">THE</span> Conquest of Civilization</h2>
-
-<div id="if_i_037" class="figcenter" style="width: 337px;">
-  <img src="images/i_037.jpg" width="337" height="177" alt="" /></div>
-</div>
-
-<p>Now we must return to the Near East again. We are coming
-to the point where history is about to begin. I am going to
-stick pretty close to Iraq and Egypt in this chapter. These
-countries will perhaps be the most interesting to most of us,
-for the foundations of western civilization were laid in the
-river lands of the Tigris and Euphrates and of the Nile. I
-shall probably stick closest of all to Iraq, because things first
-happened there and also because I know it best.</p>
-
-<p>There is another interesting thing, too. We have seen that
-the first experiment in village-farming took place in the Near
-East. So did the first experiment in civilization. Both experiments
-“took.” The traditions we live by today are based,
-ultimately, on those ancient beginnings in food-production and
-civilization in the Near East.</p>
-
-<h3>WHAT “CIVILIZATION” MEANS</h3>
-
-<p>I shall not try to define “civilization” for you; rather, I shall
-tell you what the word brings to my mind. To me civilization
-means urbanization: the fact that there are cities.
-It means a formal political set-up&mdash;that there are kings or
-governing bodies that the people have set up. It means formal
-laws&mdash;rules of conduct&mdash;which the government (if not the<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_145">145</a></span>
-people) believes are necessary. It probably means that there
-are formalized projects&mdash;roads, harbors, irrigation canals, and
-the like&mdash;and also some sort of army or police force to protect
-them. It means quite new and different art forms. It also
-usually means there is writing. (The people of the Andes&mdash;the
-Incas&mdash;had everything which goes to make up a civilization
-but formal writing. I can see no reason to say they
-were not civilized.) Finally, as the late Professor Redfield
-reminded us, civilization seems to bring with it the dawn of
-a new kind of moral order.</p>
-
-<p>In different civilizations, there may be important differences
-in the way such things as the above are managed. In
-early civilizations, it is usual to find religion very closely tied
-in with government, law, and so forth. The king may also be
-a high priest, or he may even be thought of as a god. The
-laws are usually thought to have been given to the people by
-the gods. The temples are protected just as carefully as the
-other projects.</p>
-
-<h3>CIVILIZATION IMPOSSIBLE WITHOUT FOOD-PRODUCTION</h3>
-
-<p>Civilizations have to be made up of many people. Some of
-the people live in the country; some live in very large towns or
-cities. Classes of society have begun. There are officials and
-government people; there are priests or religious officials;
-there are merchants and traders; there are craftsmen, metal-workers,
-potters, builders, and so on; there are also farmers,
-and these are the people who produce the food for the whole
-population. It must be obvious that civilization cannot exist
-without food-production and that food-production must also
-be at a pretty efficient level of village-farming before civilization
-can even begin.</p>
-
-<p>But people can be food-producing without being civilized.
-In many parts of the world this is still the case. When the
-white men first came to America, the Indians in most parts
-of this hemisphere were food-producers. They grew corn,
-potatoes, tomatoes, squash, and many other things the white
-men had never eaten before. But only the Aztecs of Mexico,<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_146">146</a></span>
-the Mayas of Yucatan and Guatemala, and the Incas of the
-Andes were civilized.</p>
-
-<h3>WHY DIDN’T CIVILIZATION COME TO ALL FOOD-PRODUCERS?</h3>
-
-<p>Once you have food-production, even at the well-advanced
-level of the village-farming community, what else has to
-happen before you get civilization? Many men have asked
-this question and have failed to give a full and satisfactory
-answer. There is probably no <em>one</em> answer. I shall give you
-my own idea about how civilization <em>may</em> have come about in
-the Near East alone. Remember, it is only a guess&mdash;a putting
-together of hunches from incomplete evidence. It is <em>not</em> meant
-to explain how civilization began in any of the other areas&mdash;China,
-southeast Asia, the Americas&mdash;where other early experiments
-in civilization went on. The details in those areas
-are quite different. Whether certain general principles hold,
-for the appearance of any early civilization, is still an open
-and very interesting question.</p>
-
-<h3>WHERE CIVILIZATION FIRST APPEARED IN THE NEAR EAST</h3>
-
-<p>You remember that our earliest village-farming communities
-lay along the hilly flanks of a great “crescent.” (See map on
-<a href="#if_i_033">p. 125</a>.) Professor Breasted’s “fertile crescent” emphasized the
-rich river valleys of the Nile and the Tigris-Euphrates Rivers.
-Our hilly-flanks area of the crescent zone arches up from
-Egypt through Palestine and Syria, along southern Turkey
-into northern Iraq, and down along the southwestern fringe
-of Iran. The earliest food-producing villages we know already
-existed in this area by about 6750 <span class="smcap smaller">B.C.</span> (± 200 years).</p>
-
-<p>Now notice that this hilly-flanks zone does not include
-southern Mesopotamia, the alluvial land of the lower Tigris
-and Euphrates in Iraq, or the Nile Valley proper. The
-earliest known villages of classic Mesopotamia and Egypt
-seem to appear fifteen hundred or more years after those
-of the hilly-flanks zone. For example, the early Fayum
-village which lies near a lake west of the Nile Valley proper
-(see <a href="#Page_135">p. 135</a>) has a radiocarbon date of 4275 <span class="smcap smaller">B.C.</span> ± 320 years.<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_147">147</a></span>
-It was in the river lands, however, that the immediate beginnings
-of civilization were made.</p>
-
-<p>We know that by about 3200 <span class="smcap smaller">B.C.</span> the Early Dynastic
-period had begun in southern Mesopotamia. The beginnings
-of writing go back several hundred years earlier, but we can
-safely say that civilization had begun in Mesopotamia by
-3200 <span class="smcap smaller">B.C.</span> In Egypt, the beginning of the First Dynasty is
-slightly later, at about 3100 <span class="smcap smaller">B.C.</span>, and writing probably did not
-appear much earlier. There is no question but that history
-and civilization were well under way in both Mesopotamia
-and Egypt by 3000 <span class="smcap smaller">B.C.</span>&mdash;about five thousand years ago.</p>
-
-<h3>THE HILLY-FLANKS ZONE VERSUS THE RIVER LANDS</h3>
-
-<p>Why did these two civilizations spring up in these two river
-lands which apparently were not even part of the area where
-the village-farming community began? Why didn’t we have
-the first civilizations in Palestine, Syria, north Iraq, or Iran,
-where we’re sure food-production had had a long time to develop?
-I think the probable answer gives a clue to the ways
-in which civilization began in Egypt and Mesopotamia.</p>
-
-<p>The land in the hilly flanks is of a sort which people can
-farm without too much trouble. There is a fairly fertile
-coastal strip in Palestine and Syria. There are pleasant
-mountain slopes, streams running out to the sea, and rain, at
-least in the winter months. The rain belt and the foothills of
-the Turkish mountains also extend to northern Iraq and on to
-the Iranian plateau. The Iranian plateau has its mountain
-valleys, streams, and some rain. These hilly flanks of the
-“crescent,” through most of its arc, are almost made-to-order
-for beginning farmers. The grassy slopes of the higher hills
-would be pasture for their herds and flocks. As soon as the
-earliest experiments with agriculture and domestic animals
-had been successful, a pleasant living could be made&mdash;and
-without too much trouble.</p>
-
-<p>I should add here again, that our evidence points increasingly
-to a climate for those times which is very little
-different from that for the area today.<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_148">148</a></span>
-Now look at Egypt and southern Mesopotamia. Both are
-lands without rain, for all intents and purposes. Both are lands
-with rivers that have laid down very fertile soil&mdash;soil perhaps
-superior to that in the hilly flanks. But in both lands, the
-rivers are of no great aid without some control.</p>
-
-<p>The Nile floods its banks once a year, in late September
-or early October. It not only soaks the narrow fertile strip of
-land on either side; it lays down a fresh layer of new soil each
-year. Beyond the fertile strip on either side rise great cliffs,
-and behind them is the desert. In its natural, uncontrolled
-state, the yearly flood of the Nile must have caused short-lived
-swamps that were full of crocodiles. After a short time, the
-flood level would have dropped, the water and the crocodiles
-would have run back into the river, and the swamp plants
-would have become parched and dry.</p>
-
-<p>The Tigris and the Euphrates of Mesopotamia are less
-likely to flood regularly than the Nile. The Tigris has a
-shorter and straighter course than the Euphrates; it is also the
-more violent river. Its banks are high, and when the snows
-melt and flow into all of its tributary rivers it is swift and
-dangerous. The Euphrates has a much longer and more
-curving course and few important tributaries. Its banks are
-lower and it is less likely to flood dangerously. The land on
-either side and between the two rivers is very fertile, south of
-the modern city of Baghdad. Unlike the Nile Valley, neither
-the Tigris nor the Euphrates is flanked by cliffs. The land on
-either side of the rivers stretches out for miles and is not much
-rougher than a poor tennis court.</p>
-
-<h3>THE RIVERS MUST BE CONTROLLED</h3>
-
-<p>The real trick in both Egypt and Mesopotamia is to make the
-rivers work for you. In Egypt, this is a matter of building
-dikes and reservoirs that will catch and hold the Nile flood.
-In this way, the water is held and allowed to run off over the
-fields as it is needed. In Mesopotamia, it is a matter of
-taking advantage of natural river channels and branch channels,
-and of leading ditches from these onto the fields.</p>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_149">149</a></span>
-Obviously, we can no longer find the first dikes or reservoirs
-of the Nile Valley, or the first canals or ditches of
-Mesopotamia. The same land has been lived on far too long
-for any traces of the first attempts to be left; or, especially
-in Egypt, it has been covered by the yearly deposits of silt,
-dropped by the river floods. But we’re pretty sure the first
-food-producers of Egypt and southern Mesopotamia must have
-made such dikes, canals, and ditches. In the first place, there
-can’t have been enough rain for them to grow things otherwise.
-In the second place, the patterns for such projects seem to
-have been pretty well set by historic times.</p>
-
-<h3>CONTROL OF THE RIVERS THE BUSINESS OF EVERYONE</h3>
-
-<p>Here, then, is a <em>part</em> of the reason why civilization grew in
-Egypt and Mesopotamia first&mdash;not in Palestine, Syria, or Iran.
-In the latter areas, people could manage to produce their food
-as individuals. It wasn’t too hard; there were rain and some
-streams, and good pasturage for the animals even if a crop or
-two went wrong. In Egypt and Mesopotamia, people had to
-put in a much greater amount of work, and this work couldn’t
-be individual work. Whole villages or groups of people had
-to turn out to fix dikes or dig ditches. The dikes had to be
-repaired and the ditches carefully cleared of silt each year, or
-they would become useless.</p>
-
-<p>There also had to be hard and fast rules. The person who
-lived nearest the ditch or the reservoir must not be allowed to
-take all the water and leave none for his neighbors. It was
-not only a business of learning to control the rivers and of
-making their waters do the farmer’s work. It also meant controlling
-men. But once these men had managed both kinds of
-controls, what a wonderful yield they had! The soil was
-already fertile, and the silt which came in the floods and
-ditches kept adding fertile soil.</p>
-
-<h3>THE GERM OF CIVILIZATION IN EGYPT AND MESOPOTAMIA</h3>
-
-<p>This learning to work together for the common good was the
-real germ of the Egyptian and the Mesopotamian civilizations.<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_150">150</a></span>
-The bare elements of civilization were already there: the need
-for a governing hand and for laws to see that the communities’
-work was done and that the water was justly shared. You
-may object that there is a sort of chicken and egg paradox
-in this idea. How could the people set up the rules until they
-had managed to get a way to live, and how could they manage
-to get a way to live until they had set up the rules? I think
-that small groups must have moved down along the mud-flats
-of the river banks quite early, making use of naturally favorable
-spots, and that the rules grew out of such cases. It would
-have been like the hand-in-hand growth of automobiles and
-paved highways in the United States.</p>
-
-<p>Once the rules and the know-how did get going, there must
-have been a constant interplay of the two. Thus, the more the
-crops yielded, the richer and better-fed the people would have
-been, and the more the population would have grown. As the
-population grew, more land would have needed to be flooded
-or irrigated, and more complex systems of dikes, reservoirs,
-canals, and ditches would have been built. The more complex
-the system, the more necessity for work on new projects and
-for the control of their use.... And so on....</p>
-
-<p>What I have just put down for you is a guess at the manner
-of growth of some of the formalized systems that go to make up
-a civilized society. My explanation has been pointed particularly
-at Egypt and Mesopotamia. I have already told you that
-the irrigation and water-control part of it does not apply to the
-development of the Aztecs or the Mayas, or perhaps anybody
-else. But I think that a fair part of the story of Egypt and
-Mesopotamia must be as I’ve just told you.</p>
-
-<p>I am particularly anxious that you do <em>not</em> understand me to
-mean that irrigation <em>caused</em> civilization. I am sure it was not
-that simple at all. For, in fact, a complex and highly engineered
-irrigation system proper did not come until later
-times. Let’s say rather that the simple beginnings of irrigation
-allowed and in fact encouraged a great number of
-things in the technological, political, social, and moral realms
-of culture. We do not yet understand what all these things
-were or how they worked. But without these other aspects of<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_151">151</a></span>
-culture, I do not think that urbanization and civilization itself
-could have come into being.</p>
-
-<h3>THE ARCHEOLOGICAL SEQUENCE TO CIVILIZATION IN IRAQ</h3>
-
-<p>We last spoke of the archeological materials of Iraq on
-<a href="#Page_130">page 130</a>, where I described the village-farming community
-of Hassunan type. The Hassunan type villages appear in the
-hilly-flanks zone and in the rolling land adjacent to the Tigris
-in northern Iraq. It is probable that even before the Hassuna
-pattern of culture lived its course, a new assemblage had been
-established in northern Iraq and Syria. This assemblage is
-called Halaf, after a site high on a tributary of the Euphrates,
-on the Syro-Turkish border.</p>
-
-<div id="if_i_038" class="figcenter" style="width: 475px;">
-  <img src="images/i_038.jpg" width="475" height="317" alt="" />
-  <div class="caption"><p>SKETCH OF SELECTED ITEMS OF HALAFIAN ASSEMBLAGE</p>
-
-<p class="sans">
-BEADS AND PENDANTS<br />
-POTTERY MOTIFS<br />
-POTTERY<br />
-</p></div></div>
-
-<p>The Halafian assemblage is incompletely known. The culture
-it represents included a remarkably handsome painted
-pottery. Archeologists have tended to be so fascinated with
-this pottery that they have bothered little with the rest of the
-Halafian assemblage. We do know that strange stone-founded
-houses, with plans like those of the popular notion of an
-Eskimo igloo, were built. Like the pottery of the Samarran<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_152">152</a></span>
-style, which appears as part of the Hassunan assemblage
-(see <a href="#Page_131">p. 131</a>), the Halafian painted pottery implies great concentration
-and excellence of draftsmanship on the part of the
-people who painted it.</p>
-
-<p>We must mention two very interesting sites adjacent to the
-mud-flats of the rivers, half way down from northern Iraq to
-the classic alluvial Mesopotamian area. One is Baghouz on
-the Euphrates; the other is Samarra on the Tigris (see map,
-<a href="#if_i_033">p. 125</a>). Both these sites yield the handsome painted pottery
-of the style called Samarran: in fact it is Samarra which gives
-its name to the pottery. Neither Baghouz nor Samarra have
-completely Hassunan types of assemblages, and at Samarra
-there are a few pots of proper Halafian style. I suppose that
-Samarra and Baghouz give us glimpses of those early farmers
-who had begun to finger their way down the mud-flats of the
-river banks toward the fertile but yet untilled southland.</p>
-
-<h3>CLASSIC SOUTHERN MESOPOTAMIA FIRST OCCUPIED</h3>
-
-<p>Our next step is into the southland proper. Here, deep in the
-core of the mound which later became the holy Sumerian city
-of Eridu, Iraqi archeologists uncovered a handsome painted
-pottery. Pottery of the same type had been noticed earlier by
-German archeologists on the surface of a small mound, awash
-in the spring floods, near the remains of the Biblical city of
-Erich (Sumerian = Uruk; Arabic = Warka). This “Eridu”
-pottery, which is about all we have of the assemblage of the
-people who once produced it, may be seen as a blend of
-the Samarran and Halafian painted pottery styles. This may
-over-simplify the case, but as yet we do not have much evidence
-to go on. The idea does at least fit with my interpretation of
-the meaning of Baghouz and Samarra as way-points on the
-mud-flats of the rivers half way down from the north.</p>
-
-<p>My colleague, Robert Adams, believes that there were
-certainly riverine-adapted food-collectors living in lower Mesopotamia.
-The presence of such would explain why the Eridu
-assemblage is not simply the sum of the Halafian and Samarran
-assemblages. But the domesticated plants and animals and<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_153">153</a></span>
-the basic ways of food-production must have come from the
-hilly-flanks country in the north.</p>
-
-<p>Above the basal Eridu levels, and at a number of other
-sites in the south, comes a full-fledged assemblage called
-Ubaid. Incidentally, there is an aspect of the Ubaidian
-assemblage in the north as well. It seems to move into place
-before the Halaf manifestation is finished, and to blend with it.
-The Ubaidian assemblage in the south is by far the more
-spectacular. The development of the temple has been traced
-at Eridu from a simple little structure to a monumental
-building some 62 feet long, with a pilaster-decorated façade
-and an altar in its central chamber. There is painted Ubaidian
-pottery, but the style is hurried and somewhat careless and
-gives the <em>impression</em> of having been a cheap mass-production
-means of decoration when compared with the carefully drafted
-styles of Samarra and Halaf. The Ubaidian people made
-other items of baked clay: sickles and axes of very hard-baked
-clay are found. The northern Ubaidian sites have yielded
-tools of copper, but metal tools of unquestionable Ubaidian
-find-spots are not yet available from the south. Clay figurines
-of human beings with monstrous turtle-like faces are another
-item in the southern Ubaidian assemblage.</p>
-
-<div id="if_i_039" class="figcenter" style="width: 374px;">
-  <img src="images/i_039.jpg" width="374" height="600" alt="" />
-  <div class="caption">SKETCH OF SELECTED ITEMS OF UBAIDIAN ASSEMBLAGE</div></div>
-
-<p>There is a large Ubaid cemetery at Eridu, much of it still
-awaiting excavation. The few skeletons so far tentatively
-studied reveal a completely modern type of “Mediterraneanoid”;
-the individuals whom the skeletons represent would
-undoubtedly blend perfectly into the modern population of
-southern Iraq. What the Ubaidian assemblage says to us is
-that these people had already adapted themselves and their
-culture to the peculiar riverine environment of classic southern
-Mesopotamia. For example, hard-baked clay axes will chop
-bundles of reeds very well, or help a mason dress his unbaked
-mud bricks, and there were only a few soft and pithy species
-of trees available. The Ubaidian levels of Eridu yield
-quantities of date pits; that excellent and characteristically
-Iraqi fruit was already in use. The excavators also found the
-clay model of a ship, with the stepping-point for a mast, so
-that Sinbad the Sailor must have had his antecedents as early<span class="pagenum"><a class="hidev" id="Page_154">154</a><a  id="Page_155">155</a></span>
-as the time of Ubaid. The bones of fish, which must have
-flourished in the larger canals as well as in the rivers, are
-common in the Ubaidian levels and thereafter.</p>
-
-<h3>THE UBAIDIAN ACHIEVEMENT</h3>
-
-<p>On present evidence, my tendency is to see the Ubaidian
-assemblage in southern Iraq as the trace of a new era. I wish
-there were more evidence, but what we have suggests this to
-me. The culture of southern Ubaid soon became a culture of
-towns&mdash;of centrally located towns with some rural villages
-about them. The town had a temple and there must have
-been priests. These priests probably had political and
-economic functions as well as religious ones, if the somewhat
-later history of Mesopotamia may suggest a pattern for us.
-Presently the temple and its priesthood were possibly the
-focus of the market; the temple received its due, and may
-already have had its own lands and herds and flocks. The
-people of the town, undoubtedly at least in consultation with
-the temple administration, planned and maintained the simple
-irrigation ditches. As the system flourished, the community
-of rural farmers would have produced more than sufficient
-food. The tendency for specialized crafts to develop&mdash;tentative
-at best at the cultural level of the earlier village-farming
-community era&mdash;would now have been achieved, and
-probably many other specialists in temple administration,
-water control, architecture, and trade would also have appeared,
-as the surplus food-supply was assured.</p>
-
-<p>Southern Mesopotamia is not a land rich in natural resources
-other than its fertile soil. Stone, good wood for construction,
-metal, and innumerable other things would have had
-to be imported. Grain and dates&mdash;although both are bulky
-and difficult to transport&mdash;and wool and woven stuffs must
-have been the mediums of exchange. Over what area did
-the trading net-work of Ubaid extend? We start with the
-idea that the Ubaidian assemblage is most richly developed
-in the south. We assume, I think, correctly, that it represents
-a cultural flowering of the south. On the basis of the pottery
-of the still elusive “Eridu” immigrants who had first followed<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_156">156</a></span>
-the rivers into alluvial Mesopotamia, we get the notion that
-the characteristic painted pottery style of Ubaid was developed
-in the southland. If this reconstruction is correct
-then we may watch with interest where the Ubaid pottery-painting
-tradition spread. We have already mentioned that
-there is a substantial assemblage of (and from the southern
-point of view, <em>fairly</em> pure) Ubaidian material in northern Iraq.
-The pottery appears all along the Iranian flanks, even well
-east of the head of the Persian Gulf, and ends in a later and
-spectacular flourish in an extremely handsome painted style
-called the “Susa” style. Ubaidian pottery has been noted up
-the valleys of both of the great rivers, well north of the Iraqi
-and Syrian borders on the southern flanks of the Anatolian
-plateau. It reaches the Mediterranean Sea and the valley of
-the Orontes in Syria, and it may be faintly reflected in the
-painted style of a site called Ghassul, on the east bank of the
-Jordan in the Dead Sea Valley. Over this vast area&mdash;certainly
-in all of the great basin of the Tigris-Euphrates drainage
-system and its natural extensions&mdash;I believe we may lay our
-fingers on the traces of a peculiar way of decorating pottery,
-which we call Ubaidian. This cursive and even slap-dash
-decoration, it appears to me, was part of a new cultural
-tradition which arose from the adjustments which immigrant
-northern farmers first made to the new and challenging
-environment of southern Mesopotamia. But exciting as the
-idea of the spread of influences of the Ubaid tradition in space
-may be, I believe you will agree that the consequences of the
-growth of that tradition in southern Mesopotamia itself, as
-time passed, are even more important.</p>
-
-<h3>THE WARKA PHASE IN THE SOUTH</h3>
-
-<p>So far, there are only two radiocarbon determinations for the
-Ubaidian assemblage, one from Tepe Gawra in the north and
-one from Warka in the south. My hunch would be to use the
-dates 4500 to 3750 <span class="smcap smaller">B.C.</span>, with a plus or more probably a minus
-factor of about two hundred years for each, as the time duration
-of the Ubaidian assemblage in southern Mesopotamia.</p>
-
-<p>Next, much to our annoyance, we have what is almost
-a temporary black-out. According to the system of terminology<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_157">157</a></span>
-I favor, our next “assemblage” after that of Ubaid is
-called the <i xml:lang="ar" lang="ar">Warka</i> phase, from the Arabic name for the site of
-Uruk or Erich. We know it only from six or seven levels in
-a narrow test-pit at Warka, and from an even smaller hole at
-another site. This “assemblage,” so far, is known only by its
-pottery, some of which still bears Ubaidian style painting.
-The characteristic Warkan pottery is unpainted, with
-smoothed red or gray surfaces and peculiar shapes. Unquestionably,
-there must be a great deal more to say about the
-Warkan assemblage, but someone will first have to excavate
-it!</p>
-
-<h3>THE DAWN OF CIVILIZATION</h3>
-
-<p>After our exasperation with the almost unknown Warka interlude,
-following the brilliant “false dawn” of Ubaid, we move
-next to an assemblage which yields traces of a preponderance
-of those elements which we noted (<a href="#Page_144">p. 144</a>) as meaning civilization.
-This assemblage is that called <em>Proto-Literate</em>; it
-already contains writing. On the somewhat shaky principle
-that writing, however early, means history&mdash;and no longer
-prehistory&mdash;the assemblage is named for the historical implications
-of its content, and no longer after the name of the site
-where it was first found. Since some of the older books used
-site-names for this assemblage, I will tell you that the Proto-Literate
-includes the latter half of what used to be called the
-“Uruk period” <em>plus</em> all of what used to be called the “Jemdet
-Nasr period.” It shows a consistent development from beginning
-to end.</p>
-
-<p>I shall, in fact, leave much of the description and the historic
-implications of the Proto-Literate assemblage to the conventional
-historians. Professor T.&nbsp;J. Jacobsen, reaching backward
-from the legends he finds in the cuneiform writings of
-slightly later times, can in fact tell you a more complete story of
-Proto-Literate culture than I can. It should be enough here
-if I sum up briefly what the excavated archeological evidence
-shows.</p>
-
-<p>We have yet to dig a Proto-Literate site in its entirety,
-but the indications are that the sites cover areas the size of<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_158">158</a></span>
-small cities. In architecture, we know of large and monumental
-temple structures, which were built on elaborate high
-terraces. The plans and decoration of these temples follow
-the pattern set in the Ubaid phase: the chief difference is one
-of size. The German excavators at the site of Warka reckoned
-that the construction of only one of the Proto-Literate temple
-complexes there must have taken 1,500 men, each working
-a ten-hour day, five years to build.</p>
-
-<h3>ART AND WRITING</h3>
-
-<p>If the architecture, even in its monumental forms, can be seen
-to stem from Ubaidian developments, this is not so with our
-other evidence of Proto-Literate artistic expression. In relief
-and applied sculpture, in sculpture in the round, and on the
-engraved cylinder seals&mdash;all of which now make their appearance&mdash;several
-completely new artistic principles are apparent.
-These include the composition of subject-matter in groups,
-commemorative scenes, and especially the ability and apparent
-desire to render the human form and face. Excellent
-as the animals of the Franco-Cantabrian art may have been
-(see <a href="#Page_85">p. 85</a>), and however handsome were the carefully drafted
-geometric designs and conventionalized figures on the pottery
-of the early farmers, there seems to have been, up to this time,
-a mental block about the drawing of the human figure and
-especially the human face. We do not yet know what caused
-this self-consciousness about picturing themselves which
-seems characteristic of men before the appearance of civilization.
-We do know that with civilization, the mental block
-seems to have been removed.</p>
-
-<p>Clay tablets bearing pictographic signs are the Proto-Literate
-forerunners of cuneiform writing. The earliest examples
-are not well understood but they seem to be “devices
-for making accounts and for remembering accounts.” Different
-from the later case in Egypt, where writing appears fully
-formed in the earliest examples, the development from simple
-pictographic signs to proper cuneiform writing may be traced,
-step by step, in Mesopotamia. It is most probable that the
-development of writing was connected with the temple and
-the need for keeping account of the temple’s possessions.<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_159">159</a></span>
-Professor Jacobsen sees writing as a means for overcoming
-space, time, and the increasing complications of human
-affairs: “Literacy, which began with ... civilization, enhanced
-mightily those very tendencies in its development
-which characterize it as a civilization and mark it off as such
-from other types of culture.”</p>
-
-<div id="if_i_040" class="figcenter" style="width: 496px;">
-  <img src="images/i_040.jpg" width="496" height="462" alt="" />
-  <div class="caption"><p>RELIEF ON A PROTO-LITERATE STONE VASE, WARKA</p>
-
-<p class="smaller">Unrolled drawing, with restoration suggested by figures from
-contemporary cylinder seals</p></div></div>
-
-<p>While the new principles in art and the idea of writing are
-not foreshadowed in the Ubaid phase, or in what little we
-know of the Warkan, I do not think we need to look outside
-southern Mesopotamia for their beginnings. We do know
-something of the adjacent areas, too, and these beginnings
-are not there. I think we must accept them as completely
-new discoveries, made by the people who were developing the
-whole new culture pattern of classic southern Mesopotamia.<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_160">160</a></span>
-Full description of the art, architecture, and writing of the Proto-Literate
-phase would call for many details. Men like Professor
-Jacobsen and Dr. Adams can give you these details much
-better than I can. Nor shall I do more than tell you that the
-common pottery of the Proto-Literate phase was so well
-standardized that it looks factory made. There was also some
-handsome painted pottery, and there were stone bowls with
-inlaid decoration. Well-made tools in metal had by now
-become fairly common, and the metallurgist was experimenting
-with the casting process. Signs for plows have been identified
-in the early pictographs, and a wheeled chariot is shown on
-a cylinder seal engraving. But if I were forced to a guess in
-the matter, I would say that the development of plows and
-draft-animals probably began in the Ubaid period and was
-another of the great innovations of that time.</p>
-
-<p>The Proto-Literate assemblage clearly suggests a highly
-developed and sophisticated culture. While perhaps not yet
-fully urban, it is on the threshold of urbanization. There
-seems to have been a very dense settlement of Proto-Literate
-sites in classic southern Mesopotamia, many of them newly
-founded on virgin soil where no earlier settlements had been.
-When we think for a moment of what all this implies, of the
-growth of an irrigation system which must have existed
-to allow the flourish of this culture, and of the social and
-political organization necessary to maintain the irrigation
-system, I think we will agree that at last we are dealing with
-civilization proper.</p>
-
-<h3>FROM PREHISTORY TO HISTORY</h3>
-
-<p>Now it is time for the conventional ancient historians to
-take over the story from me. Remember this when you read
-what they write. Their real base-line is with cultures ruled
-over by later kings and emperors, whose writings describe
-military campaigns and the administration of laws and fully
-organized trading ventures. To these historians, the Proto-Literate
-phase is still a simple beginning for what is to follow.
-If they mention the Ubaid assemblage at all&mdash;the one I was<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_161">161</a></span>
-so lyrical about&mdash;it will be as some dim and fumbling step
-on the path to the civilized way of life.</p>
-
-<p>I suppose you could say that the difference in the approach
-is that as a prehistorian I have been looking forward or upward
-in time, while the historians look backward to glimpse
-what I’ve been describing here. My base-line was half
-a million years ago with a being who had little more than the
-capacity to make tools and fire to distinguish him from the
-animals about him. Thus my point of view and that of the
-conventional historian are bound to be different. You will
-need both if you want to understand all of the story of men,
-as they lived through time to the present.</p>
-
-<hr />
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_162">162</a></span></p>
-
-<div class="chapter">
-<h2 id="hdr_10">End of PREHISTORY</h2>
-
-<div id="if_i_041" class="figcenter" style="width: 485px;">
-  <img src="images/i_041.jpg" width="485" height="228" alt="" /></div>
-</div>
-
-<p>You’ll doubtless easily recall your general course in ancient
-history: how the Sumerian dynasties of Mesopotamia were
-supplanted by those of Babylonia, how the Hittite kingdom
-appeared in Anatolian Turkey, and about the three great
-phases of Egyptian history. The literate kingdom of Crete
-arose, and by 1500 <span class="smcap smaller">B.C.</span> there were splendid fortified Mycenean
-towns on the mainland of Greece. This was the time&mdash;about
-the whole eastern end of the Mediterranean&mdash;of what Professor
-Breasted called the “first great internationalism,” with
-flourishing trade, international treaties, and royal marriages
-between Egyptians, Babylonians, and Hittites. By 1200 <span class="smcap smaller">B.C.</span>,
-the whole thing had fragmented: “the peoples of the sea were
-restless in their isles,” and the great ancient centers in Egypt,
-Mesopotamia, and Anatolia were eclipsed. Numerous smaller
-states arose&mdash;Assyria, Phoenicia, Israel&mdash;and the Trojan war
-was fought. Finally Assyria became the paramount power
-of all the Near East, presently to be replaced by Persia.</p>
-
-<p>A new culture, partaking of older west Asiatic and Egyptian
-elements, but casting them with its own tradition into
-a new mould, arose in mainland Greece.</p>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_163">163</a></span>
-I once shocked my Classical colleagues to the core by
-referring to Greece as “a second degree derived civilization,”
-but there is much truth in this. The principles of bronze- and
-then of iron-working, of the alphabet, and of many other
-elements in Greek culture were borrowed from western Asia.
-Our debt to the Greeks is too well known for me even to
-mention it, beyond recalling to you that it is to Greece we owe
-the beginnings of rational or empirical science and thought in
-general. But Greece fell in its turn to Rome, and in 55 <span class="smcap smaller">B.C.</span>
-Caesar invaded Britain.</p>
-
-<p>I last spoke of Britain on <a href="#Page_142">page 142</a>; I had chosen it as my
-single example for telling you something of how the earliest
-farming communities were established in Europe. Now I will
-continue with Britain’s later prehistory, so you may sense
-something of the end of prehistory itself. Remember that
-Britain is simply a single example we select; the same thing
-could be done for all the other countries of Europe, and will be
-possible also, some day, for further Asia and Africa. Remember,
-too, that prehistory in most of Europe runs on for
-three thousand or more years <em>after</em> conventional ancient history
-begins in the Near East. Britain is a good example to use in
-showing how prehistory ended in Europe. As we said earlier,
-it lies at the opposite end of Europe from the area of highest
-cultural achievement in those times, and should you care to
-read more of the story in detail, you may do so in the English
-language.</p>
-
-<h3>METAL USERS REACH ENGLAND</h3>
-
-<p>We left the story of Britain with the peoples who made three
-different assemblages&mdash;the Windmill Hill, the megalith-builders,
-and the Peterborough&mdash;making adjustments to their
-environments, to the original inhabitants of the island, and
-to each other. They had first arrived about 2500 <span class="smcap smaller">B.C.</span>, and
-were simple pastoralists and hoe cultivators who lived in little
-village communities. Some of them planted little if any grain.
-By 2000 <span class="smcap smaller">B.C.</span>, they were well settled in. Then, somewhere in
-the range from about 1900 to 1800 <span class="smcap smaller">B.C.</span>, the traces of the invasion
-of a new series of peoples began to appear.</p>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_164">164</a></span>
-The first newcomers are called the Beaker folk, after the
-name of a peculiar form of pottery they made. The beaker
-type of pottery seems oldest in Spain, where it occurs with
-great collective tombs of megalithic construction and with
-copper tools. But the Beaker folk who reached England seem
-already to have moved first from Spain(?) to the Rhineland
-and Holland. While in the Rhineland, and before leaving
-for England, the Beaker folk seem to have mixed with the
-local population and also with incomers from northeastern
-Europe whose culture included elements brought originally
-from the Near East by the eastern way through the steppes.
-This last group has also been named for a peculiar article in
-its assemblage; the group is called the Battle-axe folk. A few
-Battle-axe folk elements, including, in fact, stone battle-axes,
-reached England with the earliest Beaker folk,<a id="FNanchor_6" href="#Footnote_6" class="fnanchor">6</a> coming from
-the Rhineland.</p>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_6" href="#FNanchor_6" class="fnanchor">6</a> The British authors use the term “Beaker folk” to mean both
-archeological assemblage and human physical type. They speak of
-a “... tall, heavy-boned, rugged, and round-headed” strain which
-they take to have developed, apparently in the Rhineland, by a mixture
-of the original (Spanish?) beaker-makers and the northeast European
-battle-axe makers. However, since the science of physical anthropology
-is very much in flux at the moment, and since I am not able to assess the
-evidence for these physical types, I <em>do not</em> use the term “folk” in this book
-with its usual meaning of standardized physical type. When I use “folk”
-here, I mean simply <em>the makers of a given archeological assemblage</em>. The
-difficulty only comes when assemblages are named for some item in them;
-it is too clumsy to make an adjective of the item and refer to a “beakerian”
-assemblage.</p></div>
-
-<p>The Beaker folk settled earliest in the agriculturally fertile
-south and east. There seem to have been several phases of
-Beaker folk invasions, and it is not clear whether these all
-came strictly from the Rhineland or Holland. We do know
-that their copper daggers and awls and armlets are more of
-Irish or Atlantic European than of Rhineland origin. A few
-simple habitation sites and many burials of the Beaker folk
-are known. They buried their dead singly, sometimes in
-conspicuous individual barrows with the dead warrior in his
-full trappings. The spectacular element in the assemblage
-of the Beaker folk is a group of large circular monuments with
-ditches and with uprights of wood or stone. These “henges”
-became truly monumental several hundred years later; while<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_165">165</a></span>
-they were occasionally dedicated with a burial, they were not
-primarily tombs. The effect of the invasion of the Beaker folk
-seems to cut across the whole fabric of life in Britain.</p>
-
-<div id="if_i_042" class="figcenter" style="width: 358px;">
-  <img src="images/i_042.jpg" width="358" height="495" alt="" />
-  <div class="caption">BEAKER</div></div>
-
-<p>There was, however, a second major element in British life
-at this time. It shows itself in the less well understood traces
-of a group again called after one of the items in their catalogue,
-the Food-vessel folk. There are many burials in these “food-vessel”
-pots in northern England, Scotland, and Ireland, and
-the pottery itself seems to link back to that of the Peterborough
-assemblage. Like the earlier Peterborough people in the
-highland zone before them, the makers of the food-vessels
-seem to have been heavily involved in trade. It is quite
-proper to wonder whether the food-vessel pottery itself was
-made by local women who were married to traders who were<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_166">166</a></span>
-middlemen in the transmission of Irish metal objects to north
-Germany and Scandinavia. The belt of high, relatively
-woodless country, from southwest to northeast, was already
-established as a natural route for inland trade.</p>
-
-<h3>MORE INVASIONS</h3>
-
-<p>About 1500 <span class="smcap smaller">B.C.</span>, the situation became further complicated
-by the arrival of new people in the region of southern England
-anciently called Wessex. The traces suggest the Brittany
-coast of France as a source, and the people seem at first to
-have been a small but “heroic” group of aristocrats. Their
-“heroes” are buried with wealth and ceremony, surrounded by
-their axes and daggers of bronze, their gold ornaments, and
-amber and jet beads. These rich finds show that the trade-linkage
-these warriors patronized spread from the Baltic
-sources of amber to Mycenean Greece or even Egypt, as
-evidenced by glazed blue beads.</p>
-
-<p>The great visual trace of Wessex achievement is the final
-form of the spectacular sanctuary at Stonehenge. A wooden
-henge or circular monument was first made several hundred
-years earlier, but the site now received its great circles of stone
-uprights and lintels. The diameter of the surrounding ditch at
-Stonehenge is about 350 feet, the diameter of the inner circle of
-large stones is about 100 feet, and the tallest stone of the
-innermost horseshoe-shaped enclosure is 29 feet 8 inches high.
-One circle is made of blue stones which must have been transported
-from Pembrokeshire, 145 miles away as the crow flies.
-Recently, many carvings representing the profile of a standard
-type of bronze axe of the time, and several profiles of bronze
-daggers&mdash;one of which has been called Mycenean in type&mdash;have
-been found carved in the stones. We cannot, of course,
-describe the details of the religious ceremonies which must have
-been staged in Stonehenge, but we can certainly imagine the
-well-integrated and smoothly working culture which must
-have been necessary before such a great monument could have
-been built.</p>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_167">167</a></span></p>
-
-<h3>“THIS ENGLAND”</h3>
-
-<p>The range from 1900 to about 1400 <span class="smcap smaller">B.C.</span> includes the time of
-development of the archeological features usually called the
-“Early Bronze Age” in Britain. In fact, traces of the Wessex
-warriors persisted down to about 1200 <span class="smcap smaller">B.C.</span> The main regions
-of the island were populated, and the adjustments to the
-highland and lowland zones were distinct and well marked.
-The different aspects of the assemblages of the Beaker folk
-and the clearly expressed activities of the Food-vessel folk
-and the Wessex warriors show that Britain was already taking
-on her characteristic trading role, separated from the European
-continent but conveniently adjacent to it. The tin of Cornwall&mdash;so
-important in the production of good bronze&mdash;as well as
-the copper of the west and of Ireland, taken with the gold of
-Ireland and the general excellence of Irish metal work,
-assured Britain a trader’s place in the then known world.
-Contacts with the eastern Mediterranean may have been by
-sea, with Cornish tin as the attraction, or may have been made
-by the Food-vessel middlemen on their trips to the Baltic
-coast. There they would have encountered traders who
-traveled the great north-south European road, by which
-Baltic amber moved southward to Greece and the Levant,
-and ideas and things moved northward again.</p>
-
-<p>There was, however, the Channel between England and
-Europe, and this relative isolation gave some peace and also
-gave time for a leveling and further fusion of culture. The
-separate cultural traditions began to have more in common.
-The growing of barley, the herding of sheep and cattle, and
-the production of woolen garments were already features
-common to all Britain’s inhabitants save a few in the remote
-highlands, the far north, and the distant islands not yet fully
-touched by food-production. The “personality of Britain”
-was being formed.</p>
-
-<h3>CREMATION BURIALS BEGIN</h3>
-
-<p>Along with people of certain religious faiths, archeologists are
-against cremation (for other people!). Individuals to be
-cremated seem in past times to have been dressed in their<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_168">168</a></span>
-trappings and put upon a large pyre: it takes a lot of wood
-and a very hot fire for a thorough cremation. When the
-burning had been completed, the few fragile scraps of bone
-and such odd beads of stone or other rare items as had resisted
-the great heat seem to have been whisked into a pot and the
-pot buried. The archeologist is left with the pot and the
-unsatisfactory scraps in it.</p>
-
-<p>Tentatively, after about 1400 <span class="smcap smaller">B.C.</span> and almost completely
-over the whole island by 1200 <span class="smcap smaller">B.C.</span>, Britain became the scene of
-cremation burials in urns. We know very little of the people
-themselves. None of their settlements have been identified,
-although there is evidence that they grew barley and made
-enclosures for cattle. The urns used for the burials seem to
-have antecedents in the pottery of the Food-vessel folk, and
-there are some other links with earlier British traditions. In
-Lancashire, a wooden circle seems to have been built about
-a grave with cremated burials in urns. Even occasional
-instances of cremation may be noticed earlier in Britain, and
-it is not clear what, if any, connection the British cremation
-burials in urns have with the classic <em>Urnfields</em> which were now
-beginning in the east Mediterranean and which we shall
-mention below.</p>
-
-<p>The British cremation-burial-in-urns folk survived a long
-time in the highland zone. In the general British scheme, they
-make up what is called the “Middle Bronze Age,” but in the
-highland zone they last until after 900 <span class="smcap smaller">B.C.</span> and are considered
-to be a specialized highland “Late Bronze Age.” In the
-highland zone, these later cremation-burial folk seem to have
-continued the older Food-vessel tradition of being middlemen
-in the metal market.</p>
-
-<p>Granting that our knowledge of this phase of British prehistory
-is very restricted because the cremations have left so
-little for the archeologist, it does not appear that the cremation-burial-urn
-folk can be sharply set off from their
-immediate predecessors. But change on a grander scale was
-on the way.</p>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_169">169</a></span></p>
-
-<h3>REVERBERATIONS FROM CENTRAL EUROPE</h3>
-
-<p>In the centuries immediately following 1000 <span class="smcap smaller">B.C.</span>, we see with
-fair clarity two phases of a cultural process which must have
-been going on for some time. Certainly several of the invasions
-we have already described in this chapter were due to
-earlier phases of the same cultural process, but we could not
-see the details.</p>
-
-<div id="if_i_043" class="figcenter" style="width: 450px;">
-  <img src="images/i_043.jpg" width="450" height="65" alt="" />
-  <div class="caption">SLASHING SWORD</div></div>
-
-<p>Around 1200 <span class="smcap smaller">B.C.</span> central Europe was upset by the spread
-of the so-called Urnfield folk, who practiced cremation burial
-in urns and whom we also know to have been possessors of
-long, slashing swords and the horse. I told you above that we
-have no idea that the Urnfield folk proper were in any way
-connected with the people who made cremation-burial-urn
-cemeteries a century or so earlier in Britain. It has been
-supposed that the Urnfield folk themselves may have shared
-ideas with the people who sacked Troy. We know that the
-Urnfield pressure from central Europe displaced other people
-in northern France, and perhaps in northwestern Germany,
-and that this reverberated into Britain about 1000 <span class="smcap smaller">B.C.</span></p>
-
-<p>Soon after 750 <span class="smcap smaller">B.C.</span>, the same thing happened again. This
-time, the pressure from central Europe came from the Hallstatt
-folk who were iron tool makers: the reverberation brought
-people from the western Alpine region across the Channel
-into Britain.</p>
-
-<p>At first it is possible to see the separate results of these
-folk movements, but the developing cultures soon fused with
-each other and with earlier British elements. Presently there
-were also strains of other northern and western European
-pottery and traces of Urnfield practices themselves which
-appeared in the finished British product. I hope you will
-sense that I am vastly over-simplifying the details.</p>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_170">170</a></span>
-The result seems to have been&mdash;among other things&mdash;a
-new kind of agricultural system. The land was marked off
-by ditched divisions. Rectangular fields imply the plow
-rather than hoe cultivation. We seem to get a picture of
-estate or tribal boundaries which included village communities;
-we find a variety of tools in bronze, and even
-whetstones which show that iron has been honed on them
-(although the scarce iron has not been found). Let me give
-you the picture in Professor S. Piggott’s words: “The ... Late
-Bronze Age of southern England was but the forerunner of
-the earliest Iron Age in the same region, not only in the
-techniques of agriculture, but almost certainly in terms of
-ethnic kinship ... we can with some assurance talk of the
-Celts ... the great early Celtic expansion of the Continent
-is recognized to be that of the Urnfield people.”</p>
-
-<p>Thus, certainly by 500 <span class="smcap smaller">B.C.</span>, there were people in Britain,
-some of whose descendants we may recognize today in name
-or language in remote parts of Wales, Scotland, and the
-Hebrides.</p>
-
-<h3>THE COMING OF IRON</h3>
-
-<p>Iron&mdash;once the know-how of reducing it from its ore in a very
-hot, closed fire has been achieved&mdash;produces a far cheaper
-and much more efficient set of tools than does bronze. Iron
-tools seem first to have been made in quantity in Hittite
-Anatolia about 1500 <span class="smcap smaller">B.C.</span> In continental Europe, the earliest,
-so-called Hallstatt, iron-using cultures appeared in Germany
-soon after 750 <span class="smcap smaller">B.C.</span> Somewhat later, Greek and especially
-Etruscan exports of <i xml:lang="fr" lang="fr">objets d’art</i>&mdash;which moved with a flourishing
-trans-Alpine wine trade&mdash;influenced the Hallstatt iron-working
-tradition. Still later new classical motifs, together
-with older Hallstatt, oriental, and northern nomad motifs,
-gave rise to a new style in metal decoration which characterizes
-the so-called La Tène phase.</p>
-
-<p>A few iron users reached Britain a little before 400 <span class="smcap smaller">B.C.</span> Not
-long after that, a number of allied groups appeared in southern
-and southeastern England. They came over the Channel
-from France and must have been Celts with dialects related<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_171">171</a></span>
-to those already in England. A second wave of Celts arrived
-from the Marne district in France about 250 <span class="smcap smaller">B.C.</span> Finally,
-in the second quarter of the first century <span class="smcap smaller">B.C.</span>, there were
-several groups of newcomers, some of whom were Belgae of
-a mixed Teutonic-Celtic confederacy of tribes in northern
-France and Belgium. The Belgae preceded the Romans by
-only a few years.</p>
-
-<h3>HILL-FORTS AND FARMS</h3>
-
-<p>The earliest iron-users seem to have entrenched themselves
-temporarily within hill-top forts, mainly in the south. Gradually,
-they moved inland, establishing <em>individual</em> farm sites with
-extensive systems of rectangular fields. We recognize these
-fields by the “lynchets” or lines of soil-creep which plowing
-left on the slopes of hills. New crops appeared; there were
-now bread wheat, oats, and rye, as well as barley.</p>
-
-<p>At Little Woodbury, near the town of Salisbury, a farmstead
-has been rather completely excavated. The rustic
-buildings were within a palisade, the round house itself was
-built of wood, and there were various outbuildings and pits
-for the storage of grain. Weaving was done on the farm, but
-not blacksmithing, which must have been a specialized trade.
-Save for the lack of firearms, the place might almost be taken
-for a farmstead on the American frontier in the early 1800’s.</p>
-
-<p>Toward 250 <span class="smcap smaller">B.C.</span> there seems to have been a hasty attempt
-to repair the hill-forts and to build new ones, evidently in
-response to signs of restlessness being shown by remote
-relatives in France.</p>
-
-<h3>THE SECOND PHASE</h3>
-
-<p>Perhaps the hill-forts were not entirely effective or perhaps
-a compromise was reached. In any case, the newcomers from
-the Marne district did establish themselves, first in the southeast
-and then to the north and west. They brought iron with
-decoration of the La Tène type and also the two-wheeled
-chariot. Like the Wessex warriors of over a thousand years
-earlier, they made “heroes’” graves, with their warriors
-buried in the war-chariots and dressed in full trappings.</p>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_172">172</a></span></p>
-
-<div id="if_i_044" class="figcenter" style="width: 486px;">
-  <img src="images/i_044.jpg" width="486" height="244" alt="" />
-  <div class="caption">CELTIC BUCKLE</div></div>
-
-<p>The metal work of these Marnian newcomers is excellent.
-The peculiar Celtic art style, based originally on the classic
-tendril motif, is colorful and virile, and fits with Greek and
-Roman descriptions of Celtic love of color in dress. There is a
-strong trace of these newcomers northward in Yorkshire,
-linked by Ptolemy’s description to the Parisii, doubtless part
-of the Celtic tribe which originally gave its name to Paris on
-the Seine. Near Glastonbury, in Somerset, two villages in
-swamps have been excavated. They seem to date toward the
-middle of the first century <span class="smcap smaller">B.C.</span>, which was a troubled time
-in Britain. The circular houses were built on timber platforms
-surrounded with palisades. The preservation of antiquities
-by the water-logged peat of the swamp has yielded us
-a long catalogue of the materials of these villagers.</p>
-
-<p>In Scotland, which yields its first iron tools at a date of
-about 100 <span class="smcap smaller">B.C.</span>, and in northern Ireland even slightly earlier,
-the effects of the two phases of newcomers tend especially to
-blend. Hill-forts, “brochs” (stone-built round towers) and
-a variety of other strange structures seem to appear as the new
-ideas develop in the comparative isolation of northern Britain.</p>
-
-<h3>THE THIRD PHASE</h3>
-
-<p>For the time of about the middle of the first century <span class="smcap smaller">B.C.</span>,
-we again see traces of frantic hill-fort construction. This<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_173">173</a></span>
-simple military architecture now took some new forms. Its
-multiple ramparts must reflect the use of slings as missiles,
-rather than spears. We probably know the reason. In 56 <span class="smcap smaller">B.C.</span>,
-Julius Caesar chastised the Veneti of Brittany for outraging
-the dignity of Roman ambassadors. The Veneti were famous
-slingers, and doubtless the reverberations of escaping Veneti
-were felt across the Channel. The military architecture
-suggests that some Veneti did escape to Britain.</p>
-
-<p>Also, through Caesar, we learn the names of newcomers
-who arrived in two waves, about 75 <span class="smcap smaller">B.C.</span> and about 50 <span class="smcap smaller">B.C.</span>
-These were the Belgae. Now, at last, we can even begin to
-speak of dynasties and individuals. Some time before 55 <span class="smcap smaller">B.C.</span>,
-the Catuvellauni, originally from the Marne district in France,
-had possessed themselves of a large part of southeastern
-England. They evidently sailed up the Thames and built
-a town of over a hundred acres in area. Here ruled Cassivellaunus,
-“the first man in England whose name we know,”
-and whose town Caesar sacked. The town sprang up elsewhere
-again, however.</p>
-
-<h3>THE END OF PREHISTORY</h3>
-
-<p>Prehistory, strictly speaking, is now over in southern Britain.
-Claudius’ effective invasion took place in 43 <span class="smcap smaller">A.D.</span>; by 83 <span class="smcap smaller">A.D.</span>,
-a raid had been made as far north as Aberdeen in Scotland.
-But by 127 <span class="smcap smaller">A.D.</span>, Hadrian had completed his wall from the
-Solway to the Tyne, and the Romans settled behind it. In
-Scotland, Romanization can have affected the countryside
-very little. Professor Piggott adds that “... it is when the
-pressure of Romanization is relaxed by the break-up of the
-Dark Ages that we see again the Celtic metal-smiths handling
-their material with the same consummate skill as they had
-before the Roman Conquest, and with traditional styles that
-had not even then forgotten their Marnian and Belgic heritage.”</p>
-
-<p>In fact, many centuries go by, in Britain as well as in the
-rest of Europe, before the archeologist’s task is complete and
-the historian on his own is able to describe the ways of men in
-the past.</p>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_174">174</a></span></p>
-
-<h3>BRITAIN AS A SAMPLE OF THE GENERAL COURSE OF PREHISTORY IN EUROPE</h3>
-
-<p>In giving this very brief outline of the later prehistory of
-Britain, you will have noticed how often I had to refer to the
-European continent itself. Britain, beyond the English
-Channel for all of her later prehistory, had a much simpler
-course of events than did most of the rest of Europe in later
-prehistoric times. This holds, in spite of all the “invasions”
-and “reverberations” from the continent. Most of Europe
-was the scene of an even more complicated ebb and flow of
-cultural change, save in some of its more remote mountain
-valleys and peninsulas.</p>
-
-<p>The whole course of later prehistory in Europe is, in fact,
-so very complicated that there is no single good book to cover
-it all; certainly there is none in English. There are some good
-regional accounts and some good general accounts of part of
-the range from about 3000 <span class="smcap smaller">B.C.</span> to <span class="smcap smaller">A.D.</span> 1. I suspect that the
-difficulty of making a good book that covers all of its later
-prehistory is another aspect of what makes Europe so very
-complicated a continent today. The prehistoric foundations
-for Europe’s very complicated set of civilizations, cultures, and
-sub-cultures&mdash;which begin to appear as history proceeds&mdash;were
-in themselves very complicated.</p>
-
-<p>Hence, I selected the case of Britain as a single example of
-how prehistory ends in Europe. It could have been more
-complicated than we found it to be. Even in the subject
-matter on Britain in the chapter before the last, we did not
-see direct traces of the effect on Britain of the very important
-developments which took place in the Danubian way from
-the Near East. Apparently Britain was not affected. Britain
-received the impulses which brought copper, bronze, and iron
-tools from an original east Mediterranean homeland into
-Europe, almost at the ends of their journeys. But by the
-same token, they had had time en route to take on their
-characteristic European aspects.</p>
-
-<p>Some time ago, Sir Cyril Fox wrote a famous book called
-<cite>The Personality of Britain</cite>, sub-titled “Its Influence on Inhabitant
-and Invader in Prehistoric and Early Historic Times.”<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_175">175</a></span>
-We have not gone into the post-Roman early historic period
-here; there are still the Anglo-Saxons and Normans to account
-for as well as the effects of the Romans. But what I have tried
-to do was to begin the story of how the personality of Britain
-was formed. The principles that Fox used, in trying to
-balance cultural and environmental factors and interrelationships
-would not be greatly different for other lands.</p>
-
-<hr />
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_176">176</a></span></p>
-
-<div class="chapter">
-<h2 id="hdr_11">Summary</h2>
-
-<div id="if_i_045" class="figcenter" style="width: 252px;">
-  <img src="images/i_045.jpg" width="252" height="220" alt="" /></div>
-</div>
-
-<p>In the pages you have read so far, you have been brought
-through the earliest 99 per cent of the story of man’s life on
-this planet. I have left only 1 per cent of the story for the
-historians to tell.</p>
-
-<h3>THE DRAMA OF THE PAST</h3>
-
-<p>Men first became men when evolution had carried them to a
-certain point. This was the point where the eye-hand-brain
-co-ordination was good enough so that tools could be made.
-When tools began to be made according to sets of lasting
-habits, we know that men had appeared. This happened over
-a half million years ago. The stage for the play may have
-been as broad as all of Europe, Africa, and Asia. At least,
-it seems unlikely that it was only one little region that saw
-the beginning of the drama.</p>
-
-<p>Glaciers and different climates came and went, to change
-the settings. But the play went on in the same first act for
-a very long time. The men who were the players had simple
-roles. They had to feed themselves and protect themselves
-as best they could. They did this by hunting, catching, and
-finding food wherever they could, and by taking such protection
-as caves, fire, and their simple tools would give them.
-Before the first act was over, the last of the glaciers was
-melting away, and the players had added the New World to<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_177">177</a></span>
-their stage. If we want a special name for the first act, we
-could call it <em>The Food-Gatherers</em>.</p>
-
-<p>There were not many climaxes in the first act, so far as we
-can see. But I think there may have been a few. Certainly
-the pace of the first act accelerated with the swing from simple
-gathering to more intensified collecting. The great cave art
-of France and Spain was probably an expression of a climax.
-Even the ideas of burying the dead and of the “Venus” figurines
-must also point to levels of human thought and activity
-that were over and above pure food-getting.</p>
-
-<h3>THE SECOND ACT</h3>
-
-<p>The second act began only about ten thousand years ago. A
-few of the players started it by themselves near the center
-of the Old World part of the stage, in the Near East. It began
-as a plant and animal act, but it soon became much more
-complicated.</p>
-
-<p>But the players in this one part of the stage&mdash;in the Near
-East&mdash;were not the only ones to start off on the second act
-by themselves. Other players, possibly in several places in the
-Far East, and certainly in the New World, also started second
-acts that began as plant and animal acts, and then became
-complicated. We can call the whole second act <em>The Food-Producers</em>.</p>
-
-<h3>THE FIRST GREAT CLIMAX OF THE SECOND ACT</h3>
-
-<p>In the Near East, the first marked climax of the second act
-happened in Mesopotamia and Egypt. The play and the
-players reached that great climax that we call civilization.
-This seems to have come less than five thousand years after
-the second act began. But it could never have happened in
-the first act at all.</p>
-
-<p>There is another curious thing about the first act. Many
-of the players didn’t know it was over and they kept on with
-their roles long after the second act had begun. On the edges
-of the stage there are today some players who are still going
-on with the first act. The Eskimos, and the native Australians,
-and certain tribes in the Amazon jungle are some of these<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_178">178</a></span>
-players. They seem perfectly happy to keep on with the
-first act.</p>
-
-<p>The second act moved from climax to climax. The
-civilizations of Mesopotamia and Egypt were only the earliest
-of these climaxes. The players to the west caught the spirit of
-the thing, and climaxes followed there. So also did climaxes
-come in the Far Eastern and New World portions of the stage.</p>
-
-<p>The greater part of the second act should really be described
-to you by a historian. Although it was a very short
-act when compared to the first one, the climaxes complicate
-it a great deal. I, a prehistorian, have told you about only
-the first act, and the very beginning of the second.</p>
-
-<h3>THE THIRD ACT</h3>
-
-<p>Also, as a prehistorian I probably should not even mention the
-third act&mdash;it began so recently. The third act is <em>The Industrialization</em>.
-It is the one in which we ourselves are players.
-If the pace of the second act was so much faster than that of
-the first, the pace of the third act is terrific. The danger is
-that it may wear down the players completely.</p>
-
-<p>What sort of climaxes will the third act have, and are we
-already in one? You have seen by now that the acts of my
-play are given in terms of modes or basic patterns of human
-economy&mdash;ways in which people get food and protection and
-safety. The climaxes involve more than human economy.
-Economics and technological factors may be part of the
-climaxes, but they are not all. The climaxes may be revolutions
-in their own way, intellectual and social revolutions
-if you like.</p>
-
-<p>If the third act follows the pattern of the second act,
-a climax should come soon after the act begins. We may be
-due for one soon if we are not already in it. Remember the
-terrific pace of this third act.</p>
-
-<h3>WHY BOTHER WITH PREHISTORY?</h3>
-
-<p>Why do we bother about prehistory? The main reason is that
-we think it may point to useful ideas for the present. We are in
-the troublesome beginnings of the third act of the play. The<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_179">179</a></span>
-beginnings of the second act may have lessons for us and give
-depth to our thinking. I know there are at least <em>some</em> lessons,
-even in the present incomplete state of our knowledge. The
-players who began the second act&mdash;that of food-production&mdash;separately,
-in different parts of the world, were not all of one
-“pure race” nor did they have “pure” cultural traditions.
-Some apparently quite mixed Mediterraneans got off to the
-first start on the second act and brought it to its first two
-climaxes as well. Peoples of quite different physical type
-achieved the first climaxes in China and in the New World.</p>
-
-<p>In our British example of how the late prehistory of
-Europe worked, we listed a continuous series of “invasions”
-and “reverberations.” After each of these came fusion.
-Even though the Channel protected Britain from some of the
-extreme complications of the mixture and fusion of continental
-Europe, you can see how silly it would be to refer to a “pure”
-British race or a “pure” British culture. We speak of the
-United States as a “melting pot.” But this is nothing new.
-Actually, Britain and all the rest of the world have been
-“melting pots” at one time or another.</p>
-
-<p>By the time the written records of Mesopotamia and
-Egypt begin to turn up in number, the climaxes there are well
-under way. To understand the beginnings of the climaxes,
-and the real beginnings of the second act itself, we are thrown
-back on prehistoric archeology. And this is as true for China,
-India, Middle America, and the Andes, as it is for the Near
-East.</p>
-
-<p>There are lessons to be learned from all of man’s past, not
-simply lessons of how to fight battles or win peace conferences,
-but of how human society evolves from one stage to another.
-Many of these lessons can only be looked for in the prehistoric
-past. So far, we have only made a beginning. There is much
-still to do, and many gaps in the story are yet to be filled.
-The prehistorian’s job is to find the evidence, to fill the gaps,
-and to discover the lessons men have learned in the past. As I
-see it, this is not only an exciting but a very practical goal
-for which to strive.</p>
-
-<hr />
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_180">180</a></span></p>
-
-<div id="booklist" class="chapter">
-<h2 id="hdr_12">List of Books</h2>
-
-<h3 class="center">BOOKS OF GENERAL INTEREST</h3>
-
-<p>(Chosen from a variety of the increasingly useful list of cheap paperbound
-books.)</p>
-
-<p class="in0">
-Childe, V. Gordon</p>
-<p class="hang"><cite>What Happened in History.</cite> 1954. Penguin.</p>
-<p class="hang"><cite>Man Makes Himself.</cite> 1955. Mentor.</p>
-<p class="hang"><cite>The Prehistory of European Society.</cite> 1958. Penguin.</p>
-
-<p class="in0">
-Dunn, L.&nbsp;C., and Dobzhansky, Th.</p>
-<p class="hang"><cite>Heredity, Race, and Society.</cite> 1952. Mentor.</p>
-
-<p class="in0">Frankfort, Henri, Frankfort, H.&nbsp;A., Jacobsen, Thorkild, and Wilson, John A.</p>
-<p class="hang"><cite>Before Philosophy.</cite> 1954. Penguin.</p>
-
-<p class="in0">
-Simpson, George G.</p>
-<p class="hang"><cite>The Meaning of Evolution.</cite> 1955. Mentor.</p>
-
-<p class="in0">
-Wheeler, Sir Mortimer</p>
-<p class="hang"><cite>Archaeology from the Earth.</cite> 1956. Penguin.
-</p>
-
-<h3 class="center">GEOCHRONOLOGY AND THE ICE AGE</h3>
-
-<p>(Two general books. Some Pleistocene geologists disagree with
-Zeuner’s interpretation of the dating evidence, but their points of view
-appear in professional journals, in articles too cumbersome to list here.)</p>
-
-<p class="in0">
-Flint, R.&nbsp;F.</p>
-<p class="hang"><cite>Glacial Geology and the Pleistocene Epoch.</cite> 1947. John Wiley and Sons.</p>
-
-<p class="in0">
-Zeuner, F.&nbsp;E.</p>
-<p class="hang"><cite>Dating the Past.</cite> 1952 (3rd ed.). Methuen and Co.
-</p>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_181">181</a></span></p>
-
-<h3 class="center">FOSSIL MEN AND RACE</h3>
-
-<p>(The points of view of physical anthropologists and human paleontologists
-are changing very quickly. Two of the different points of view
-are listed here.)</p>
-
-<p class="in0">
-Clark, W.&nbsp;E. Le Gros</p>
-<p class="hang"><cite>History of the Primates.</cite> 1956 (5th ed.). British Museum (Natural History). (Also in Phoenix edition, 1957.)</p>
-
-<p class="in0">
-Howells, W.&nbsp;W.</p>
-<p class="hang"><cite>Mankind So Far.</cite> 1944. Doubleday, Doran.
-</p>
-
-<h3 class="center">GENERAL ANTHROPOLOGY</h3>
-
-<p>(These are standard texts not absolutely up to date in every detail,
-or interpretative essays concerned with cultural change through time
-as well as in space.)</p>
-
-<p class="in0">
-Kroeber, A.&nbsp;L.</p>
-<p class="hang"><cite>Anthropology.</cite> 1948. Harcourt, Brace.</p>
-
-<p class="in0">
-Linton, Ralph</p>
-<p class="hang"><cite>The Tree of Culture.</cite> 1955. Alfred A. Knopf, Inc.</p>
-
-<p class="in0">
-Redfield, Robert</p>
-<p class="hang"><cite>The Primitive World and Its Transformations.</cite> 1953. Cornell University Press.</p>
-
-<p class="in0">
-Steward, Julian H.</p>
-<p class="hang"><cite>Theory of Culture Change.</cite> 1955. University of Illinois Press.</p>
-
-<p class="in0">
-White, Leslie</p>
-<p class="hang"><cite>The Science of Culture.</cite> 1949. Farrar, Strauss.
-</p>
-
-<h3 class="center">GENERAL PREHISTORY</h3>
-
-<p>(A sampling of the more useful and current standard works in English.)</p>
-
-<p class="in0">
-Childe, V. Gordon</p>
-<p class="hang"><cite>The Dawn of European Civilization.</cite> 1957. Kegan Paul, Trench, Trubner.</p>
-<p class="hang"><cite>Prehistoric Migrations in Europe.</cite> 1950. Instituttet for Sammenlignende Kulturforskning.</p>
-
-<p class="in0">
-Clark, Grahame</p>
-<p class="hang"><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_182">182</a></span><cite>Archaeology and Society.</cite> 1957. Harvard University Press.</p>
-
-<p class="in0">
-Clark, J.&nbsp;G.&nbsp;D.</p>
-<p class="hang"><cite>Prehistoric Europe: The Economic Basis.</cite> 1952. Methuen and Co.</p>
-
-<p class="in0">
-Garrod, D.&nbsp;A.&nbsp;E.</p>
-<p class="hang"><cite>Environment, Tools, and Man.</cite> 1946. Cambridge University Press.</p>
-
-<p class="in0">
-Movius, Hallam L., Jr.</p>
-<p class="hang">“Old World Prehistory: Paleolithic” in <cite>Anthropology Today</cite>. Kroeber, A.&nbsp;L., ed. 1953. University of Chicago Press.</p>
-
-<p class="in0">
-Oakley, Kenneth P.</p>
-<p class="hang"><cite>Man the Tool-Maker.</cite> 1956. British Museum (Natural History). (Also in Phoenix edition, 1957.)</p>
-
-<p class="in0">
-Piggott, Stuart</p>
-<p class="hang"><cite>British Prehistory.</cite> 1949. Oxford University Press.</p>
-
-<p class="in0">
-Pittioni, Richard</p>
-<p class="hang"><cite>Die Urgeschichtlichen Grundlagen der Europäischen Kultur.</cite> 1949. Deuticke. (A single book which does attempt to cover the whole range of European prehistory to ca. 1 <span class="smcap smaller">A.D.</span>)
-</p>
-
-<h3 class="center">THE NEAR EAST</h3>
-
-<p class="in0">
-Adams, Robert M.</p>
-<p class="hang">“Developmental Stages in Ancient Mesopotamia,” <em>in</em> Steward, Julian, <i xml:lang="la" lang="la">et al</i>, <cite>Irrigation Civilizations: A Comparative Study</cite>. 1955. Pan American Union.</p>
-
-<p class="in0">
-Braidwood, Robert J.</p>
-<p class="hang"><cite>The Near East and the Foundations for Civilization.</cite> 1952. University of Oregon.</p>
-
-<p class="in0">
-Childe, V. Gordon</p>
-<p class="hang"><cite>New Light on the Most Ancient East.</cite> 1952. Oriental Dept., Routledge and Kegan Paul.</p>
-
-<p class="in0">
-Frankfort, Henri</p>
-<p class="hang"><cite>The Birth of Civilization in the Near East.</cite> 1951. University of Indiana Press. (Also in Anchor edition, 1956.)</p>
-
-<p class="in0">
-Pallis, Svend A.</p>
-<p class="hang"><cite>The Antiquity of Iraq.</cite> 1956. Munksgaard.</p>
-
-<p class="in0">
-Wilson, John A.</p>
-<p class="hang"><cite>The Burden of Egypt.</cite> 1951. University of Chicago Press. (Also in Phoenix edition, called <cite>The Culture of Ancient Egypt</cite>, 1956.)
-</p>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_183">183</a></span>
-HOW DIGGING IS DONE</p>
-
-<p class="in0">
-Braidwood, Linda</p>
-<p class="hang"><cite>Digging beyond the Tigris.</cite> 1953. Schuman, New York.</p>
-
-<p class="in0">
-Wheeler, Sir Mortimer</p>
-<p class="hang"><cite>Archaeology from the Earth.</cite> 1954. Oxford, London.
-</p>
-</div>
-
-<hr />
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_184">184</a></span></p>
-
-<div class="chapter">
-<div class="index">
-<h2 class="nobreak p1" id="hdr_13">Index</h2>
-
-<ul class="index"><li class="ifrst">Abbevillian, <a href="#Page_48">48</a>;</li>
-<li class="isub1">core-biface tool, <a href="#Page_44">44</a>, <a href="#Page_48">48</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Acheulean, <a href="#Page_48">48</a>, <a href="#Page_60">60</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Acheuleo-Levalloisian, <a href="#Page_63">63</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Acheuleo-Mousterian, <a href="#Page_63">63</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Adams, R.&nbsp;M., <a href="#Page_106">106</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Adzes, <a href="#Page_45">45</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Africa, east, <a href="#Page_67">67</a>, <a href="#Page_89">89</a>;</li>
-<li class="isub1">north, <a href="#Page_70">70</a>, <a href="#Page_89">89</a>;</li>
-<li class="isub1">south, <a href="#Page_22">22</a>, <a href="#Page_25">25</a>, <a href="#Page_34">34</a>, <a href="#Page_40">40</a>, <a href="#Page_67">67</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Agriculture, incipient, in England, <a href="#Page_140">140</a>;</li>
-<li class="isub1">in Near East, <a href="#Page_123">123</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Ain Hanech, <a href="#Page_48">48</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Amber, taken from Baltic to Greece, <a href="#Page_167">167</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">American Indians, <a href="#Page_90">90</a>, <a href="#Page_142">142</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Anatolia, used as route to Europe, <a href="#Page_138">138</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Animals, in caves, <a href="#Page_54">54</a>, <a href="#Page_64">64</a>;</li>
-<li class="isub1">in cave art, <a href="#Page_85">85</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Antevs, Ernst, <a href="#Page_19">19</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Anyathian, <a href="#Page_47">47</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Archeological interpretation, <a href="#Page_8">8</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Archeology, defined, <a href="#Page_8">8</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Architecture, at Jarmo, <a href="#Page_128">128</a>;</li>
-<li class="isub1">at Jericho, <a href="#Page_133">133</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Arrow, points, <a href="#Page_94">94</a>;</li>
-<li class="isub1">shaft straightener, <a href="#Page_83">83</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Art, in caves, <a href="#Page_84">84</a>;</li>
-<li class="isub1">East Spanish, <a href="#Page_85">85</a>;</li>
-<li class="isub1">figurines, <a href="#Page_84">84</a>;</li>
-<li class="isub1">Franco-Cantabrian, <a href="#Page_84">84</a>, <a href="#Page_85">85</a>;</li>
-<li class="isub1">movable (engravings, modeling, scratchings), <a href="#Page_83">83</a>;</li>
-<li class="isub1">painting, <a href="#Page_83">83</a>;</li>
-<li class="isub1">sculpture, <a href="#Page_83">83</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Asia, western, <a href="#Page_67">67</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Assemblage, defined, <a href="#Page_13">13</a>, <a href="#Page_14">14</a>;</li>
-<li class="isub1">European, <a href="#Page_94">94</a>;</li>
-<li class="isub1">Jarmo, <a href="#Page_129">129</a>;</li>
-<li class="isub1">Maglemosian, <a href="#Page_94">94</a>;</li>
-<li class="isub1">Natufian, <a href="#Page_113">113</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Aterian, industry, <a href="#Page_67">67</a>;</li>
-<li class="isub1">point, <a href="#Page_89">89</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Australopithecinae, <a href="#Page_24">24</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Australopithecine, <a href="#Page_25">25</a>, <a href="#Page_26">26</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Awls, <a href="#Page_77">77</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Axes, <a href="#Page_62">62</a>, <a href="#Page_94">94</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Ax-heads, <a href="#Page_15">15</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Azilian, <a href="#Page_97">97</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Aztecs, <a href="#Page_145">145</a></li>
-
-<li class="ifrst">Baghouz, <a href="#Page_152">152</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Bakun, <a href="#Page_134">134</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Baltic sea, <a href="#Page_93">93</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Banana, <a href="#Page_107">107</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Barley, wild, <a href="#Page_108">108</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Barrow, <a href="#Page_141">141</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Battle-axe folk, <a href="#Page_164">164</a>;</li>
-<li class="isub1">assemblage, <a href="#Page_164">164</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Beads, <a href="#Page_80">80</a>;</li>
-<li class="isub1">bone, <a href="#Page_114">114</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Beaker folk, <a href="#Page_164">164</a>;</li>
-<li class="isub1">assemblage, <a href="#Page_164">164–165</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Bear, in cave art, <a href="#Page_85">85</a>;</li>
-<li class="isub1">cult, <a href="#Page_68">68</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Belgium, <a href="#Page_94">94</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Belt cave, <a href="#Page_126">126</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Bering Strait, used as route to New World, <a href="#Page_98">98</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Bison, in cave art, <a href="#Page_85">85</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Blade, awl, <a href="#Page_77">77</a>;</li>
-<li class="isub1">backed, <a href="#Page_75">75</a>;</li>
-<li class="isub1">blade-core, <a href="#Page_71">71</a>;</li>
-<li class="isub1">end-scraper, <a href="#Page_77">77</a>;</li>
-<li class="isub1">stone, defined, <a href="#Page_71">71</a>;</li>
-<li class="isub1">strangulated (notched), <a href="#Page_76">76</a>;</li>
-<li class="isub1">tanged point, <a href="#Page_76">76</a>;</li>
-<li class="isub1">tools, <a href="#Page_71">71</a>, <a href="#Page_75">75–80</a>, <a href="#Page_90">90</a>;</li>
-<li class="isub1">tool tradition, <a href="#Page_70">70</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Boar, wild, in cave art, <a href="#Page_85">85</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Bogs, source of archeological materials, <a href="#Page_94">94</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Bolas, <a href="#Page_54">54</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Bordes, François, <a href="#Page_62">62</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Borer, <a href="#Page_77">77</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Boskop skull, <a href="#Page_34">34</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Boyd, William C., <a href="#Page_35">35</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Bracelets, <a href="#Page_118">118</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Brain, development of, <a href="#Page_24">24</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Breadfruit, <a href="#Page_107">107</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Breasted, James H., <a href="#Page_107">107</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Brick, at Jericho, <a href="#Page_133">133</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Britain, <a href="#Page_94">94</a>;</li>
-<li class="isub1">late prehistory, <a href="#Page_163">163–175</a>;</li>
-<li class="isub1">invaders, <a href="#Page_173">173</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Broch, <a href="#Page_172">172</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Buffalo, in China, <a href="#Page_54">54</a>;</li>
-<li class="isub1">killed by stampede, <a href="#Page_86">86</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Burials, <a href="#Page_66">66</a>, <a href="#Page_86">86</a>;</li>
-<li class="isub1">in “henges,” <a href="#Page_164">164</a>;</li>
-<li class="isub1">in urns, <a href="#Page_168">168</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Burins, <a href="#Page_75">75</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Burma, <a href="#Page_90">90</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Byblos, <a href="#Page_134">134</a></li>
-
-<li class="ifrst">Camel, <a href="#Page_54">54</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Cannibalism, <a href="#Page_55">55</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Cattle, wild, <a href="#Page_85">85</a>, <a href="#Page_112">112</a>;<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_185">185</a></span></li>
-<li class="isub1">in cave art, <a href="#Page_85">85</a>;</li>
-<li class="isub1">domesticated, <a href="#Page_15">15</a>;</li>
-<li class="isub1">at Skara Brae, <a href="#Page_142">142</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Caucasoids, <a href="#Page_34">34</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Cave men, <a href="#Page_29">29</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Caves, <a href="#Page_62">62</a>;</li>
-<li class="isub1">art in, <a href="#Page_84">84</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Celts, <a href="#Page_170">170</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Chariot, <a href="#Page_160">160</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Chicken, domestication of, <a href="#Page_107">107</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Chiefs, in food-gathering groups, <a href="#Page_68">68</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Childe, V. Gordon, <a href="#Page_8">8</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">China, <a href="#Page_136">136</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Choukoutien, <a href="#Page_28">28</a>, <a href="#Page_35">35</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Choukoutienian, <a href="#Page_47">47</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Civilization, beginnings, <a href="#Page_144">144</a>, <a href="#Page_149">149</a>, <a href="#Page_157">157</a>;</li>
-<li class="isub1">meaning of, <a href="#Page_144">144</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Clactonian, <a href="#Page_45">45</a>, <a href="#Page_47">47</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Clay, used in modeling, <a href="#Page_128">128</a>;</li>
-<li class="isub1">baked, used for tools, <a href="#Page_153">153</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Club-heads, <a href="#Page_82">82</a>, <a href="#Page_94">94</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Colonization, in America, <a href="#Page_142">142</a>;</li>
-<li class="isub1">in Europe, <a href="#Page_142">142</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Combe Capelle, <a href="#Page_30">30</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Combe Capelle-Brünn group, <a href="#Page_34">34</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Commont, Victor, <a href="#Page_51">51</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Coon, Carlton S., <a href="#Page_73">73</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Copper, <a href="#Page_134">134</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Corn, in America, <a href="#Page_145">145</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Corrals for cattle, <a href="#Page_140">140</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">“Cradle of mankind,” <a href="#Page_136">136</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Cremation, <a href="#Page_167">167</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Crete, <a href="#Page_162">162</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Cro-Magnon, <a href="#Page_30">30</a>, <a href="#Page_34">34</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Cultivation, incipient, <a href="#Page_105">105</a>, <a href="#Page_109">109</a>, <a href="#Page_111">111</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Culture, change, <a href="#Page_99">99</a>;</li>
-<li class="isub1">characteristics, defined, <a href="#Page_38">38</a>, <a href="#Page_49">49</a>;</li>
-<li class="isub1">prehistoric, <a href="#Page_39">39</a></li>
-
-<li class="ifrst">Danube Valley, used as route from Asia, <a href="#Page_138">138</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Dates, <a href="#Page_153">153</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Deer, <a href="#Page_54">54</a>, <a href="#Page_96">96</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Dog, domesticated, <a href="#Page_96">96</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Domestication, of animals, <a href="#Page_100">100</a>, <a href="#Page_105">105</a>, <a href="#Page_107">107</a>;</li>
-<li class="isub1">of plants, <a href="#Page_100">100</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">“Dragon teeth” fossils in China, <a href="#Page_28">28</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Drill, <a href="#Page_77">77</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Dubois, Eugene, <a href="#Page_26">26</a></li>
-
-<li class="ifrst">Early Dynastic Period, Mesopotamia, <a href="#Page_147">147</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">East Spanish art, <a href="#Page_72">72</a>, <a href="#Page_85">85</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Egypt, <a href="#Page_70">70</a>, <a href="#Page_126">126</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Ehringsdorf, <a href="#Page_31">31</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Elephant, <a href="#Page_54">54</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Emiliani, Cesare, <a href="#Page_18">18</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Emiran flake point, <a href="#Page_73">73</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">England, <a href="#Page_163">163–168</a>;</li>
-<li class="isub1">prehistoric, <a href="#Page_19">19</a>, <a href="#Page_40">40</a>;</li>
-<li class="isub1">farmers in, <a href="#Page_140">140</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Eoanthropus dawsoni, <a href="#Page_29">29</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Eoliths, <a href="#Page_41">41</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Erich, <a href="#Page_152">152</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Eridu, <a href="#Page_152">152</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Euphrates River, floods in, <a href="#Page_148">148</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Europe, cave dwellings, <a href="#Page_58">58</a>;</li>
-<li class="isub1">at end of Ice Age, <a href="#Page_93">93</a>;</li>
-<li class="isub1">early farmers, <a href="#Page_140">140</a>;</li>
-<li class="isub1">glaciers in, <a href="#Page_40">40</a>;</li>
-<li class="isub1">huts in, <a href="#Page_86">86</a>;</li>
-<li class="isub1">routes into, <a href="#Page_137">137–140</a>;</li>
-<li class="isub1">spread of food-production to, <a href="#Page_136">136</a></li>
-
-<li class="ifrst">Far East, <a href="#Page_69">69</a>, <a href="#Page_90">90</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Farmers, <a href="#Page_103">103</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Fauresmith industry, <a href="#Page_67">67</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Fayum, <a href="#Page_135">135</a>;</li>
-<li class="isub1">radiocarbon date, <a href="#Page_146">146</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">“Fertile Crescent,” <a href="#Page_107">107</a>, <a href="#Page_146">146</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Figurines, “Venus,” <a href="#Page_84">84</a>;</li>
-<li class="isub1">at Jarmo, <a href="#Page_128">128</a>;</li>
-<li class="isub1">at Ubaid, <a href="#Page_153">153</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Fire, used by Peking man, <a href="#Page_54">54</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">First Dynasty, Egypt, <a href="#Page_147">147</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Fish-hooks, <a href="#Page_80">80</a>, <a href="#Page_94">94</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Fishing, <a href="#Page_80">80</a>;</li>
-<li class="isub1">by food-producers, <a href="#Page_122">122</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Fish-lines, <a href="#Page_80">80</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Fish spears, <a href="#Page_94">94</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Flint industry, <a href="#Page_127">127</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Fontéchevade, <a href="#Page_32">32</a>, <a href="#Page_56">56</a>, <a href="#Page_58">58</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Food-collecting, <a href="#Page_104">104</a>, <a href="#Page_121">121</a>;</li>
-<li class="isub1">end of, <a href="#Page_104">104</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Food-gatherers, <a href="#Page_53">53</a>, <a href="#Page_176">176</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Food-gathering, <a href="#Page_99">99</a>, <a href="#Page_104">104</a>;</li>
-<li class="isub1">in Old World, <a href="#Page_104">104</a>;</li>
-<li class="isub1">stages of, <a href="#Page_104">104</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Food-producers, <a href="#Page_176">176</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Food-producing economy, <a href="#Page_122">122</a>;</li>
-<li class="isub1">in America, <a href="#Page_145">145</a>;</li>
-<li class="isub1">in Asia, <a href="#Page_105">105</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Food-producing revolution, <a href="#Page_99">99</a>, <a href="#Page_105">105</a>;</li>
-<li class="isub1">causes of, <a href="#Page_101">101</a>;</li>
-<li class="isub1">preconditions for, <a href="#Page_100">100</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Food-production, beginnings of, <a href="#Page_99">99</a>;</li>
-<li class="isub1">carried to Europe, <a href="#Page_110">110</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Food-vessel folk, <a href="#Page_164">164</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">“Forest folk,” <a href="#Page_97">97</a>, <a href="#Page_98">98</a>, <a href="#Page_104">104</a>, <a href="#Page_110">110</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Fox, Sir Cyril, <a href="#Page_174">174</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">France, caves in, <a href="#Page_56">56</a></li>
-
-<li class="ifrst">Galley Hill (fossil type), <a href="#Page_29">29</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Garrod, D.&nbsp;A., <a href="#Page_73">73</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Gazelle, <a href="#Page_114">114</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Germany, <a href="#Page_94">94</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Ghassul, <a href="#Page_156">156</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Glaciers, <a href="#Page_18">18</a>, <a href="#Page_30">30</a>;</li>
-<li class="isub1">destruction by, <a href="#Page_40">40</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Goat, wild, <a href="#Page_108">108</a>;</li>
-<li class="isub1">domesticated, <a href="#Page_128">128</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Grain, first planted, <a href="#Page_20">20</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Graves, passage, <a href="#Page_141">141</a>;</li>
-<li class="isub1">gallery, <a href="#Page_141">141</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Greece, civilization in, <a href="#Page_163">163</a>;</li>
-<li class="isub1">as route to western Europe, <a href="#Page_138">138</a>;</li>
-<li class="isub1">towns in, <a href="#Page_162">162</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Grimaldi skeletons, <a href="#Page_34">34</a></li>
-
-<li class="ifrst">Hackberry seeds used as food, <a href="#Page_55">55</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Halaf, <a href="#Page_151">151</a>;</li>
-<li class="isub1">assemblage, <a href="#Page_151">151</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Hallstatt, tradition, <a href="#Page_169">169</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Hand, development of, <a href="#Page_24">24</a>, <a href="#Page_25">25</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Hand adzes, <a href="#Page_46">46</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Hand axes, <a href="#Page_44">44</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Harpoons, antler, <a href="#Page_83">83</a>, <a href="#Page_94">94</a>;<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_186">186</a></span></li>
-<li class="isub1">bone, <a href="#Page_82">82</a>, <a href="#Page_94">94</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Hassuna, <a href="#Page_131">131</a>;</li>
-<li class="isub1">assemblage, <a href="#Page_131">131</a>, <a href="#Page_132">132</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Heidelberg, fossil type, <a href="#Page_28">28</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Hill-forts, in England, <a href="#Page_171">171</a>;</li>
-<li class="isub1">in Scotland, <a href="#Page_172">172</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Hilly flanks of Near East, <a href="#Page_107">107</a>, <a href="#Page_108">108</a>, <a href="#Page_125">125</a>, <a href="#Page_131">131</a>, <a href="#Page_146">146</a>, <a href="#Page_147">147</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">History, beginning of, <a href="#Page_7">7</a>, <a href="#Page_17">17</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Hoes, <a href="#Page_112">112</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Holland, <a href="#Page_164">164</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Homo sapiens, <a href="#Page_32">32</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Hooton, E.&nbsp;A., <a href="#Page_34">34</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Horse, <a href="#Page_112">112</a>;</li>
-<li class="isub1">wild, in cave art, <a href="#Page_85">85</a>;</li>
-<li class="isub1">in China, <a href="#Page_54">54</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Hotu cave, <a href="#Page_126">126</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Houses, <a href="#Page_122">122</a>;</li>
-<li class="isub1">at Jarmo, <a href="#Page_128">128</a>;</li>
-<li class="isub1">at Halaf, <a href="#Page_151">151</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Howe, Bruce, <a href="#Page_116">116</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Howell, F. Clark, <a href="#Page_30">30</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Hunting, <a href="#Page_93">93</a></li>
-
-<li class="ifrst">Ice Age, in Asia, <a href="#Page_99">99</a>;</li>
-<li class="isub1">beginning of, <a href="#Page_18">18</a>;</li>
-<li class="isub1">glaciers in, <a href="#Page_41">41</a>;</li>
-<li class="isub1">last glaciation, <a href="#Page_93">93</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Incas, <a href="#Page_145">145</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">India, <a href="#Page_90">90</a>, <a href="#Page_136">136</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Industrialization, <a href="#Page_178">178</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Industry, blade-tool, <a href="#Page_88">88</a>;</li>
-<li class="isub1">defined, <a href="#Page_58">58</a>;</li>
-<li class="isub1">ground stone, <a href="#Page_94">94</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Internationalism, <a href="#Page_162">162</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Iran, <a href="#Page_107">107</a>, <a href="#Page_147">147</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Iraq, <a href="#Page_107">107</a>, <a href="#Page_124">124</a>, <a href="#Page_127">127</a>, <a href="#Page_136">136</a>, <a href="#Page_147">147</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Iron, introduction of, <a href="#Page_170">170</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Irrigation, <a href="#Page_123">123</a>, <a href="#Page_149">149</a>, <a href="#Page_155">155</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Italy, <a href="#Page_138">138</a></li>
-
-<li class="ifrst">Jacobsen, T.&nbsp;J., <a href="#Page_157">157</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Jarmo, <a href="#Page_109">109</a>, <a href="#Page_126">126</a>, <a href="#Page_128">128</a>, <a href="#Page_130">130</a>;</li>
-<li class="isub1">assemblage, <a href="#Page_129">129</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Java, <a href="#Page_23">23</a>, <a href="#Page_29">29</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Java man, <a href="#Page_26">26</a>, <a href="#Page_27">27</a>, <a href="#Page_29">29</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Jefferson, Thomas, <a href="#Page_11">11</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Jericho, <a href="#Page_119">119</a>, <a href="#Page_133">133</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Judaidah, <a href="#Page_134">134</a></li>
-
-<li class="ifrst">Kafuan, <a href="#Page_48">48</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Kanam, <a href="#Page_23">23</a>, <a href="#Page_36">36</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Karim Shahir, <a href="#Page_116">116–119</a>, <a href="#Page_124">124</a>;</li>
-<li class="isub1">assemblage, <a href="#Page_116">116</a>, <a href="#Page_117">117</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Keith, Sir Arthur, <a href="#Page_33">33</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Kelley, Harper, <a href="#Page_51">51</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Kharga, <a href="#Page_126">126</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Khartoum, <a href="#Page_136">136</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Knives, <a href="#Page_80">80</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Krogman, W.&nbsp;M., <a href="#Page_3">3</a>, <a href="#Page_25">25</a></li>
-
-<li class="ifrst">Lamps, <a href="#Page_85">85</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Land bridges in Mediterranean, <a href="#Page_19">19</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">La Tène phase, <a href="#Page_170">170</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Laurel leaf point, <a href="#Page_78">78</a>, <a href="#Page_89">89</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Leakey, L.&nbsp;S. B., <a href="#Page_40">40</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Le Moustier, <a href="#Page_57">57</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Levalloisian, <a href="#Page_47">47</a>, <a href="#Page_61">61</a>, <a href="#Page_62">62</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Levalloiso-Mousterian, <a href="#Page_47">47</a>, <a href="#Page_63">63</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Little Woodbury, <a href="#Page_170">170</a></li>
-
-<li class="ifrst">Magic, used by hunters, <a href="#Page_123">123</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Maglemosian, assemblage, <a href="#Page_94">94</a>, <a href="#Page_95">95</a>;</li>
-<li class="isub1">folk, <a href="#Page_98">98</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Makapan, <a href="#Page_40">40</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Mammoth, <a href="#Page_93">93</a>;</li>
-<li class="isub1">in cave art, <a href="#Page_85">85</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">“Man-apes,” <a href="#Page_26">26</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Mango, <a href="#Page_107">107</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Mankind, age, <a href="#Page_17">17</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Maringer, J., <a href="#Page_45">45</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Markets, <a href="#Page_155">155</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Marston, A.&nbsp;T., <a href="#Page_11">11</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Mathiassen, T., <a href="#Page_97">97</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">McCown, T.&nbsp;D., <a href="#Page_33">33</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Meganthropus, <a href="#Page_26">26</a>, <a href="#Page_27">27</a>, <a href="#Page_36">36</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Men, defined, <a href="#Page_25">25</a>;</li>
-<li class="isub1">modern, <a href="#Page_32">32</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Merimde, <a href="#Page_135">135</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Mersin, <a href="#Page_133">133</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Metal-workers, <a href="#Page_160">160</a>, <a href="#Page_163">163</a>, <a href="#Page_167">167</a>, <a href="#Page_172">172</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Micoquian, <a href="#Page_48">48</a>, <a href="#Page_60">60</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Microliths, <a href="#Page_87">87</a>;</li>
-<li class="isub1">at Jarmo, <a href="#Page_130">130</a>;</li>
-<li class="isub1">“lunates,” <a href="#Page_87">87</a>;</li>
-<li class="isub1">trapezoids, <a href="#Page_87">87</a>;</li>
-<li class="isub1">triangles, <a href="#Page_87">87</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Minerals used as coloring matter, <a href="#Page_66">66</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Mine-shafts, <a href="#Page_140">140</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">M’lefaat, <a href="#Page_126">126</a>, <a href="#Page_127">127</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Mongoloids, <a href="#Page_29">29</a>, <a href="#Page_90">90</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Mortars, <a href="#Page_114">114</a>, <a href="#Page_118">118</a>, <a href="#Page_127">127</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Mounds, how formed, <a href="#Page_12">12</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Mount Carmel, <a href="#Page_11">11</a>, <a href="#Page_33">33</a>, <a href="#Page_52">52</a>, <a href="#Page_59">59</a>, <a href="#Page_64">64</a>, <a href="#Page_69">69</a>, <a href="#Page_113">113</a>, <a href="#Page_114">114</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">“Mousterian man,” <a href="#Page_64">64</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">“Mousterian” tools, <a href="#Page_61">61</a>, <a href="#Page_62">62</a>;</li>
-<li class="isub1">of Acheulean tradition, <a href="#Page_62">62</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Movius, H.&nbsp;L., <a href="#Page_47">47</a></li>
-
-<li class="ifrst">Natufian, animals in, <a href="#Page_114">114</a>;</li>
-<li class="isub1">assemblage, <a href="#Page_113">113</a>, <a href="#Page_114">114</a>, <a href="#Page_115">115</a>;</li>
-<li class="isub1">burials, <a href="#Page_114">114</a>;</li>
-<li class="isub1">date of, <a href="#Page_113">113</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Neanderthal man, <a href="#Page_29">29</a>, <a href="#Page_30">30</a>, <a href="#Page_31">31</a>, <a href="#Page_56">56</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Near East, beginnings of civilization in, <a href="#Page_20">20</a>, <a href="#Page_144">144</a>;</li>
-<li class="isub1">cave sites, <a href="#Page_58">58</a>;</li>
-<li class="isub1">climate in Ice Age, <a href="#Page_99">99</a>;</li>
-<li class="isub1">“Fertile Crescent,” <a href="#Page_107">107</a>, <a href="#Page_146">146</a>;</li>
-<li class="isub1">food-production in, <a href="#Page_99">99</a>;</li>
-<li class="isub1">Natufian assemblage in, <a href="#Page_113">113–115</a>;</li>
-<li class="isub1">stone tools, <a href="#Page_114">114</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Needles, <a href="#Page_80">80</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Negroid, <a href="#Page_34">34</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">New World, <a href="#Page_90">90</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Nile River valley, <a href="#Page_102">102</a>, <a href="#Page_134">134</a>;</li>
-<li class="isub1">floods in, <a href="#Page_148">148</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Nuclear area, <a href="#Page_106">106</a>, <a href="#Page_110">110</a>;</li>
-<li class="isub1">in Near East, <a href="#Page_107">107</a></li>
-
-<li class="ifrst">Obsidian, used for blade tools, <a href="#Page_71">71</a>;</li>
-<li class="isub1">at Jarmo, <a href="#Page_130">130</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Ochre, red, with burials, <a href="#Page_86">86</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Oldowan, <a href="#Page_48">48</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Old World, <a href="#Page_67">67</a>, <a href="#Page_70">70</a>, <a href="#Page_90">90</a>;<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_187">187</a></span></li>
-<li class="isub1">continental phases in, <a href="#Page_18">18</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Olorgesailie, <a href="#Page_40">40</a>, <a href="#Page_51">51</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Ostrich, in China, <a href="#Page_54">54</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Ovens, <a href="#Page_128">128</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Oxygen isotopes, <a href="#Page_18">18</a></li>
-
-<li class="ifrst">Paintings in caves, <a href="#Page_83">83</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Paleoanthropic man, <a href="#Page_50">50</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Palestine, burials, <a href="#Page_56">56</a>;</li>
-<li class="isub1">cave sites, <a href="#Page_52">52</a>;</li>
-<li class="isub1">types of man, <a href="#Page_69">69</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Parpallo, <a href="#Page_89">89</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Patjitanian, <a href="#Page_45">45</a>, <a href="#Page_47">47</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Pebble tools, <a href="#Page_42">42</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Peking cave, <a href="#Page_54">54</a>;</li>
-<li class="isub1">animals in, <a href="#Page_54">54</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Peking man, <a href="#Page_27">27</a>, <a href="#Page_28">28</a>, <a href="#Page_29">29</a>, <a href="#Page_54">54</a>, <a href="#Page_58">58</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Pendants, <a href="#Page_80">80</a>;</li>
-<li class="isub1">bone, <a href="#Page_114">114</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Pestle, <a href="#Page_114">114</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Peterborough, <a href="#Page_141">141</a>;</li>
-<li class="isub1">assemblage, <a href="#Page_141">141</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Pictographic signs, <a href="#Page_158">158</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Pig, wild, <a href="#Page_108">108</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">“Piltdown man,” <a href="#Page_29">29</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Pins, <a href="#Page_80">80</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Pithecanthropus, <a href="#Page_26">26</a>, <a href="#Page_27">27</a>, <a href="#Page_30">30</a>, <a href="#Page_36">36</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Pleistocene, <a href="#Page_18">18</a>, <a href="#Page_25">25</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Plows developed, <a href="#Page_123">123</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Points, arrow, <a href="#Page_76">76</a>;</li>
-<li class="isub1">laurel leaf, <a href="#Page_78">78</a>;</li>
-<li class="isub1">shouldered, <a href="#Page_78">78</a>, <a href="#Page_79">79</a>;</li>
-<li class="isub1">split-based bone, <a href="#Page_80">80</a>, <a href="#Page_82">82</a>;</li>
-<li class="isub1">tanged, <a href="#Page_76">76</a>;</li>
-<li class="isub1">willow leaf, <a href="#Page_78">78</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Potatoes, in America, <a href="#Page_145">145</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Pottery, <a href="#Page_122">122</a>, <a href="#Page_130">130</a>, <a href="#Page_156">156</a>;</li>
-<li class="isub1">decorated, <a href="#Page_142">142</a>;</li>
-<li class="isub1">painted, <a href="#Page_131">131</a>, <a href="#Page_151">151</a>, <a href="#Page_152">152</a>;</li>
-<li class="isub1">Susa style, <a href="#Page_156">156</a>;</li>
-<li class="isub1">in tombs, <a href="#Page_141">141</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Prehistory, defined, <a href="#Page_7">7</a>;</li>
-<li class="isub1">range of, <a href="#Page_18">18</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Pre-neanderthaloids, <a href="#Page_30">30</a>, <a href="#Page_31">31</a>, <a href="#Page_37">37</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Pre-Solutrean point, <a href="#Page_89">89</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Pre-Stellenbosch, <a href="#Page_48">48</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Proto-Literate assemblage, <a href="#Page_157">157–160</a></li>
-
-<li class="ifrst">Race, <a href="#Page_35">35</a>;</li>
-<li class="isub1">biological, <a href="#Page_36">36</a>;</li>
-<li class="isub1">“pure,” <a href="#Page_16">16</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Radioactivity, <a href="#Page_9">9</a>, <a href="#Page_10">10</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Radioactive carbon dates, <a href="#Page_18">18</a>, <a href="#Page_92">92</a>, <a href="#Page_120">120</a>, <a href="#Page_130">130</a>, <a href="#Page_135">135</a>, <a href="#Page_156">156</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Redfield, Robert, <a href="#Page_38">38</a>, <a href="#Page_49">49</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Reed, C.&nbsp;A., <a href="#Page_128">128</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Reindeer, <a href="#Page_94">94</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Rhinoceros, <a href="#Page_93">93</a>;</li>
-<li class="isub1">in cave art, <a href="#Page_85">85</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Rhodesian man, <a href="#Page_32">32</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Riss glaciation, <a href="#Page_58">58</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Rock-shelters, <a href="#Page_58">58</a>;</li>
-<li class="isub1">art in, <a href="#Page_85">85</a></li>
-
-<li class="ifrst">Saccopastore, <a href="#Page_31">31</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Sahara Desert, <a href="#Page_34">34</a>, <a href="#Page_102">102</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Samarra, <a href="#Page_152">152</a>;</li>
-<li class="isub1">pottery, <a href="#Page_131">131</a>, <a href="#Page_152">152</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Sangoan industry, <a href="#Page_67">67</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Sauer, Carl, <a href="#Page_136">136</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Sbaikian point, <a href="#Page_89">89</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Schliemann, H., <a href="#Page_11">11</a>, <a href="#Page_12">12</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Scotland, <a href="#Page_171">171</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Scraper, flake, <a href="#Page_79">79</a>;</li>
-<li class="isub1">end-scraper on blade, <a href="#Page_77">77</a>, <a href="#Page_78">78</a>;</li>
-<li class="isub1">keel-shaped, <a href="#Page_79">79</a>, <a href="#Page_80">80</a>, <a href="#Page_81">81</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Sculpture in caves, <a href="#Page_83">83</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Sebilian III, <a href="#Page_126">126</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Shaheinab, <a href="#Page_135">135</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Sheep, wild, <a href="#Page_108">108</a>;</li>
-<li class="isub1">at Skara Brae, <a href="#Page_142">142</a>;</li>
-<li class="isub1">in China, <a href="#Page_54">54</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Shellfish, <a href="#Page_142">142</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Ship, Ubaidian, <a href="#Page_153">153</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Sialk, <a href="#Page_126">126</a>, <a href="#Page_134">134</a>;</li>
-<li class="isub1">assemblage, <a href="#Page_134">134</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Siberia, <a href="#Page_88">88</a>;</li>
-<li class="isub1">pathway to New World, <a href="#Page_98">98</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Sickle, <a href="#Page_112">112</a>, <a href="#Page_153">153</a>;</li>
-<li class="isub1">blade, <a href="#Page_113">113</a>, <a href="#Page_130">130</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Silo, <a href="#Page_122">122</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Sinanthropus, <a href="#Page_27">27</a>, <a href="#Page_30">30</a>, <a href="#Page_35">35</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Skara Brae, <a href="#Page_142">142</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Snails used as food, <a href="#Page_128">128</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Soan, <a href="#Page_47">47</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Solecki, R., <a href="#Page_116">116</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Solo (fossil type), <a href="#Page_29">29</a>, <a href="#Page_32">32</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Solutrean industry, <a href="#Page_77">77</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Spear, shaft, <a href="#Page_78">78</a>;</li>
-<li class="isub1">thrower, <a href="#Page_82">82</a>, <a href="#Page_83">83</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Speech, development of organs of, <a href="#Page_25">25</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Squash, in America, <a href="#Page_145">145</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Steinheim fossil skull, <a href="#Page_28">28</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Stillbay industry, <a href="#Page_67">67</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Stonehenge, <a href="#Page_166">166</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Stratification, in caves, <a href="#Page_12">12</a>, <a href="#Page_57">57</a>;</li>
-<li class="isub1">in sites, <a href="#Page_12">12</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Swanscombe (fossil type), <a href="#Page_11">11</a>, <a href="#Page_28">28</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Syria, <a href="#Page_107">107</a></li>
-
-<li class="ifrst">Tabun, <a href="#Page_60">60</a>, <a href="#Page_71">71</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Tardenoisian, <a href="#Page_97">97</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Taro, <a href="#Page_107">107</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Tasa, <a href="#Page_135">135</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Tayacian, <a href="#Page_47">47</a>, <a href="#Page_59">59</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Teeth, pierced, in beads and pendants, <a href="#Page_114">114</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Temples, <a href="#Page_123">123</a>, <a href="#Page_155">155</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Tepe Gawra, <a href="#Page_156">156</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Ternafine, <a href="#Page_29">29</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Teshik Tash, <a href="#Page_69">69</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Textiles, <a href="#Page_122">122</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Thong-stropper, <a href="#Page_80">80</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Tigris River, floods in, <a href="#Page_148">148</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Toggle, <a href="#Page_80">80</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Tomatoes, in America, <a href="#Page_145">145</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Tombs, megalithic, <a href="#Page_141">141</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Tool-making, <a href="#Page_42">42</a>, <a href="#Page_49">49</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Tool-preparation traditions, <a href="#Page_65">65</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Tools, <a href="#Page_62">62</a>;</li>
-<li class="isub1">antler, <a href="#Page_80">80</a>;</li>
-<li class="isub1">blade, <a href="#Page_70">70</a>, <a href="#Page_71">71</a>, <a href="#Page_75">75</a>;</li>
-<li class="isub1">bone, <a href="#Page_66">66</a>;</li>
-<li class="isub1">chopper, <a href="#Page_47">47</a>;</li>
-<li class="isub1">core-biface, <a href="#Page_43">43</a>, <a href="#Page_48">48</a>, <a href="#Page_60">60</a>, <a href="#Page_61">61</a>;</li>
-<li class="isub1">flake, <a href="#Page_44">44</a>, <a href="#Page_47">47</a>, <a href="#Page_51">51</a>, <a href="#Page_60">60</a>, <a href="#Page_64">64</a>;</li>
-<li class="isub1">flint, <a href="#Page_80">80</a>, <a href="#Page_127">127</a>;</li>
-<li class="isub1">ground stone, <a href="#Page_68">68</a>, <a href="#Page_127">127</a>;</li>
-<li class="isub1">handles, <a href="#Page_94">94</a>;</li>
-<li class="isub1">pebble, <a href="#Page_42">42</a>, <a href="#Page_43">43</a>, <a href="#Page_48">48</a>, <a href="#Page_53">53</a>;</li>
-<li class="isub1">use of, <a href="#Page_24">24</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Touf (mud wall), <a href="#Page_128">128</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Toynbee, A.&nbsp;J., <a href="#Page_101">101</a><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_188">188</a></span></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Trade, <a href="#Page_130">130</a>, <a href="#Page_155">155</a>, <a href="#Page_162">162</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Traders, <a href="#Page_167">167</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Traditions, <a href="#Page_15">15</a>;</li>
-<li class="isub1">blade tool, <a href="#Page_70">70</a>;</li>
-<li class="isub1">definition of, <a href="#Page_51">51</a>;</li>
-<li class="isub1">interpretation of, <a href="#Page_49">49</a>;</li>
-<li class="isub1">tool-making, <a href="#Page_42">42</a>, <a href="#Page_48">48</a>;</li>
-<li class="isub1">chopper-tool, <a href="#Page_47">47</a>;</li>
-<li class="isub1">chopper-chopping tool, <a href="#Page_45">45</a>;</li>
-<li class="isub1">core-biface, <a href="#Page_43">43</a>, <a href="#Page_48">48</a>;</li>
-<li class="isub1">flake, <a href="#Page_44">44</a>, <a href="#Page_47">47</a>;</li>
-<li class="isub1">pebble tool, <a href="#Page_42">42</a>, <a href="#Page_48">48</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Tool-making, prehistory of, <a href="#Page_42">42</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Turkey, <a href="#Page_107">107</a>, <a href="#Page_108">108</a></li>
-
-<li class="ifrst">Ubaid, <a href="#Page_153">153</a>;</li>
-<li class="isub1">assemblage, <a href="#Page_153">153–155</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Urnfields, <a href="#Page_168">168</a>, <a href="#Page_169">169</a></li>
-
-<li class="ifrst">Village-farming community era, <a href="#Page_105">105</a>, <a href="#Page_119">119</a></li>
-
-<li class="ifrst">Wad B, <a href="#Page_72">72</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Wadjak, <a href="#Page_34">34</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Warka phase, <a href="#Page_156">156</a>;</li>
-<li class="isub1">assemblage, <a href="#Page_156">156</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Washburn, Sherwood L., <a href="#Page_36">36</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Water buffalo, domestication of, <a href="#Page_107">107</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Weidenreich, F., <a href="#Page_29">29</a>, <a href="#Page_34">34</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Wessex, <a href="#Page_166">166</a>, <a href="#Page_167">167</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Wheat, wild, <a href="#Page_108">108</a>;</li>
-<li class="isub1">partially domesticated, <a href="#Page_127">127</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Willow leaf point, <a href="#Page_78">78</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Windmill Hill, <a href="#Page_138">138</a>;</li>
-<li class="isub1">assemblage, <a href="#Page_138">138</a>, <a href="#Page_140">140</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Witch doctors, <a href="#Page_68">68</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Wool, <a href="#Page_112">112</a>;</li>
-<li class="isub1">in garments, <a href="#Page_167">167</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Writing, <a href="#Page_158">158</a>;</li>
-<li class="isub1">cuneiform, <a href="#Page_158">158</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Würm I glaciation, <a href="#Page_58">58</a></li>
-
-<li class="ifrst">Zebu cattle, domestication of, <a href="#Page_107">107</a></li>
-
-<li class="indx">Zeuner, F.&nbsp;E., <a href="#Page_73">73</a></li>
-</ul>
-</div></div>
-
-<div class="chapter">
-<div class="transnote">
-<h2 class="nobreak p1"><a id="Transcribers_Notes">Transcriber’s Note</a></h2>
-
-<p>Punctuation, hyphenation, and spelling were made consistent when a predominant
-preference was found in this book; otherwise they were not changed.</p>
-
-<p>Simple typographical errors were corrected; occasional unbalanced
-quotation marks retained.</p>
-
-<p>Ambiguous hyphens at the ends of lines were retained.</p>
-
-<p>Index not checked for proper alphabetization or correct page references.</p>
-
-<p>In the original book, chapter headings were accompanied by illustrations,
-sometimes above, sometimes below, and sometimes adjacent. In this eBook
-those ilustrations always appear below the headings.</p>
-
-<p>Page references to charts, maps, diagrams, and illustrations link to those
-items; all other references link to pages.</p>
-
-<p>Page <a href="#Page_46">46</a>: In the phrase “an adze cutting edge is ∠ shaped”, the symbol
-before “shaped” looks like a sharply-italicized sans-serif “L”. Devices
-that cannot display that symbol may substitute a question mark, a
-square, or other symbol.</p>
-</div></div>
-
-<p>&nbsp;</p>
-<p>&nbsp;</p>
-<hr class="full" />
-<p>***END OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK PREHISTORIC MEN***</p>
-<p>******* This file should be named 52664-h.htm or 52664-h.zip *******</p>
-<p>This and all associated files of various formats will be found in:<br />
-<a href="http://www.gutenberg.org/dirs/5/2/6/6/52664">http://www.gutenberg.org/5/2/6/6/52664</a></p>
-<p>
-Updated editions will replace the previous one--the old editions will
-be renamed.</p>
-
-<p>Creating the works from print editions not protected by U.S. copyright
-law means that no one owns a United States copyright in these works,
-so the Foundation (and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United
-States without permission and without paying copyright
-royalties. Special rules, set forth in the General Terms of Use part
-of this license, apply to copying and distributing Project
-Gutenberg-tm electronic works to protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm
-concept and trademark. Project Gutenberg is a registered trademark,
-and may not be used if you charge for the eBooks, unless you receive
-specific permission. If you do not charge anything for copies of this
-eBook, complying with the rules is very easy. You may use this eBook
-for nearly any purpose such as creation of derivative works, reports,
-performances and research. They may be modified and printed and given
-away--you may do practically ANYTHING in the United States with eBooks
-not protected by U.S. copyright law. Redistribution is subject to the
-trademark license, especially commercial redistribution.
-</p>
-
-<h2 class="pg">START: FULL LICENSE<br />
-<br />
-THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE<br />
-PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK</h2>
-
-<p>To protect the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting the free
-distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work
-(or any other work associated in any way with the phrase "Project
-Gutenberg"), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full
-Project Gutenberg-tm License available with this file or online at
-www.gutenberg.org/license.</p>
-
-<h3 class="pg">Section 1. General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project
-Gutenberg-tm electronic works</h3>
-
-<p>1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg-tm
-electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to
-and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property
-(trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all
-the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or
-destroy all copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in your
-possession. If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a
-Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work and you do not agree to be bound
-by the terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the
-person or entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph
-1.E.8.</p>
-
-<p>1.B. "Project Gutenberg" is a registered trademark. It may only be
-used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who
-agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a few
-things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works
-even without complying with the full terms of this agreement. See
-paragraph 1.C below. There are a lot of things you can do with Project
-Gutenberg-tm electronic works if you follow the terms of this
-agreement and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg-tm
-electronic works. See paragraph 1.E below.</p>
-
-<p>1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation ("the
-Foundation" or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection
-of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works. Nearly all the individual
-works in the collection are in the public domain in the United
-States. If an individual work is unprotected by copyright law in the
-United States and you are located in the United States, we do not
-claim a right to prevent you from copying, distributing, performing,
-displaying or creating derivative works based on the work as long as
-all references to Project Gutenberg are removed. Of course, we hope
-that you will support the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting
-free access to electronic works by freely sharing Project Gutenberg-tm
-works in compliance with the terms of this agreement for keeping the
-Project Gutenberg-tm name associated with the work. You can easily
-comply with the terms of this agreement by keeping this work in the
-same format with its attached full Project Gutenberg-tm License when
-you share it without charge with others.</p>
-
-<p>1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern
-what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most countries are
-in a constant state of change. If you are outside the United States,
-check the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this
-agreement before downloading, copying, displaying, performing,
-distributing or creating derivative works based on this work or any
-other Project Gutenberg-tm work. The Foundation makes no
-representations concerning the copyright status of any work in any
-country outside the United States.</p>
-
-<p>1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg:</p>
-
-<p>1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other
-immediate access to, the full Project Gutenberg-tm License must appear
-prominently whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg-tm work (any work
-on which the phrase "Project Gutenberg" appears, or with which the
-phrase "Project Gutenberg" is associated) is accessed, displayed,
-performed, viewed, copied or distributed:</p>
-
-<blockquote><p>This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United
-  States and most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost
-  no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use
-  it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included with
-  this eBook or online
-  at <a href="http://www.gutenberg.org">www.gutenberg.org</a>. If you
-  are not located in the United States, you'll have to check the laws
-  of the country where you are located before using this
-  ebook.</p></blockquote>
-
-<p>1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is
-derived from texts not protected by U.S. copyright law (does not
-contain a notice indicating that it is posted with permission of the
-copyright holder), the work can be copied and distributed to anyone in
-the United States without paying any fees or charges. If you are
-redistributing or providing access to a work with the phrase "Project
-Gutenberg" associated with or appearing on the work, you must comply
-either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 or
-obtain permission for the use of the work and the Project Gutenberg-tm
-trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.</p>
-
-<p>1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is posted
-with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution
-must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any
-additional terms imposed by the copyright holder. Additional terms
-will be linked to the Project Gutenberg-tm License for all works
-posted with the permission of the copyright holder found at the
-beginning of this work.</p>
-
-<p>1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg-tm
-License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this
-work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg-tm.</p>
-
-<p>1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this
-electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without
-prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with
-active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project
-Gutenberg-tm License.</p>
-
-<p>1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary,
-compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including
-any word processing or hypertext form. However, if you provide access
-to or distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg-tm work in a format
-other than "Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other format used in the official
-version posted on the official Project Gutenberg-tm web site
-(www.gutenberg.org), you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense
-to the user, provide a copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means
-of obtaining a copy upon request, of the work in its original "Plain
-Vanilla ASCII" or other form. Any alternate format must include the
-full Project Gutenberg-tm License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1.</p>
-
-<p>1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying,
-performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg-tm works
-unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.</p>
-
-<p>1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing
-access to or distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works
-provided that</p>
-
-<ul>
-<li>You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from
-  the use of Project Gutenberg-tm works calculated using the method
-  you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The fee is owed
-  to the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark, but he has
-  agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the Project
-  Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty payments must be paid
-  within 60 days following each date on which you prepare (or are
-  legally required to prepare) your periodic tax returns. Royalty
-  payments should be clearly marked as such and sent to the Project
-  Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the address specified in
-  Section 4, "Information about donations to the Project Gutenberg
-  Literary Archive Foundation."</li>
-
-<li>You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies
-  you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he
-  does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg-tm
-  License. You must require such a user to return or destroy all
-  copies of the works possessed in a physical medium and discontinue
-  all use of and all access to other copies of Project Gutenberg-tm
-  works.</li>
-
-<li>You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of
-  any money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the
-  electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days of
-  receipt of the work.</li>
-
-<li>You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free
-  distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm works.</li>
-</ul>
-
-<p>1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project
-Gutenberg-tm electronic work or group of works on different terms than
-are set forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing
-from both the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and The
-Project Gutenberg Trademark LLC, the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm
-trademark. Contact the Foundation as set forth in Section 3 below.</p>
-
-<p>1.F.</p>
-
-<p>1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable
-effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread
-works not protected by U.S. copyright law in creating the Project
-Gutenberg-tm collection. Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg-tm
-electronic works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may
-contain "Defects," such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate
-or corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other
-intellectual property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or
-other medium, a computer virus, or computer codes that damage or
-cannot be read by your equipment.</p>
-
-<p>1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the "Right
-of Replacement or Refund" described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project
-Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project
-Gutenberg-tm trademark, and any other party distributing a Project
-Gutenberg-tm electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all
-liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal
-fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT
-LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE
-PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH 1.F.3. YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE
-TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE
-LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR
-INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH
-DAMAGE.</p>
-
-<p>1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a
-defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can
-receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a
-written explanation to the person you received the work from. If you
-received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium
-with your written explanation. The person or entity that provided you
-with the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in
-lieu of a refund. If you received the work electronically, the person
-or entity providing it to you may choose to give you a second
-opportunity to receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund. If
-the second copy is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing
-without further opportunities to fix the problem.</p>
-
-<p>1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth
-in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you 'AS-IS', WITH NO
-OTHER WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT
-LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE.</p>
-
-<p>1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied
-warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of
-damages. If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement
-violates the law of the state applicable to this agreement, the
-agreement shall be interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or
-limitation permitted by the applicable state law. The invalidity or
-unenforceability of any provision of this agreement shall not void the
-remaining provisions.</p>
-
-<p>1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the
-trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone
-providing copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in
-accordance with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the
-production, promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm
-electronic works, harmless from all liability, costs and expenses,
-including legal fees, that arise directly or indirectly from any of
-the following which you do or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this
-or any Project Gutenberg-tm work, (b) alteration, modification, or
-additions or deletions to any Project Gutenberg-tm work, and (c) any
-Defect you cause.  </p>
-
-<h3 class="pg">Section 2. Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg-tm</h3>
-
-<p>Project Gutenberg-tm is synonymous with the free distribution of
-electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of
-computers including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers. It
-exists because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations
-from people in all walks of life.</p>
-
-<p>Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the
-assistance they need are critical to reaching Project Gutenberg-tm's
-goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg-tm collection will
-remain freely available for generations to come. In 2001, the Project
-Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure
-and permanent future for Project Gutenberg-tm and future
-generations. To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary
-Archive Foundation and how your efforts and donations can help, see
-Sections 3 and 4 and the Foundation information page at
-www.gutenberg.org.</p>
-
-<h3 class="pg">Section 3. Information about the Project Gutenberg
-Literary Archive Foundation</h3>
-
-<p>The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non profit
-501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the
-state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal
-Revenue Service. The Foundation's EIN or federal tax identification
-number is 64-6221541. Contributions to the Project Gutenberg Literary
-Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent permitted by
-U.S. federal laws and your state's laws.</p>
-
-<p>The Foundation's principal office is in Fairbanks, Alaska, with the
-mailing address: PO Box 750175, Fairbanks, AK 99775, but its
-volunteers and employees are scattered throughout numerous
-locations. Its business office is located at 809 North 1500 West, Salt
-Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887. Email contact links and up to
-date contact information can be found at the Foundation's web site and
-official page at www.gutenberg.org/contact</p>
-
-<p>For additional contact information:</p>
-
-<p> Dr. Gregory B. Newby<br />
-    Chief Executive and Director<br />
-    gbnewby@pglaf.org</p>
-
-<h3 class="pg">Section 4. Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg
-Literary Archive Foundation</h3>
-
-<p>Project Gutenberg-tm depends upon and cannot survive without wide
-spread public support and donations to carry out its mission of
-increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be
-freely distributed in machine readable form accessible by the widest
-array of equipment including outdated equipment. Many small donations
-($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt
-status with the IRS.</p>
-
-<p>The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating
-charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United
-States. Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a
-considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up
-with these requirements. We do not solicit donations in locations
-where we have not received written confirmation of compliance. To SEND
-DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any particular
-state visit <a href="http://www.gutenberg.org/donate">www.gutenberg.org/donate</a>.</p>
-
-<p>While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we
-have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition
-against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who
-approach us with offers to donate.</p>
-
-<p>International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make
-any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from
-outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff.</p>
-
-<p>Please check the Project Gutenberg Web pages for current donation
-methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of other
-ways including checks, online payments and credit card donations. To
-donate, please visit: www.gutenberg.org/donate</p>
-
-<h3 class="pg">Section 5. General Information About Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works.</h3>
-
-<p>Professor Michael S. Hart was the originator of the Project
-Gutenberg-tm concept of a library of electronic works that could be
-freely shared with anyone. For forty years, he produced and
-distributed Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks with only a loose network of
-volunteer support.</p>
-
-<p>Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks are often created from several printed
-editions, all of which are confirmed as not protected by copyright in
-the U.S. unless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not
-necessarily keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper
-edition.</p>
-
-<p>Most people start at our Web site which has the main PG search
-facility: www.gutenberg.org</p>
-
-<p>This Web site includes information about Project Gutenberg-tm,
-including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary
-Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to
-subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks.</p>
-
-</body>
-</html>
-
diff --git a/old/52664-h/images/cover.jpg b/old/52664-h/images/cover.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 2b65cc2..0000000
--- a/old/52664-h/images/cover.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/52664-h/images/i_001.jpg b/old/52664-h/images/i_001.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index c11061c..0000000
--- a/old/52664-h/images/i_001.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/52664-h/images/i_002.jpg b/old/52664-h/images/i_002.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 09cc5de..0000000
--- a/old/52664-h/images/i_002.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/52664-h/images/i_003.jpg b/old/52664-h/images/i_003.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 24d4af0..0000000
--- a/old/52664-h/images/i_003.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/52664-h/images/i_004.jpg b/old/52664-h/images/i_004.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 0a1448e..0000000
--- a/old/52664-h/images/i_004.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/52664-h/images/i_005.jpg b/old/52664-h/images/i_005.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index f475e61..0000000
--- a/old/52664-h/images/i_005.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/52664-h/images/i_006.jpg b/old/52664-h/images/i_006.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index f40fcc2..0000000
--- a/old/52664-h/images/i_006.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/52664-h/images/i_007.jpg b/old/52664-h/images/i_007.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 815d070..0000000
--- a/old/52664-h/images/i_007.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/52664-h/images/i_008.jpg b/old/52664-h/images/i_008.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index d0c6c23..0000000
--- a/old/52664-h/images/i_008.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/52664-h/images/i_009.jpg b/old/52664-h/images/i_009.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 226991c..0000000
--- a/old/52664-h/images/i_009.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/52664-h/images/i_010.jpg b/old/52664-h/images/i_010.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 0a2387f..0000000
--- a/old/52664-h/images/i_010.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/52664-h/images/i_010a.jpg b/old/52664-h/images/i_010a.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 58c4859..0000000
--- a/old/52664-h/images/i_010a.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/52664-h/images/i_011.jpg b/old/52664-h/images/i_011.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 30b590e..0000000
--- a/old/52664-h/images/i_011.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/52664-h/images/i_012.jpg b/old/52664-h/images/i_012.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 06ef0d1..0000000
--- a/old/52664-h/images/i_012.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/52664-h/images/i_013.jpg b/old/52664-h/images/i_013.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 9af1b13..0000000
--- a/old/52664-h/images/i_013.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/52664-h/images/i_013a.jpg b/old/52664-h/images/i_013a.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 0dda8a6..0000000
--- a/old/52664-h/images/i_013a.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/52664-h/images/i_014.jpg b/old/52664-h/images/i_014.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 1cc904b..0000000
--- a/old/52664-h/images/i_014.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/52664-h/images/i_015.jpg b/old/52664-h/images/i_015.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index d499dd8..0000000
--- a/old/52664-h/images/i_015.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/52664-h/images/i_016.jpg b/old/52664-h/images/i_016.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index baa3e1a..0000000
--- a/old/52664-h/images/i_016.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/52664-h/images/i_016a.jpg b/old/52664-h/images/i_016a.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 24cf2d7..0000000
--- a/old/52664-h/images/i_016a.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/52664-h/images/i_017.jpg b/old/52664-h/images/i_017.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 352cba8..0000000
--- a/old/52664-h/images/i_017.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/52664-h/images/i_018.jpg b/old/52664-h/images/i_018.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index dad61e7..0000000
--- a/old/52664-h/images/i_018.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/52664-h/images/i_018a.jpg b/old/52664-h/images/i_018a.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 6f2ccbb..0000000
--- a/old/52664-h/images/i_018a.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/52664-h/images/i_019.jpg b/old/52664-h/images/i_019.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index dcad412..0000000
--- a/old/52664-h/images/i_019.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/52664-h/images/i_019a.jpg b/old/52664-h/images/i_019a.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index e114a21..0000000
--- a/old/52664-h/images/i_019a.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/52664-h/images/i_020.jpg b/old/52664-h/images/i_020.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 59adc28..0000000
--- a/old/52664-h/images/i_020.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/52664-h/images/i_021.jpg b/old/52664-h/images/i_021.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 395e07a..0000000
--- a/old/52664-h/images/i_021.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/52664-h/images/i_021a.jpg b/old/52664-h/images/i_021a.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index a81d02b..0000000
--- a/old/52664-h/images/i_021a.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/52664-h/images/i_021b.jpg b/old/52664-h/images/i_021b.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 4d5b966..0000000
--- a/old/52664-h/images/i_021b.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/52664-h/images/i_022.jpg b/old/52664-h/images/i_022.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 60bca3a..0000000
--- a/old/52664-h/images/i_022.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/52664-h/images/i_022b.jpg b/old/52664-h/images/i_022b.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index c6b80bc..0000000
--- a/old/52664-h/images/i_022b.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/52664-h/images/i_022c.jpg b/old/52664-h/images/i_022c.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 9f65719..0000000
--- a/old/52664-h/images/i_022c.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/52664-h/images/i_023.jpg b/old/52664-h/images/i_023.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 62cac1e..0000000
--- a/old/52664-h/images/i_023.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/52664-h/images/i_023a.jpg b/old/52664-h/images/i_023a.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 4142b50..0000000
--- a/old/52664-h/images/i_023a.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/52664-h/images/i_024.jpg b/old/52664-h/images/i_024.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index b206abb..0000000
--- a/old/52664-h/images/i_024.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/52664-h/images/i_024a.jpg b/old/52664-h/images/i_024a.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index d1d3898..0000000
--- a/old/52664-h/images/i_024a.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/52664-h/images/i_024b.jpg b/old/52664-h/images/i_024b.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index b12a224..0000000
--- a/old/52664-h/images/i_024b.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/52664-h/images/i_024c.jpg b/old/52664-h/images/i_024c.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index a05ea60..0000000
--- a/old/52664-h/images/i_024c.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/52664-h/images/i_025.jpg b/old/52664-h/images/i_025.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index b094e03..0000000
--- a/old/52664-h/images/i_025.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/52664-h/images/i_026.jpg b/old/52664-h/images/i_026.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 4be2c4d..0000000
--- a/old/52664-h/images/i_026.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/52664-h/images/i_027.jpg b/old/52664-h/images/i_027.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index a65bbd3..0000000
--- a/old/52664-h/images/i_027.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/52664-h/images/i_028.jpg b/old/52664-h/images/i_028.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 245dcfe..0000000
--- a/old/52664-h/images/i_028.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/52664-h/images/i_029.jpg b/old/52664-h/images/i_029.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index dbae39d..0000000
--- a/old/52664-h/images/i_029.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/52664-h/images/i_030.jpg b/old/52664-h/images/i_030.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 63645d2..0000000
--- a/old/52664-h/images/i_030.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/52664-h/images/i_031.jpg b/old/52664-h/images/i_031.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index c81b494..0000000
--- a/old/52664-h/images/i_031.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/52664-h/images/i_032.jpg b/old/52664-h/images/i_032.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 406e3f2..0000000
--- a/old/52664-h/images/i_032.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/52664-h/images/i_033.jpg b/old/52664-h/images/i_033.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index afd44b5..0000000
--- a/old/52664-h/images/i_033.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/52664-h/images/i_034.jpg b/old/52664-h/images/i_034.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 714218d..0000000
--- a/old/52664-h/images/i_034.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/52664-h/images/i_035.jpg b/old/52664-h/images/i_035.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index dc91c92..0000000
--- a/old/52664-h/images/i_035.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/52664-h/images/i_036.jpg b/old/52664-h/images/i_036.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index fa9fc2a..0000000
--- a/old/52664-h/images/i_036.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/52664-h/images/i_037.jpg b/old/52664-h/images/i_037.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 4f7c6a5..0000000
--- a/old/52664-h/images/i_037.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/52664-h/images/i_038.jpg b/old/52664-h/images/i_038.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 47f17ee..0000000
--- a/old/52664-h/images/i_038.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/52664-h/images/i_039.jpg b/old/52664-h/images/i_039.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 29dd222..0000000
--- a/old/52664-h/images/i_039.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/52664-h/images/i_040.jpg b/old/52664-h/images/i_040.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index f69d530..0000000
--- a/old/52664-h/images/i_040.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/52664-h/images/i_041.jpg b/old/52664-h/images/i_041.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 7ce283a..0000000
--- a/old/52664-h/images/i_041.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/52664-h/images/i_042.jpg b/old/52664-h/images/i_042.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index f700e2a..0000000
--- a/old/52664-h/images/i_042.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/52664-h/images/i_043.jpg b/old/52664-h/images/i_043.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index e25f23a..0000000
--- a/old/52664-h/images/i_043.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/52664-h/images/i_044.jpg b/old/52664-h/images/i_044.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 4dfde89..0000000
--- a/old/52664-h/images/i_044.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/52664-h/images/i_045.jpg b/old/52664-h/images/i_045.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index de2519f..0000000
--- a/old/52664-h/images/i_045.jpg
+++ /dev/null